Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Clinical Sequencing

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Applying Next-Gen Sequencing and Next-Gen Sequencing Data Analysis LifeScienceMarketing Events / Conferences 0 08-06-2012 07:21 AM
General question: human CNV/Structural variants algorithms using next-gen data cannot CNVboy Bioinformatics 12 04-10-2012 05:56 AM
Controversy over RNA-DNA Differences findings... ECO RNA Sequencing 0 03-17-2012 10:17 AM
entrepreneurship subject Chuckytah General 0 09-26-2011 07:16 AM
In Sequence: Illumina, ABI Testing How Their Next-Gen Tools Can Seq a Human Genome Newsbot! Illumina/Solexa 0 02-26-2008 03:20 PM

Thread Tools
Old 08-27-2012, 09:21 AM   #1
Senior Member
Location: Woodbridge CT

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 231
Default Incidental Findings via Next Gen Sequencing in Human Subject Research

In a recent New York Times article by science writer Gina Kolata,

"Genes now tell secrets they can't utter"

the ease and affordability of human genome sequencing is targeted as the source of growing ethical quandries. One such trouble is what to do about significant incidental findings. It is my opinion that the blame can be placed on investigators relying on human subject consent forms from another era as well as Institutional Review Boards that continue to maintain technology-blind approaches ill serving genomic advances in the clinic.

My suggestions to deal with the ethical issues of significant incidental findings center on reporting back results to a patient's referring primary care physician (many studies gain subjects through a referring physician whom the patients trusts). For those entering studies without a primary or referring physician, each study program should provide for an "incidental findings primary care doctor" who would meet with the subject to deliver and discuss findings of note.

Yes, both my proposals involve communicating genetic findings back to a research subject through a doctor--not in line with the do-it-yourself, over the counter movement, I'm afraid. But human subject clinical research is not a population field-study project, however genetic the research question may be. Relying on subject anonymity (however this is stated or consented to by the subject) is an unacceptable ethical short cut and a detriment to the obligations involved in human subject research under ethical conditions.
Joann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 11:06 PM   #2
Junior Member
Location: Wisconsin

Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2

Thee is no substitute for asking the research subject on their consent form what they might want back
Sequer is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO