Researchers’ Perspectives on Informed Consent and Ethical Review of Biobank Research in South Africa: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

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.

Keywords

researchers informed consent ethical review research ethics committee

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Appelbaum

P. S.

Parens

Waldman

C. R.

Klitzman

Fyer

Martinez

. . .Chung

W. K.

(2014). Models of consent to return of incidental findings in genomic research. Hastings Center Report, 44(4), 22-32.

Ayuso

Millán

J. M.

Mancheno

Dal-Ré

(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.

Boatin

B. A.

Basanez

M. G.

Prichard

R. K.

Awadzi

Barakat

R. M.

Garcia

H. H.

. . .Lustigman

(2012). A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: Towards control and elimination. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 6(4), e1547.

Borry

Goffin

Nys

Dierickx

(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.

Botkin

J. R.

Belmont

J. W.

Berg

J. S.

Berkman

B. E.

Bombard

Holm

I. A.

. . .McInerney

J. 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.

Brisson

A. R.

Matsui

Rieder

M. J.

Fraser

D. D.

(2012). Translational research in pediatrics: Tissue sampling and biobanking. Pediatrics, 129, 153-162.

Burgess

T. F.

(2001). Guide to the design of questionnaires: A general introduction to the design of questionnaires for survey research. Retrieved from https://nats-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/pub/User/InterculturalCommunication/top2.pdf

Cambon-Thomsen

Rial-Sebbag

Knoppers

B. M.

(2007). Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks. European Respiratory Journal, 30, 373-382.

Colledge

Persson

Elger

Shaw

(2014). Sample and data sharing barriers in biobanking: Consent, committees, and compromises. Annals of Diagnostic Pathology, 18, 78-81.

10.

Denny

S. G.

Silaigwana

Wassenaar

Bull

Parker

(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 Vries

Abayomi

Littler

Madden

McCurdy

Oukem-Boyer

O. O. M.

. . . Tindana

(2015). Addressing ethical issues in H3Africa research—The views of research ethics committee members. Hugo Journal, 9(1), 1.

12.

Dove

E. S.

Avard

Black

Knoppers

B. M.

(2013). Emerging issues in paediatric health research consent forms in Canada: Working towards best practices. BMC Medical Ethics, 14, Article 5.

13.

Edwards

K. L.

Lemke

A. A.

Trinidad

S. B.

Lewis

S. M.

Starks

Quinn Griffin

M. T.

Wiesner

G. L.

(2011). Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers. Public Health Genomics, 14(6), 337-345.

14.

Edwards

K. L.

Lemke

A. A.

Trinidad

S. B.

Lewis

S. M.

Starks

Snapinn

K. W.

. . . Consortium

(2012). Genetics researchers/’and IRB professionals/’attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis. Genetics in Medicine, 14(2), 236-242.

15.

Emanuel

E. J.

Crouch

R. A.

Arras

J. D.

Moreno

J. D.

Grady

(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.

Emanuel

E. J.

Wendler

Grady

(2000). What makes clinical research ethical? Journal of the American Medical Association, 283, 2701-2711.

17.

Emanuel

E. J.

Wendler

Killen

Grady

(2004). What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 189, 930-937.

18.

Emerson

C. I.

Singer

P. A.

Upshur

R. 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.

19.

Foe

(2014). Biobanks and informed consent voices in bioethics. Voices in Bioethics. Retrieved from http://www.voicesinbioethics.net/opeds/2014/03/26/biobanks-and-informed-consent

20.

Garrett

S. B.

Dohan

Koenig

B. 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.

Goldenberg

A. J.

Maschke

K. J.

Joffe

Botkin

J. R.

Rothwell

Murray

T. H.

. . .Rivera

S. M.

(2015). IRB practices and policies regarding the secondary research use of biospecimens. BMC Medical Ethics, 16(1), Article 32.

22.

Grady

Eckstein

Berkman

Brock

Cook-Deegan

Fullerton

S. M.

. . .Wendler

(2015). Broad consent for research with biological samples: Workshop conclusions. The American Journal of Bioethics, 15(9), 34-42.

23.

Green

R. C.

Berg

J. S.

Grody

W. W.

Kalia

S. S.

Korf

B. R.

Martin

C. L.

. . .Biesecker

L. G.

(2013). ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 565-574.

24.

Gurwitz

Fortier

Lunshof

J. E.

Knoppers

B. M.

(2009). Research ethics: Children and population biobanks. Science, 325, 818-819.

25.

Hansson

M. G.

(2005). Building on relationships of trust in biobank research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 415-418.

26.

Hansson

M. G.

(2009). Ethics and biobanks. British Journal of Cancer, 100, 8-12.

27.

Hansson

M. G.

(2011). The need to downregulate: A minimal ethical framework for biobank research. Methods in Molecular Biology, 675, 39-59.

28.

Hansson

M. G.

Dillner

Bartram

C. R.

Carlson

J. A.

Helgesson

(2006). Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research? The Lancet Oncology, 7, 266-269.

29.

Helgesson

(2012). In defense of broad consent. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 21, 40-50.

30.

Hens

Cassiman

J. J.

Nys

Dierickx

(2011). Children, biobanks and the scope of parental consent. European Journal of Human Genetics, 19, 735-739.

31.

Hens

Levesque

Dierickx

(2011). Children and biobanks: A review of the ethical and legal discussion. Human Genetics, 130, 403-413.

32.

Igbe

M. A.

Adebamowo

C. A.

(2012). Qualitative study of knowledge and attitudes to biobanking among lay persons in Nigeria. BMC Medical Ethics, 13, Article 27.

33.

