Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

An increasing number of individuals are being recruited to whole genome sequencing (WGS) research. When asked hypothetically, the majority of the public express willingness to participate in this type of research, yet little is known about how many individuals will actually consent to research participation or what they perceive the risks to be. The MedSeq Project is a clinical trial exploring WGS in clinical care. We documented primary reason(s) for declining participation and reviewed audio-recorded informed consent sessions to identify participants’ concerns. Of 514 individuals recruited, 173 (34%) actively declined, 205 (40%) enrolled, and the remaining 136 (26%) were ineligible, unresponsive or waitlisted. Although the majority of active decliners cited logistical barriers, 40% cited risks related to the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of WGS research. Participants similarly discussed ELSI-related concerns but felt the potential benefits of participation outweighed the risks. Findings provide insight into the perspectives of potential WGS research participants and identify potential barriers to participation.

Keywords

whole genome sequencing informed consent participant and decliner perspectives risks of WGS research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Biesecker

L. G.

Mullikin

J. C.

Facio

F. M.

Turner

Cherukuri

P. F.

Blakesley

R. W.

. . . Green

E. D.

(2009). The ClinSeq Project: Piloting large-scale genome sequencing for research in genomic medicine. Genome Research, 19, 1665-1674.

Bradbury

A. R.

Patrick-Miller

L. J.

Egleston

B. L.

DiGiovanni

Brower

Harris

. . . Domchek

S. M.

(2015). Patient feedback and early outcome data with a novel tiered-binned model for multiplex breast cancer susceptibility testing. Genetics in Medicine. Advance online publication. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.19

Brehaut

J. C.

O’Connor

A. M.

Wood

T. J.

Hack

T. F.

Siminoff

Gordon

Feldman-Stewart

(2003). Validation of a decision regret scale. Medical Decision Making, 23, 281-292.

Grady

(2015). Enduring and emerging challenges of informed consent [Review]. The New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 855-862.

Green

R. C.

Lautenbach

McGuire

A. L.

(2015). GINA, genetic discrimination, and genomic medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 397-399.

Henderson

G. E.

Wolf

S. M.

Kuczynski

K. J.

Joffe

Sharp

R. R.

Parsons

D. W.

Knoppers

B. M.

J. H.

Appelbaum

P. S.

(2014). The challenge of informed consent and return of results in translational genomics: Empirical analysis and recommendations. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 42(3): 344-355.

Hsieh

H. F.

Shannon

S. E.

(2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288.

Informed consent for genomics research. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.genome.gov/27026588

Kaiser

(2015). BIOMEDICINE. NIH opens precision medicine study to nation. Science, 349, 1433.

10.

Kaye

Whitley

E. A.

Lund

Morrison

Teare

Melham

(2015). Dynamic consent: A patient interface for twenty-first century research networks. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23, 141-146.

11.

Kimball

B. C.

Nowakowski

K. E.

Maschke

K. J.

McCormick

J. B.

(2014). Genomic data in the electronic medical record: Perspectives from a biobank community advisory board. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 9(5), 16-24.

12.

Lautenbach

D. M.

Christensen

K. D.

Sparks

J. A.

Green

R. C.

(2013). Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 14, 491-513.

13.

McGowan

M. L.

Glinka

Highland

Asaad

Sharp

R. R.

(2013). Genetics patients’ perspectives on clinical genomic testing. Personalized Medicine, 10, 339-347.

14.

McGuire

A. L.

Beskow

L. M.

(2010). Informed consent in genomics and genetic research. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 11, 361-381.

15.

Merriam

S. B.

(2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.

16.

Minari

Teare

Mitchell

Kaye

Kato

(2014). The emerging need for family-centric initiatives for obtaining consent in personal genome research. Genome Medicine, 6(12), 118.

17.

Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2012). Privacy and progress in whole genome sequencing. Washington, DC: Author. Available from http://www.bioethics.gov

18.

Vassy

J. L.

Lautenbach

D. M.

McLaughlin

H. M.

Kong

S. W.

Christensen

K. D.

Krier

. . . MedSeq

(2014). The MedSeq Project: A randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine. Trials, 15, Article 85.

19.

A workshop of the precision medicine initiative working group of the advisory committee to the NIH director. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.nih.gov/research-training/precision-medicine-initiative/nih-workshop-building-precision-medicine-research-cohort

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.40 MB

0.39 MB

Participants and Study Decliners’ Perspectives About the Risks of Participating in a Clinical Trial of Whole Genome Sequencing

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material