There is limited literature on the opinions and perspectives of researchers on the ethical issues in biobank research in South Africa. This study aimed to explore researchers’ perspectives on informed consent and ethical review of biobank research in South Africa. An online survey was conducted among researchers and scientists at Stellenbosch University and the University of Kwazulu-Natal. The majority of researchers opined that broad consent is appropriate for biobank research. However, there was no consensus on the necessity for re-consent. Researchers were also in agreement that issues concerning informed consent and future use of samples require thorough discussions during the ethical review process. Overall, the attitude of researchers on informed consent and ethical review of biobank research was positive and ethically informed.
AppelbaumP. S.ParensE.WaldmanC. R.KlitzmanR.FyerA.MartinezJ.. . .ChungW. K. (2014). Models of consent to return of incidental findings in genomic research. Hastings Center Report, 44(4), 22-32.
2.
AyusoC.MillánJ. M.ManchenoM.Dal-RéR. (2013). Informed consent for whole-genome sequencing studies in the clinical setting. Proposed recommendations on essential content and process. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 1054-1059.
3.
BoatinB. A.BasanezM. G.PrichardR. K.AwadziK.BarakatR. M.GarciaH. H.. . .LustigmanS. (2012). A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: Towards control and elimination. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 6(4), e1547.
4.
BorryP.GoffinT.NysH.DierickxK. (2008). Attitudes regarding predictive genetic testing in minors: A survey of European clinical geneticists. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C: Seminars in Medical Genetics, 148C, 78-83.
5.
BotkinJ. R.BelmontJ. W.BergJ. S.BerkmanB. E.BombardY.HolmI. A.. . .McInerneyJ. D. (2015). Points to consider: Ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 97, 6-21.
6.
BrissonA. R.MatsuiD.RiederM. J.FraserD. D. (2012). Translational research in pediatrics: Tissue sampling and biobanking. Pediatrics, 129, 153-162.
Cambon-ThomsenA.Rial-SebbagE.KnoppersB. M. (2007). Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks. European Respiratory Journal, 30, 373-382.
9.
ColledgeF.PerssonK.ElgerB.ShawD. (2014). Sample and data sharing barriers in biobanking: Consent, committees, and compromises. Annals of Diagnostic Pathology, 18, 78-81.
10.
DennyS. G.SilaigwanaB.WassenaarD.BullS.ParkerM. (2015). Developing ethical practices for public health research data sharing in South Africa: The views and experiences from a diverse sample of research stakeholders. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 10, 290-301.
11.
de VriesJ.AbayomiA.LittlerK.MaddenE.McCurdyS.Oukem-BoyerO. O. M.. . . TindanaP. (2015). Addressing ethical issues in H3Africa research—The views of research ethics committee members. Hugo Journal, 9(1), 1.
12.
DoveE. S.AvardD.BlackL.KnoppersB. M. (2013). Emerging issues in paediatric health research consent forms in Canada: Working towards best practices. BMC Medical Ethics, 14, Article 5.
13.
EdwardsK. L.LemkeA. A.TrinidadS. B.LewisS. M.StarksH.Quinn GriffinM. T.WiesnerG. L. (2011). Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers. Public Health Genomics, 14(6), 337-345.
14.
EdwardsK. L.LemkeA. A.TrinidadS. B.LewisS. M.StarksH.SnapinnK. W.. . . ConsortiumG. (2012). Genetics researchers/’and IRB professionals/’attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis. Genetics in Medicine, 14(2), 236-242.
15.
EmanuelE. J.CrouchR. A.ArrasJ. D.MorenoJ. D.GradyC. (Eds.). (2003). Ethical and regulatory aspects of clinical research: Readings and commentary: The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
16.
EmanuelE. J.WendlerD.GradyC. (2000). What makes clinical research ethical?Journal of the American Medical Association, 283, 2701-2711.
17.
EmanuelE. J.WendlerD.KillenJ.GradyC. (2004). What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 189, 930-937.
18.
EmersonC. I.SingerP. A.UpshurR. E. (2011). Access and use of human tissues from the developing world: Ethical challenges and a way forward using a tissue trust. BMC Medical Ethics, 12(1), Article 2.
GarrettS. B.DohanD.KoenigB. A. (2015). Linking broad consent to biobank governance: Support from a deliberative public engagement in California. The American Journal of Bioethics, 15(9), 56-57.
21.
GoldenbergA. J.MaschkeK. J.JoffeS.BotkinJ. R.RothwellE.MurrayT. H.. . .RiveraS. M. (2015). IRB practices and policies regarding the secondary research use of biospecimens. BMC Medical Ethics, 16(1), Article 32.
22.
GradyC.EcksteinL.BerkmanB.BrockD.Cook-DeeganR.FullertonS. M.. . .WendlerD. (2015). Broad consent for research with biological samples: Workshop conclusions. The American Journal of Bioethics, 15(9), 34-42.