Jarvik

G. P.

Amendola

L. M.

Berg

J. S.

Brothers

Clayton

E. W.

Chung

. . .Burke

(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-Lindblad

Ring

Viberth

Hansson

M. 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.

Klima

Fitzgerald-Butt

S. M.

Kelleher

K. J.

Chisolm

D. J.

Comstock

R. D.

Ferketich

A. K.

McBride

K. L.

(2013). Understanding of informed consent by parents of children enrolled in a genetic biobank. Genetics in Medicine, 16, 141-148.

36.

Knoppers

B. M.

Zawati

M. H.

Sénécal

(2015). Return of genetic testing results in the era of whole-genome sequencing. Nature Reviews Genetics, 16, 553-559.

37.

Kranendonk

E. J.

Ploem

M. C.

Hennekam

R. C.

(2016). Regulating biobanking with children’s tissue: A legal analysis and the experts’ view. European Journal of Human Genetics, 24, 30-36.

38.

Langat

S. K.

(2005). Reuse of samples: Ethical issues encountered by two institutional ethics review committees in Kenya. Bioethics, 19, 537-549.

39.

Lemke

A. A.

Trinidad

S. B.

Edwards

K. L.

Starks

Wiesner

G. 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.

Likert

(1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22, 1-55.

41.

Master

Campo-Engelstein

Caulfield

(2015). Scientists’ perspectives on consent in the context of biobanking research. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23, 569-574.

42.

Master

Nelson

Murdoch

Caulfield

(2012). Biobanks, consent and claims of consensus. Nature Methods, 9, 885-888.

43.

Mello

M. M.

Wolf

L. E.

(2010). The Havasupai Indian tribe case—Lessons for research involving stored biologic samples. The New England Journal of Medicine, 36, 204-207.

44.

Mongoven

A. M.

Solomon

(2012). Biobanking: Shifting the analogy from consent to surrogacy. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 183-188.

45.

Moodley

Sibanda

February

Rossouw

(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.

Moodley

Singh

(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.

Mudur

(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.

Petersen

Desmedt

Harris

Buffa

Kollek

(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.

Ramoni

R. B.

McGuire

A. L.

Robinson

J. O.

Morley

D. S.

Plon

S. E.

Joffe

(2013). Experiences and attitudes of genome investigators regarding return of individual genetic test results. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 882-887.

51.

Reid

Brief

LeDrew

(2009). Our common ground: Cultivating women’s health through community based research. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Women’s Health Research Network.

52.

Republic of South Africa Department of Health. (2015). Ethics in health research: Principles, processes and structures. Retrieved from https://www.ru.ac.za/media/rhodesuniversity/content/ethics/documents/nationalguidelines/DOH_(2015)_Ethics_in_health_research_Principles,_processes_and_structures.pdf

53.

Ross

L. F.

Rothstein

M. A.

Clayton

E. 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.

Rothstein

M. A.

(2005). Expanding the ethical analysis of biobanks. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 33, 89-101.

55.

Rothwell

Maschke

Botkin

J. R.

Goldenberg

Murray

T. H.

Rivera

S. M.

(2015). Biobanking research and human subjects protections: Perspectives of IRB leaders. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 37, 8-13.

56.

Sathar

Dhai

(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.

Sathar

Dhai

van der Linde

(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.

Sharp

R. R.

Foster

M. 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 of 2005.

60.

Staunton

Moodley

(2013). Challenges in biobank governance in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Medical Ethics, 14, Article 35.

61.

Staunton

Moodley

(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.

Steinsbekk

K. S.

Kåre Myskja

Solberg

(2013). Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: Is passive participation an ethical problem? European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 897-902.

63.

Steinsbekk

K. S.

Solberg

(2011). Biobanks—When is re-consent necessary? Public Health Ethics, 4, 236-250.

64.

Sutton

E. J.

Pacyna

J. E.

Hathcock

McCormick

J. B.

Nowakowski

Olson

J. E.

Sharp

R. 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.

Sylla

B. S.

Wild

C. 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.

Tindana

Bull

Amenga-Etego

de Vries

Aborigo

Koram

. . .Parker

(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.

Upshur

R. E.

Lavery

J. V.

Tindana

P. O.

(2007). Taking tissue seriously means taking communities seriously. BMC Medical Ethics, 8(1), Article 11.

68.

Van Assche

Gutwirth

Sterckx

(2013). Protecting dignitary interests of biobank research participants: Lessons from Havasupai Tribe v Arizona Board of Regents. Law, Innovation and Technology, 5, 54-84.

69.

van Schalkwyk

de Vries

Moodley

(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.

Wendler

Pace

Talisuna

A. O.

Maiso

Grady

Emanuel

(2005). Research on stored biological samples: The views of Ugandans. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 27(2), 1-5.

71.

Whitney

S. N.

Alcser

Schneider

C. E.

McCullough

L. B.

McGuire

A. L.

Volk

R. J.

(2008). Principal investigator views of the IRB system. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 5, 68-72.

72.

Wolf

S. M.

Branum

Koenig

B. A.

Petersen

G. M.

Berry

S. A.

Beskow

L. M.

. . .Wilfond

B. S.

(2015). Returning a research participant’s genomic results to relatives: Analysis and recommendations. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 43, 440-463.

73.

The World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki 2013—Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Retrieved from https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/

74.

Zawedde-Muyanja

Nakanwagi

Dongo

J. P.

Sekadde

M. P.

Nyinoburyo

Ssentongo

. . .Graham

S. 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.

Zhang

Matsui

Krohmal

Zeid

A. A.

Muthuswamy

Koo

Y. M.

. . .Lie

R. 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.

Ziniel

Savage

S. K.

Huntington

Amatruda

Green

R. C.

Weitzman

E. R.

. . .Holm

I. 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.

0.00 MB

0.54 MB