scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "Bartha Maria Knoppers published in 2021"



DOI
Heidi L. Rehm1, Heidi L. Rehm2, Angela Page2, Lindsay Smith3  +220 moreInstitutions (73)
10 Nov 2021
TL;DR: The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) aims to accelerate biomedical advances by enabling the responsible sharing of clinical and genomic data through both harmonized data aggregation and federated approaches.
Abstract: Summary The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) aims to accelerate biomedical advances by enabling the responsible sharing of clinical and genomic data through both harmonized data aggregation and federated approaches. The decreasing cost of genomic sequencing (along with other genome-wide molecular assays) and increasing evidence of its clinical utility will soon drive the generation of sequence data from tens of millions of humans, with increasing levels of diversity. In this perspective, we present the GA4GH strategies for addressing the major challenges of this data revolution. We describe the GA4GH organization, which is fueled by the development efforts of eight Work Streams and informed by the needs of 24 Driver Projects and other key stakeholders. We present the GA4GH suite of secure, interoperable technical standards and policy frameworks and review the current status of standards, their relevance to key domains of research and clinical care, and future plans of GA4GH. Broad international participation in building, adopting, and deploying GA4GH standards and frameworks will catalyze an unprecedented effort in data sharing that will be critical to advancing genomic medicine and ensuring that all populations can access its benefits.

69 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, rare predicted loss-of-function (pLOF) variants across 13 candidate genes in TLR3- and IRF7-dependent type I IFN pathways explain up to 3.5% of severe COVID-19 cases.
Abstract: A recent report found that rare predicted loss-of-function (pLOF) variants across 13 candidate genes in TLR3- and IRF7-dependent type I IFN pathways explain up to 3.5% of severe COVID-19 cases. We performed whole-exome or whole-genome sequencing of 1,864 COVID-19 cases (713 with severe and 1,151 with mild disease) and 15,033 ancestry-matched population controls across 4 independent COVID-19 biobanks. We tested whether rare pLOF variants in these 13 genes were associated with severe COVID-19. We identified only 1 rare pLOF mutation across these genes among 713 cases with severe COVID-19 and observed no enrichment of pLOFs in severe cases compared to population controls or mild COVID-19 cases. We found no evidence of association of rare LOF variants in the 13 candidate genes with severe COVID-19 outcomes.

53 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The PERSPECTIVE I&I (Personalized Risk Assessment for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer: Integration and Implementation) project seeks to improve personalized risk assessment to allow for a cost-effective, population-based approach to risk-based screening and determine best practices for implementation in Canada.
Abstract: Early detection of breast cancer through screening reduces breast cancer mortality. The benefits of screening must also be considered within the context of potential harms (e.g., false positives, overdiagnosis). Furthermore, while breast cancer risk is highly variable within the population, most screening programs use age to determine eligibility. A risk-based approach is expected to improve the benefit-harm ratio of breast cancer screening programs. The PERSPECTIVE I&I (Personalized Risk Assessment for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer: Integration and Implementation) project seeks to improve personalized risk assessment to allow for a cost-effective, population-based approach to risk-based screening and determine best practices for implementation in Canada. This commentary describes the four inter-related activities that comprise the PERSPECTIVE I&I project. 1: Identification and validation of novel moderate to high-risk susceptibility genes. 2: Improvement, validation, and adaptation of a risk prediction web-tool for the Canadian context. 3: Development and piloting of a socio-ethical framework to support implementation of risk-based breast cancer screening. 4: Economic analysis to optimize the implementation of risk-based screening. Risk-based screening and prevention is expected to benefit all women, empowering them to work with their healthcare provider to make informed decisions about screening and prevention.

48 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that, in line with the dramatic increase in the collection, storage and curation of human genomic data for biomedical research, genomic data repositories and consortia have adopted governance frameworks to both enable wide access and protect against possible harms.
Abstract: Here, we argue that, in line with the dramatic increase in the collection, storage and curation of human genomic data for biomedical research, genomic data repositories and consortia have adopted governance frameworks to both enable wide access and protect against possible harms. However, the merits and limitations of different governance frameworks in achieving these twin aims are a matter of ongoing debate in the scientific community; indeed, best practices and points for consideration are notably absent in devising governance frameworks for genomic databases. According to our collective experience in devising and assessing governance frameworks, we identify five key functions of ‘good governance’ (or ‘better governance’) and three areas in which trade-offs should be considered when specifying policies within those functions. We apply these functions as a benchmark to describe, as an example, the governance frameworks of six large-scale international genomic projects.

24 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined Canadian women's attitudes towards, comfort level about, and willingness to take part in BC risk-stratified screening using multifactorial risk assessment.
Abstract: Risk-stratified screening for breast cancer (BC) is increasingly considered as a promising approach However, its implementation is challenging and needs to be acceptable to women We examined Canadian women’s attitudes towards, comfort level about, and willingness to take part in BC risk-stratified screening We conducted an online survey in women aged 30 to 69 years in four Canadian provinces In total, 4293 women completed the questionnaire (response rate of 63%) The majority of women (635% to 728%) expressed favorable attitudes towards BC risk-stratified screening Most women reported that they would be comfortable providing personal and genetic information for BC risk assessment (615% to 674%) and showed a willingness to have their BC risk assessed if offered (748%) Most women (859%) would also accept an increase in screening frequency if they were at higher risk, but fewer (493%) would accept a reduction in screening frequency if they were at lower risk There were few differences by province; however, outcomes varied by age, education level, marital status, income, perceived risk, history of BC, prior mammography, and history of genetic test for BC (all p ≤ 001) Risk-based BC screening using multifactorial risk assessment appears to be acceptable to most women This suggests that the implementation of this approach is likely to be well-supported by Canadian women

21 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
08 Nov 2021-PLOS ONE
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic search was conducted across five major databases in August 2018 and repeated in April 2020, and included studies reporting findings from primary research regardless of method (quantitative, qualitative, mixed).
Abstract: Despite the plethora of empirical studies conducted to date, debate continues about whether and to what extent results should be returned to participants of genomic research. We aimed to systematically review the empirical literature exploring stakeholders' perspectives on return of individual research results (IRR) from genomic research. We examined preferences for receiving or willingness to return IRR, and experiences with either receiving or returning them. The systematic searches were conducted across five major databases in August 2018 and repeated in April 2020, and included studies reporting findings from primary research regardless of method (quantitative, qualitative, mixed). Articles that related to the clinical setting were excluded. Our search identified 221 articles that met our search criteria. This included 118 quantitative, 69 qualitative and 34 mixed methods studies. These articles included a total number of 118,874 stakeholders with research participants (85,270/72%) and members of the general public (40,967/35%) being the largest groups represented. The articles spanned at least 22 different countries with most (144/65%) being from the USA. Most (76%) discussed clinical research projects, rather than biobanks. More than half (58%) gauged views that were hypothetical. We found overwhelming evidence of high interest in return of IRR from potential and actual genomic research participants. There is also a general willingness to provide such results by researchers and health professionals, although they tend to adopt a more cautious stance. While all results are desired to some degree, those that have the potential to change clinical management are generally prioritized by all stakeholders. Professional stakeholders appear more willing to return results that are reliable and clinically relevant than those that are less reliable and lack clinical relevance. The lack of evidence for significant enduring psychological harm and the clear benefits to some research participants suggest that researchers should be returning actionable IRRs to participants.

21 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GAGH) as discussed by the authors has proposed a policy for the return of clinically actionable genomic research results, the first such policy approved by an international body.
Abstract: The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health has approved a policy for the return of clinically actionable genomic research results, the first such policy approved by an international body. The policy acknowledges the potential medical benefits to millions of individuals who are participating in genomics research. It ties the pace of implementation to each country’s clinical standards, including for the return of secondary findings, and urges funders to set aside resources to support responsible return.

19 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Technological innovations including risk-stratification algorithms and large databases of longitudinal population health data and genetic data are allowing us to develop a deeper understanding how individual behaviors, characteristics, and genetics are related to health risk.
Abstract: Technological innovations including risk-stratification algorithms and large databases of longitudinal population health data and genetic data are allowing us to develop a deeper understanding how individual behaviors, characteristics, and genetics are related to health risk. The clinical implementation of risk-stratified screening programmes that utilise risk scores to allocate patients into tiers of health risk is foreseeable in the future. Legal and ethical challenges associated with risk-stratified cancer care must, however, be addressed. Obtaining access to the rich health data that are required to perform risk-stratification, ensuring equitable access to risk-stratified care, ensuring that algorithms that perform risk-scoring are representative of human genetic diversity, and determining the appropriate follow-up to be provided to stratification participants to alert them to changes in their risk score are among the principal ethical and legal challenges. Accounting for the great burden that regulatory requirements could impose on access to risk-scoring technologies is another critical consideration.

14 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 2021-BMJ Open
TL;DR: The Sino-Canadian Healthy Life Trajectories Initiative (SCHeLTI), one of four trials being undertaken by the international HeLTI consortium, aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted, community-family-mother-child intervention on childhood overweight and obesity and non-communicable diseases risk as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Introduction Childhood overweight and obesity (OWO) is a primary global health challenge. Childhood OWO prevention is now a public health priority in China. The Sino-Canadian Healthy Life Trajectories Initiative (SCHeLTI), one of four trials being undertaken by the international HeLTI consortium, aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted, community-family-mother-child intervention on childhood OWO and non-communicable diseases risk. Methods and analysis This is a multicentre, cluster-randomised, controlled trial conducted in Shanghai, China. The unit of randomisation is the service area of Maternal Child Health Units (N=36). We will recruit 4500 women/partners/families in maternity and district level hospitals. Participants in the intervention group will receive a multifaceted, integrated package of health promotion interventions beginning in preconception or in the first trimester of pregnancy, continuing into infancy and early childhood. The intervention, which is centred on a modified motivational interviewing approach, will target early-life maternal and child risk factors for adiposity. Through the development of a biological specimen bank, we will study potential mechanisms underlying the effects of the intervention. The primary outcome for the trial is childhood OWO (body mass index for age ≥85th percentile) at 5 years of age, based on WHO sex-specific standards. The study has a power of 0.8 (α=0.05) to detect a 30% risk reduction in the proportion of children with OWO at 5 years of age, from 24.4% in the control group to 17% in the intervention group. Recruitment was launched on 30 August 2018 for the pilot study and 10 January 2019 for the formal study. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital in Shanghai, China, and the Research Ethics Board of the Centre Integre Universitaire de Sante et Services Sociaux de l’Estrie–CHUS in Sherbrooke, Canada. Data sharing policies are consistent with the governance policy of the HeLTI consortium and government legislation. Trial registration number ChiCTR1800017773. Protocol version November 11, 2020 (Version #5).