23.
GreenR. C.BergJ. S.GrodyW. W.KaliaS. S.KorfB. R.MartinC. L.. . .BieseckerL. G. (2013). ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 565-574.
24.
GurwitzD.FortierI.LunshofJ. E.KnoppersB. M. (2009). Research ethics: Children and population biobanks. Science, 325, 818-819.
25.
HanssonM. G. (2005). Building on relationships of trust in biobank research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 415-418.
26.
HanssonM. G. (2009). Ethics and biobanks. British Journal of Cancer, 100, 8-12.
27.
HanssonM. G. (2011). The need to downregulate: A minimal ethical framework for biobank research. Methods in Molecular Biology, 675, 39-59.
28.
HanssonM. G.DillnerJ.BartramC. R.CarlsonJ. A.HelgessonG. (2006). Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research?The Lancet Oncology, 7, 266-269.
29.
HelgessonG. (2012). In defense of broad consent. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 21, 40-50.
30.
HensK.CassimanJ. J.NysH.DierickxK. (2011). Children, biobanks and the scope of parental consent. European Journal of Human Genetics, 19, 735-739.
31.
HensK.LevesqueE.DierickxK. (2011). Children and biobanks: A review of the ethical and legal discussion. Human Genetics, 130, 403-413.
32.
IgbeM. A.AdebamowoC. A. (2012). Qualitative study of knowledge and attitudes to biobanking among lay persons in Nigeria. BMC Medical Ethics, 13, Article 27.
33.
JarvikG. P.AmendolaL. M.BergJ. S.BrothersK.ClaytonE. W.ChungW.. . .BurkeW. (2014). Return of genomic results to research participants: The floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 94, 818-826.
34.
Kettis-LindbladA.RingL.ViberthE.HanssonM. G. (2006). Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think?European Journal of Public Health, 16, 433-440.
35.
KlimaJ.Fitzgerald-ButtS. M.KelleherK. J.ChisolmD. J.ComstockR. D.FerketichA. K.McBrideK. L. (2013). Understanding of informed consent by parents of children enrolled in a genetic biobank. Genetics in Medicine, 16, 141-148.
36.
KnoppersB. M.ZawatiM. H.SénécalK. (2015). Return of genetic testing results in the era of whole-genome sequencing. Nature Reviews Genetics, 16, 553-559.
37.
KranendonkE. J.PloemM. C.HennekamR. C. (2016). Regulating biobanking with children’s tissue: A legal analysis and the experts’ view. European Journal of Human Genetics, 24, 30-36.
38.
LangatS. K. (2005). Reuse of samples: Ethical issues encountered by two institutional ethics review committees in Kenya. Bioethics, 19, 537-549.
39.
LemkeA. A.TrinidadS. B.EdwardsK. L.StarksH.WiesnerG. L. & GRRIP Consortium. (2010). Attitudes toward genetic research review: Results from a national survey of professionals involved in human subjects protection. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5, 83-91.
40.
LikertR. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22, 1-55.
41.
MasterZ.Campo-EngelsteinL.CaulfieldT. (2015). Scientists’ perspectives on consent in the context of biobanking research. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23, 569-574.
42.
MasterZ.NelsonE.MurdochB.CaulfieldT. (2012). Biobanks, consent and claims of consensus. Nature Methods, 9, 885-888.
43.
MelloM. M.WolfL. E. (2010). The Havasupai Indian tribe case—Lessons for research involving stored biologic samples. The New England Journal of Medicine, 36, 204-207.
44.
MongovenA. M.SolomonS. (2012). Biobanking: Shifting the analogy from consent to surrogacy. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 183-188.
45.
MoodleyK.SibandaN.FebruaryK.RossouwT. (2014). “It’s my blood”: Ethical complexities in the use, storage and export of biological samples: Perspectives from South African research participants. BMC Medical Ethics, 15, Article 4.
46.
MoodleyK.SinghS. (2016). “It’s all about trust”: Reflections of researchers on the complexity and controversy surrounding biobanking in South Africa. BMC Medical Ethics, 17(1), Article 57.
47.
MudurG. (2002). Indian scientists object to export of human biological material for research. British Medical Journal, 325(7371), Article 990.
48.
Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.openepi.com
49.
PetersenI.DesmedtC.HarrisA.BuffaF.KollekR. (2014). Informed consent, biobank research, and locality: Perceptions of breast cancer patients in three European countries. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 9(3), 48-55.
50.
RamoniR. B.McGuireA. L.RobinsonJ. O.MorleyD. S.PlonS. E.JoffeS. (2013). Experiences and attitudes of genome investigators regarding return of individual genetic test results. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 882-887.
51.
ReidC.BriefE.LeDrewR. (2009). Our common ground: Cultivating women’s health through community based research. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Women’s Health Research Network.
