Many people don’t realize that their leftover tissue, blood or other samples – otherwise known as “biospecimens” – taken during a visit to the doctor or hospital might be stripped of identifying information and used in research without their consent.
So when the federal government decided to revise its “Common Rule” regulations governing federally funded research involving humans for the first time in decades, the draft revision included a proposal to require consent for all research with biospecimens, whether they have identifying information accompanying them or not. The original regulations required a person’s consent for research with biospecimens only if they had information with them that made them identifiable.
But when the updated Common Rule was released on Jan. 18, there was no change to this part of the regulation.
Human research regulations need to keep up with major advances in technology. They also need to balance enabling scientific progress with attempting to ensure safety and privacy for human participants in research.
So why wasn’t the proposal requiring consent for all biospecimen research adopted, and how do the new regulations recognize people’s concern in what happens to pieces of themselves in the future?
Why we need human biospecimens for research
Exciting new research projects, like the Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI), aim to personalize medical interventions and therapies for things like cancer care.
But knowing how to personalize treatment requires comparing data from thousands of biospecimens to discover the relationship between genetic variation, health behaviors and medical outcomes.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.