Secondary Findings in Genomic Research offers a single, highly accessible resource on interpreting, managing and disclosing secondary findings in genomic research. With chapters written by experts in the field, this book is the first to concisely explain the ethical and practical issues raised by secondary genomics findings for a multi and interdisciplinary audience of genomic researchers, translational scientists, clinicians, medical students, genetic counselors, ethicists, legal experts and law students, public policy specialists and regulators. Contributors from Europe, North America, and Asia effectively synthesize perspectives from a spectrum of different scientific, societal, and global contexts, and offer pragmatic approaches to a range of topics, including oversight, governance and policy surrounding secondary genomic results, criteria for identifying results for return, communication and consent, stakeholders' attitudes and perspectives, disclosing results, and clinical, patient-centered protocols. Thoroughly addresses the scientific, ethical, practical and clinical issues raised by secondary findings resulting from genomic research, including active debate and challenges in the field Provides researchers, clinicians, regulators, and stakeholders with a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to interpreting, managing and disclosing secondary findings Brings together expert analysis from scholars across Europe, North America, and Asia representing a wide variety of scientific and societal contexts

Secondary Findings in Genomic Research offers a single, highly accessible resource on interpreting, managing and disclosing secondary findings in genomic research. With chapters written by experts in the field, this book is the first to concisely explain the ethical and practical issues raised by secondary genomics findings for a multi and interdisciplinary audience of genomic researchers, translational scientists, clinicians, medical students, genetic counselors, ethicists, legal experts and law students, public policy specialists and regulators. Contributors from Europe, North America, and Asia effectively synthesize perspectives from a spectrum of different scientific, societal, and global contexts, and offer pragmatic approaches to a range of topics, including oversight, governance and policy surrounding secondary genomic results, criteria for identifying results for return, communication and consent, stakeholders' attitudes and perspectives, disclosing results, and clinical, patient-centered protocols. - Thoroughly addresses the scientific, ethical, practical and clinical issues raised by secondary findings resulting from genomic research, including active debate and challenges in the field - Provides researchers, clinicians, regulators, and stakeholders with a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to interpreting, managing and disclosing secondary findings - Brings together expert analysis from scholars across Europe, North America, and Asia representing a wide variety of scientific and societal contexts

Population surveys traditionally collect information from respondents about their circumstances, behaviors, attitudes, and other characteristics. In recent years, many surveys have been collecting not only questionnaire answers, but also biologic specimens such as blood samples, saliva, and buccal swabs, from which a respondent's DNA can be ascertained along with other biomarkers (e.g., the level of a certain protein in the blood). The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), sponsored by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), has been collecting and storing genetic specimens since 1991, and other surveys, such as the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) funded by the National Institute on Aging, have followed suit. In order to give their informed consent to participate in a survey, respondents need to know the disposition and use of their data. Will their data be used for one research project and then destroyed, or will they be archived for secondary use? Sponsors of repeated cross-sectional surveys, such as NHANES, and of longitudinal surveys that follow panels of individuals over time, such as HRS, generally want to retain data for a wide range of secondary uses, many of which are not explicitly foreseen at the time of data collection. They typically inform respondents that their data will be stored in a secure manner and may be provided to researchers with suitable protections against individual identification. The addition of biologic specimens to a survey adds complications for storing, protecting, and providing access to such data and measurements made from them. There are also questions of whether, when, and for which biologic measurements the results should be reported back to individual respondents. Recently, the cost of full genomic sequencing has plummeted, and research findings are beginning to accumulate that bear up under replication and that potentially have clinical implications for a respondent. For example, knowing that one possesses a certain gene or gene sequence might suggest that one should seek a certain kind of treatment or genetic counseling or inform one's blood relatives. Biomedical research studies, in which participants are asked to donate tissues for genetic studies and are usually told that they will not be contacted with any results, are increasingly confronting the issue of when and which DNA results to return to participants. Issues in Returning Individual Results from Genome Research Using Population-Based Banked Specimens, with a Focus on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey is the summary of a workshop convened in February 2013 by the Committee on National Statistics in the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education of the National Research Council. This report considers how population surveys, in particular NHANES, should implement the reporting of results from genomic research using stored specimens and address informed consent for future data collection as well as for the use of banked specimens covered by prior informed consent agreements. The report will be of interest to survey organizations that include or contemplate including the collection of biologic specimens in population surveys for storing for genetic research. The issues involved are important for advancing social, behavioral, and biomedical knowledge while appropriately respecting and protecting individual survey respondents.

When is it appropriate to return individual research results to participants? The immense interest in this question has been fostered by the growing movement toward greater transparency and participant engagement in the research enterprise. Yet, the risks of returning individual research resultsâ€"such as results with unknown validityâ€"and the associated burdens on the research enterprise are competing considerations. Returning Individual Research Results to Participants reviews the current evidence on the benefits, harms, and costs of returning individual research results, while also considering the ethical, social, operational, and regulatory aspects of the practice. This report includes 12 recommendations directed to various stakeholdersâ€"investigators, sponsors, research institutions, institutional review boards (IRBs), regulators, and participantsâ€"and are designed to help (1) support decision making regarding the return of results on a study-by-study basis, (2) promote high-quality individual research results, (3) foster participant understanding of individual research results, and (4) revise and harmonize current regulations.

Rapid advances in technology have lowered the cost of sequencing an individual's genome from the several billion dollars that it cost a decade ago to just a few thousand dollars today and have correspondingly greatly expanded the use of genomic information in medicine. Because of the lack of evidence available for assessing variants, evaluation bodies have made only a few recommendations for the use of genetic tests in health care. For example, organizations, such as the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention working group, have sought to set standards for the kinds of evaluations needed to make population-level health decisions. However, due to insufficient evidence, it has been challenging to recommend the use of a genetic test. An additional challenge to using large-scale sequencing in the clinic is that it may uncover "secondary," or "incidental," findings - genetic variants that have been associated with a disease but that are not necessarily related to the conditions that led to the decision to use genomic testing. Furthermore, as more genetic variants are associated with diseases, new information becomes available about genomic tests performed previously, which raises issues about how and whether to return this information to physicians and patients and also about who is responsible for the information. To help develop a better understanding of how genomic information is used for healthcare decision making, the Roundtable on Translating Genomic-Based Research for Health of the Institute of Medicine held a workshop in Washington,DC in February 2014. Stakeholders, including clinicians, researchers, patients, and government officials, discussed the issues related to the use of genomic information in medical practice. Assessing Genomic Sequencing Information for Health Care Decision Making is the summary of that workshop. This report compares and contrasts evidence evaluation processes for different clinical indications and discusses key challenges in the evidence evaluation process.

Clinical Genome Sequencing: Psychological Aspects thoroughly details key psychological factors to consider while implementing genome sequencing in clinical practice, taking into account the subtleties of genetic risk assessment, patient consent and best practices for sharing genomic findings. Chapter contributions from leading international researchers and practitioners cover topics ranging from the current state of genomic testing, to patient consent, patient responses to sequencing data, common uncertainties, direct-to-consumer genomics, the role of genome sequencing in precision medicine, genetic counseling and genome sequencing, genome sequencing in pediatrics, genome sequencing in prenatal testing, and ethical issues in genome sequencing. Applied clinical case studies support concept illustration, making this an invaluable, practical reference for this important and multifaceted topic area within genomic medicine.

Human genomic research will influence the practice of medicine by further exploring the vast potential of large-scale biobanks and associated pharmacogenomics and clinical research initiatives. While population studies of normal genomic variation may assist in understanding heterogeneity and allow for targeted therapies, researchers may well discover incidental findings - discoveries that go beyond the aims of the intended study - especially when using whole genome sequencing technologies. Policies as well as literature have dealt with the issue of managing these findings in research in general, but a review of international norms governing genomic research will give us a more comprehensive look at the state of the legal and ethical guidance.

Anticipate and Communicate is the Bioethics Commission's sixth major report. In this report the Bioethics Commission offers specific recommendations for the management of incidental and secondary findings in clinical, research and direct-to-consumer settings. Emerging medical technologies, changing cost structures, and evolving medical practice make the likelihood of discovering incidental and secondary findings across contexts a growing certainty. Such findings can be lifesaving, but also can lead to uncertainty and distress if they are unexpected or identify conditions for which no effective treatment is available.

The 2012 American Jewish Year Book, “The Annual Record of American Jewish Civilization,” contains major chapters on Jewish secularism (Barry Kosmin and Ariela Keysar), Canadian Jewry (Morton Weinfeld, David Koffman, and Randal Schnoor), national affairs (Ethan Felson), Jewish communal affairs (Lawrence Grossman), Jewish population in the United States (Ira Sheskin and Arnold Dashefsky), and World Jewish population (Sergio DellaPergola). These chapters provide insight into major trends in the North American and world Jewish community. The volume also acts as a resource for the American Jewish community and for academics studying that community by supplying obituaries and lists of Jewish Federations, Jewish Community Centers, national Jewish organizations, Jewish overnight camps, Jewish museums, Holocaust museums, local and national Jewish periodicals, Jewish honorees, major recent events in the American Jewish community, and academic journals, articles, websites, and books. The volume should prove useful to social scientists and historians of the American Jewish community, Jewish communal workers, the press, and others interested in American and Canadian Jews.​

Early characterization of toxicity and efficacy would significantly impact the overall productivity of pharmaceutical R&D and reduce drug candidate attrition and failure. By describing the available platforms and weighing their relative advantages and disadvantages, including microarray data analysis, Genomics in Drug Discovery and Development introduces readers to the biomarker, pharmacogenomic, and toxicogenomics toolbox. The authors provide a valuable resource for pharmaceutical discovery scientists, preclinical drug safety department personnel, regulatory personnel, discovery toxicologists, and safety scientists, drug development professionals, and pharmaceutical scientists.