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on challenges posed by the unexplainable character of deep learning and other forms of sophisticated AI modelling used for cardiovascular imaging by briefly outlining the systems being developed in this space, describing how they work, and considering how they might generate outputs that are not reviewable by physicians or system programmers.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined an alternative approach in which the risk thresholds used for risk stratification vary by age and considered the implications of using age-independent risk thresholds on risk stratifying.
Abstract: In risk-stratified cancer screening, multiple risk factors are incorporated into the risk assessment. An individual's estimated absolute cancer risk is linked to risk categories with tailored screening recommendations for each risk category. Absolute risk, expressed as either remaining lifetime risk or shorter-term (five- or ten-year) risk, is estimated from the age at assessment. These risk estimates vary by age; however, some clinical guidelines (e.g., enhanced breast cancer surveillance guidelines) and ongoing personalised breast screening trials, stratify women based on absolute risk thresholds that do not vary by age. We examine an alternative approach in which the risk thresholds used for risk stratification vary by age and consider the implications of using age-independent risk thresholds on risk stratification. We demonstrate that using an age-independent remaining lifetime risk threshold approach could identify high-risk younger women but would miss high-risk older women, whereas an age-independent 5-year or 10-year absolute risk threshold could miss high-risk younger women and classify lower-risk older women as high risk. With risk misclassification, women with an equivalent risk level would be offered a different screening plan. To mitigate these problems, age-dependent absolute risk thresholds should be used to inform risk stratification.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore eight central concerns posed by open data with regard to human brain imaging studies: respect for individuals and communities, concern for marginalized communities, consent, privacy protections, participatory research designs, contextual integrity, fusions of clinical and research goals, and incidental findings.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated Canadian women's knowledge of the legislative context governing genetic discrimination and assessed their concerns about the possible use of breast cancer risk levels by insurance companies or employers.
Abstract: The success of risk-stratified approaches in improving population-based breast cancer screening programs depends in no small part on women’s buy-in. Fear of genetic discrimination (GD) could be a potential barrier to genetic testing uptake as part of risk assessment. Thus, the objective of this study was twofold. First, to evaluate Canadian women’s knowledge of the legislative context governing GD. Second, to assess their concerns about the possible use of breast cancer risk levels by insurance companies or employers. We use a cross-sectional survey of 4293 (age: 30–69) women, conducted in four Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Colombia, Ontario and Quebec). Canadian women’s knowledge of the regulatory framework for GD is relatively limited, with some gaps and misconceptions noted. About a third (34.7%) of the participants had a lot of concerns about the use of their health information by employers or insurers; another third had some concerns (31.9%), while 20% had no concerns. There is a need to further educate and inform the Canadian public about GD and the legal protections that exist to prevent it. Enhanced knowledge could facilitate the implementation and uptake of risk prediction informed by genetic factors, such as the risk-stratified approach to breast cancer screening that includes risk levels.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the metaphors used in these debates to chronicle the development of genetic privacy and conclude with reflections on the necessity to bring together the unique and private genetic self with the human other.
Abstract: Debates surrounding genetic privacy have taken on different forms over the past 30 years. Taking genetic privacy to mean an interest that individuals, families, or even communities have with respect to genetic information, we examine the metaphors used in these debates to chronicle the development of genetic privacy. In 1990-2000, we examine claims for ownership and of 'humanity' spurred by the launch of the Human Genome Project and related endeavors. In 2000-2010, we analyze the interface of law and ethics with research infrastructures such as biobanks, for which notions of citizenship and 'public goods' were central. In 2010-2020, we detail the relational turn of genetic privacy in response of large international research consortia and big data. Although each decade had its leading conceptions of genetic privacy, the subject is neither strictly chronological nor static. We conclude with reflections on the nature of genetic privacy and the necessity to bring together the unique and private genetic self with the human other.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the practical implications of three models of legal recognition for genetic counselors: the constitution of a professional order, inclusion in professional order and delegation, focusing on the balancing act between protecting the public and the resources required to seek legal recognition under the three different models.
Abstract: Genetic counseling is a fast-growing profession in Canada. Yet, despite its growth, genetic counseling lacks legal recognition in the majority of Canadian provinces. Legal recognition serves to regulate professions, including genetic counseling, that if not properly regulated, expose the public to the risk of harm. Under Canadian law, there are three models of legal recognition: 1) the constitution of a professional order, 2) inclusion in a professional order, and 3) delegation. This paper explores the practical implications of these different models of legal recognition for genetic counselors. It focuses on the balancing act between protecting the public and the resources required to seek legal recognition under the three different models. With a small number of genetic counselors (n = 484, with 89% found in 4 provinces) compared to other professions, the route toward professional regulation for genetic counselors can be challenging. Though legal recognition occurs at the provincial rather than federal level in Canada, we nonetheless advocate for pan-Canadian discussions that may benefit future pursuits of legal recognition.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine three issues in health research through a child-focused lens: consent to data processing, data retention, and data protection impact assessments, and show that these issues present distinctive concerns for children and that the General Data Protection Regulation provides few bright-line rules.
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the need for new ways of thinking about data protection. This is especially so in the case of health research with children. The responsible use of children's data plays a key role in promoting children's well-being and securing their right to health and to privacy. In this article, we contend that a contextual approach that appropriately balances children's legal and moral rights and interests is needed when thinking about data protection issues with children. We examine three issues in health research through a child-focused lens: consent to data processing, data retention, and data protection impact assessments. We show that these issues present distinctive concerns for children and that the General Data Protection Regulation provides few bright-line rules. We contend that there is an opportunity for creative approaches to children's data protection when child-specific principles, such as the best interests of the child and the child's right to be heard, are put into dialogue with the structure and logic of data protection law.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors map the contours of parental authority to access their child's raw genomic data and provide recommendations for healthcare professionals in the clinical and research contexts when faced with a parental request for a child's genomic data.
Abstract: Children with rare and common diseases now undergo whole genome sequencing (WGS) in clinical and research contexts Parents sometimes request access to their child's raw genomic data, to pursue their own analyses or for onward sharing with health professionals and researchers These requests raise legal, ethical, and practical issues for professionals and parents alike The advent of widespread WGS in pediatrics occurs in a context where privacy and data protection law remains focused on giving individuals control-oriented rights with respect to their personal information Acting in their child's stead and in their best interests, parents are generally the ones who will be exercising these informational rights on behalf of the child In this paper, we map the contours of parental authority to access their child's raw genomic data We consider three use cases: hospital-based researchers, healthcare professionals acting in a clinical-diagnostic capacity, and "pure" academic researchers at a public institution Our research seeks to answer two principal questions: Do parents have a right of access to their child's raw WGS data? If so, what are the limits of this right? Primarily focused on the laws of Ontario, Canada's most populous province, with a secondary focus on Canada's three other most populous provinces (Quebec, British Columbia, and Alberta) and the European Union, our principal findings include (1) parents have a general right of access to information about their children, but that the access right is more capacious in the clinical context than in the research context; (2) the right of access extends to personal data in raw form; (3) a consideration of the best interests of the child may materially limit the legal rights of parents to access data about their child; (4) the ability to exercise rights of access are transferred from parents to children when they gain decision-making capacity in both the clinical and research contexts, but with more nuance in the former With these findings in mind, we argue that professional guidelines, which are concerned with obligations to interpret and return results, may assist in furthering a child's best interests in the context of legal access rights We conclude by crafting recommendations for healthcare professionals in the clinical and research contexts when faced with a parental request for a child's raw genomic data