RossL. F.RothsteinM. A.ClaytonE. W. (2013). Mandatory extended searches in all genome sequencing: “Incidental findings,” patient autonomy, and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 310, 367-368.
54.
RothsteinM. A. (2005). Expanding the ethical analysis of biobanks. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 33, 89-101.
55.
RothwellE.MaschkeK.BotkinJ. R.GoldenbergA.MurrayT. H.RiveraS. M. (2015). Biobanking research and human subjects protections: Perspectives of IRB leaders. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 37, 8-13.
56.
SatharA.DhaiA. (2012). Laws, regulations and guidelines of developed countries, developing countries in Africa, and BRICS regions pertaining to the use of human biological material (HBM) in research. South African Journal of Bioethics and Law, 5, 51-54.
57.
SatharA.DhaiA.van der LindeS. (2013). Collaborative international research: Ethical and regulatory issues pertaining to human biological materials at a South African institutional research ethics committee. Developing World Bioethics, 14, 150-157.
58.
SharpR. R.FosterM. W. (2002). Community involvement in the ethical review of genetic research: Lessons from American Indian and Alaska Native populations. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(Suppl. 2), 145-148.
59.
South African Child Act 38 of2005.
60.
StauntonC.MoodleyK. (2013). Challenges in biobank governance in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Medical Ethics, 14, Article 35.
61.
StauntonC.MoodleyK. (2016). Data mining and biological sample exportation from South Africa: A new wave of bioexploitation under the guise of clinical care?South African Medical Journal, 106, 136-138.
62.
SteinsbekkK. S.Kåre MyskjaB.SolbergB. (2013). Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: Is passive participation an ethical problem?European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 897-902.
63.
SteinsbekkK. S.SolbergB. (2011). Biobanks—When is re-consent necessary?Public Health Ethics, 4, 236-250.
64.
SuttonE. J.PacynaJ. E.HathcockM.McCormickJ. B.NowakowskiK.OlsonJ. E.SharpR. R. (2019). Managing the unimaginable: Biobank participant views on reconsent for whole genome sequencing of stored biospecimens. Biopreservation and Biobanking. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30912675
65.
SyllaB. S.WildC. P. (2012). A million Africans a year dying from cancer by 2030: What can cancer research and control offer to the continent?International Journal of Cancer, 130, 245-250.
66.
TindanaP.BullS.Amenga-EtegoL.de VriesJ.AborigoR.KoramK.. . .ParkerM. (2012). Seeking consent to genetic and genomic research in a rural Ghanaian setting: A qualitative study of the MalariaGEN experience. BMC Medical Ethics, 13, Article 15.
67.
UpshurR. E.LaveryJ. V.TindanaP. O. (2007). Taking tissue seriously means taking communities seriously. BMC Medical Ethics, 8(1), Article 11.
68.
Van AsscheK.GutwirthS.SterckxS. (2013). Protecting dignitary interests of biobank research participants: Lessons fromHavasupai Tribe v Arizona Board of Regents. Law, Innovation and Technology, 5, 54-84.
69.
van SchalkwykG.de VriesJ.MoodleyK. (2012). “It’s for a good cause, isn’t it?”—Exploring views of South African TB research participants on sample storage and re-use. BMC Medical Ethics, 13, Article 19.
70.
WendlerD.PaceC.TalisunaA. O.MaisoF.GradyC.EmanuelE. (2005). Research on stored biological samples: The views of Ugandans. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 27(2), 1-5.
71.
WhitneyS. N.AlcserK.SchneiderC. E.McCulloughL. B.McGuireA. L.VolkR. J. (2008). Principal investigator views of the IRB system. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 5, 68-72.
72.
WolfS. M.BranumR.KoenigB. A.PetersenG. M.BerryS. A.BeskowL. M.. . .WilfondB. S. (2015). Returning a research participant’s genomic results to relatives: Analysis and recommendations. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 43, 440-463.
Zawedde-MuyanjaS.NakanwagiA.DongoJ. P.SekaddeM. P.NyinoburyoR.SsentongoG.. . .GrahamS. M. (2018). Decentralisation of child tuberculosis services increases case finding and uptake of preventive therapy in Uganda. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 22, 1314-1321.
75.
ZhangX.MatsuiK.KrohmalB.ZeidA. A.MuthuswamyV.KooY. M.. . .LieR. K. (2010). Attitudes towards transfers of human tissue samples across borders: An international survey of researchers and policy makers in five countries. BMC Medical Ethics, 11(1), Article 16.
76.
ZinielS.SavageS. K.HuntingtonN.AmatrudaJ.GreenR. C.WeitzmanE. R.. . .HolmI. A. (2014). Parents’ preferences for return of results in pediatric genomic research. Public Health Genomics, 17, 105-114.
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.