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify the potential sources of inequity in three stages of integrating cystic fibrosis personalized medicines into the Canadian healthcare system and propose mitigating strategies: clinical research and diagnostic testing; regulatory oversight and market authorization; and implementation into the healthcare system.
Abstract: This article identifies the potential sources of inequity in three stages of integrating cystic fibrosis personalized medicines into the Canadian healthcare system and proposes mitigating strategies: (1) clinical research and diagnostic testing; (2) regulatory oversight and market authorization; and (3) implementation into the healthcare system. There is concern that differential access will cast a dark shadow over personalized medicine by stratifying the care that groups of patients will receive-not only based on their genetic profiles, but also on the basis of their socioeconomic status. Furthermore, there is a need to re-evaluate regulatory and market approval mechanisms to accommodate the unique nature of personalized medicines. Physical and financial accessibility ought to be remedied before personalized medicines can be equitably delivered to patients. This article identifies the socio-ethical and legal challenges at each stage and recommends mitigating policy solutions.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compared the ethical and institutional conditions that govern the sharing and secondary use of longitudinal population health data from multiple cohorts and compared the data use and data sharing.
Abstract: Our research compares the ethical and institutional conditions that govern the sharing and secondary use of longitudinal population health data from multiple cohorts. The data use and data sharing ...


Journal ArticleDOI
25 Aug 2021
TL;DR: Ethical and analytic challenges arise when considering sequencing of biologic samples obtained from patients with relapsed leukemia following allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation and strategies to mitigate this risk are presented.
Abstract: The implementation of precision medicine and next-generation sequencing technologies in the field of oncology is a novel approach being more widely studied and used in cases of high-risk primary an...

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds (CAHHM) cohort, participants underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, heart, and abdomen, that generated incidental findings (IFs) as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In the Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds (CAHHM) cohort, participants underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, heart, and abdomen, that generated incidental findings (IFs). The approach to managing these unexpected results remain a complex issue. Our objectives were to describe the CAHHM policy for the management of IFs, to understand the impact of disclosing IFs to healthy research participants, and to reflect on the ethical obligations of researchers in future MRI studies. Between 2013 and 2019, 8252 participants (mean age 58 ± 9 years, 54% women) were recruited with a follow-up questionnaire administered to 909 participants (40% response rate) at 1-year. The CAHHM policy followed a restricted approach, whereby routine feedback on IFs was not provided. Only IFs of severe structural abnormalities were reported. Severe structural abnormalities occurred in 8.3% (95% confidence interval 7.7–8.9%) of participants, with the highest proportions found in the brain (4.2%) and abdomen (3.1%). The majority of participants (97%) informed of an IF reported no change in quality of life, with 3% of participants reporting that the knowledge of an IF negatively impacted their quality of life. Furthermore, 50% reported increased stress in learning about an IF, and in 95%, the discovery of an IF did not adversely impact his/her life insurance policy. Most participants (90%) would enrol in the study again and perceived the MRI scan to be beneficial, regardless of whether they were informed of IFs. While the implications of a restricted approach to IF management was perceived to be mostly positive, a degree of diagnostic misconception was present amongst participants, indicating the importance of a more thorough consent process to support participant autonomy. The management of IFs from research MRI scans remain a challenging issue, as participants may experience stress and a reduced quality of life when IFs are disclosed. The restricted approach to IF management in CAHHM demonstrated a fair fulfillment of the overarching ethical principles of respect for autonomy, concern for wellbeing, and justice. The approach outlined in the CAHHM policy may serve as a framework for future research studies. Clinical trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02220582 .


Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2021
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the issues presented by the use of next-generation sequencing, pharmacogenomics, and biobanking and data sharing in international consortia.
Abstract: Clinical research involving child participants frequently raises both legal and ethical concerns that researchers, clinicians, and parents must navigate to pursue relevant pediatric-centered investigation in health and particularly in cancer care. The foundational ethico-legal principles governing research participation provide the necessary frameworks with which to evaluate how emerging genetic technologies can serve current and future childhood cancer research. Taking the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions affecting a child, this chapter explores issues regarding consent/assent and return of results in pediatric oncology research. With a primary focus on Canada, the USA, and Europe, we examine the issues presented by the use of next-generation sequencing, pharmacogenomics, and biobanking and data sharing in international consortia.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss why computational tools to limit the identifiability of genomic data are a promising avenue for privacypreservation and legal compliance, even where these technologies do not eliminate all residual risk of individual identification, the law may still consider such data anonymised.
Abstract: In this opinion piece, we discuss why computational tools to limit the identifiability of genomic data are a promising avenue for privacy-preservation and legal compliance. Even where these technologies do not eliminate all residual risk of individual identification, the law may still consider such data anonymised.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Key Implications of Data Sharing (KIDS) framework was developed to address a need for institutional guidance on genomic data governance but has yet to be validated among data sharing practitioners in practice settings as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The highly sensitive nature of genomic and associated clinical data, coupled with the consent-related vulnerabilities of children together accentuate ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) concerning data sharing. The Key Implications of Data Sharing (KIDS) framework was therefore developed to address a need for institutional guidance on genomic data governance but has yet to be validated among data sharing practitioners in practice settings. This study qualitatively explored areas of consensus and dissensus of the KIDS Framework from the perspectives of Canadian clinician-scientists, genomic researchers, IRB members, and pediatric ethicists. Twelve panelists participated in a three-round online policy Delphi to determine the desirability, feasibility, relative importance and confidence of twelve individual statements of the KIDS Framework. Mean and IQR were calculated from panelists’ ratings to determine the strength of consensus and polarity. Qualitative content analysis of panelists’ written responses was used to assess degree of support. Statements were validated when their combined ratings and qualitative rationales indicated high-moderate consensus (at least 70% agreement across two contiguous categories), low to no polarity (IQR at least 1.0) and strong support. Nine original, and one new statement reached consensus. These statements outlined essential elements of the informed consent process, including a realistic evaluation of benefits and risks and assurance of future ethics oversight for secondary data use. Discrepant views on appropriate protections for anonymized and coded i.e. de-identified genomic data were primary sources of dissensus. The validated statements provide institutions with empirically supported best practices for sharing genomic and associated clinical data involving children from the perspectives of key stakeholders. Concerted efforts to quantify informational risks that can be conveyed to patients and families are further needed to align data sharing policy with stakeholder priorities.


29 Apr 2021
TL;DR: In 2019, the Court of Appeal of Quebec considered Section 1 to 7 of the GNDA were ultra vires of Parliament's criminal jurisdiction (2018) and the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the validity of Section 1, Section 7 (2019) in a 5-4 decision.
Abstract: Genetic discrimination has been a public concern for decades but supported by limited evidence. Following a reference from the Quebec government, the Court of Appeal of Quebec considered sections 1 to 7 of the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act (GNDA) were ultra vires of Parliament’s criminal jurisdiction (2018). In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the validity of the GNDA (2020). We contend that the majority’s reasoning contains serious errors in law and fact, raising constitutional and scientific concerns. We believe the majority incorrectly determined both the pith and substance of the provisions and the reasoned apprehension of harm standard.