tissue banking challenging to say the least
DESCRIPTION
TISSUE BANKING Challenging to Say the Least. P. Pearl O’Rourke, M.D. Director, Human Research Affairs Partners HealthCare System Boston, MA. Agenda. The Complexity of banking PRIM&R White Paper on Tissue Banking Introduction Identified Barriers and Recommendations Other ‘gnarly’ issues. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
TISSUE BANKINGChallenging to Say the
Least
P. Pearl O’Rourke, M.D.Director, Human Research
AffairsPartners HealthCare System
Boston, MA
Agenda
• The Complexity of banking• PRIM&R White Paper on Tissue
Banking– Introduction– Identified Barriers and
Recommendations
• Other ‘gnarly’ issues
THE BAN
K
SpecimeSpecimenn
SourceSource
SpecimeSpecimenn
RecipienRecipientt
Bank Issues to Consider• What does it look like?
– Single site
– Multiple branch sites• Loosely affiliated cooperating banks with centralized
coordination
• Virtual bank
• The ‘Owner’ or Responsible Party
– Academic Medical Center; for-profit entity; advocacy foundation; government agency;
– HIPAA entity or not
Bank Issues to Consider• What is banked
– Disease-specific focus or no focus
– Clinical and/or research specimens
– Associated data
• Identifiable; limited data set; coded or anonymized
• Processing of specimens
– Validation of diagnosis or other processing
– Updating with future medical data and/or research results
The Specimen SourceThe Specimen Source• Who can provide specimens to the
bank?– Any clinician or investigator
– Only ‘approved’ clinicians and investigators
• Type of specimens that will be accepted– Obtained during clinical care (excess)
– Obtained for research purposes
• Solely for research
• Extra obtained during clinical care
The Specimen SourceThe Specimen Source• What data will be collected and
subsequently submitted to the bank?
– Specimens collected with identifiable information
• Sent to bank with identifiers
• Sent to bank with limited data set
• Sent to banks coded – link remaining at source
• Sent to bank anonymized
– Specimens collected with limited data set
– Specimens collected with no identifiers
The Specimen SourceThe Specimen Source• What permissions will be obtained?
– Informed consent (Common Rule/FDA Regs)
– Authorization (HIPAA)
• Who will obtain permission?
– Any clinician
– Any researcher
– Only bank affiliated persons
The Specimen RecipientThe Specimen Recipient• Who can access specimens?
– Anyone
– Access restricted based on; e.g., affiliation with the bank; domestic vs international; not-for-profit vs commercial entity.
• What can be accessed?
– Specimens with identifiable information; coded data; limited data set; no data
The Specimen RecipientThe Specimen Recipient• Can a recipient re-contact a tissue donor
or have access to individual medical records?
– If yes, with what review and approval?
• How does the bank decide who is ‘worthy?’
– Ethical use
– Consistency with initial informed consent/authorization
– Trivial research with limited specimens
THE BAN
K
SpecimeSpecimenn
SourceSource
SpecimeSpecimenn
RecipienRecipientt
IRB Review
Informed Consent
Authorization
IRB Review IRB Review
Informed Consent
Authorization
Tissue Bank
with
Identifiable Tissue
Tissue obtained solely for research
Identifiable tissue
Tissue originally collected for clinical care
IRB approval
IRB approval - informed consent/authorization
IRB approval - informed consent/authorization
IRB approval - informed consent/authorization or waiver*
No additional IRB approval - letter of agreement.
No additional IRB approval – Data Use agreement
No additional IRB approval*Specific Consent at 1 or 2 will usually suffice
Tissue Tissue SourceSource
Tissue Tissue RecipientRecipient
Coded tissue
Limited Data Set
Anonymous/ anonymized
1
2
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
Tissue Bank
with
No Identifia
ble Tissue
Tissue obtained solely for research
Tissue originally collected for clinical care
IRB approval
IRB approval - informed consent/authorization
No additional IRB approval and no letter of agreement
Tissue Tissue SourceSource
Tissue Tissue RecipientRecipient
De-identified tissue
Anonymous/ anonymized
1
1
2
2
Report of the Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research
(PRIM&R) Human Tissue/Specimen Banking
Working Group
Part I: Assessment and Recommendations
Part II: Tools for Investigators, IRBs and
Repository Managers
March 2007
Report of the Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research
(PRIM&R) Human Tissue/Specimen Banking
Working Group
Available on the PRIM&R Website:http://www.primr.org/uploadedFiles/PRIMR_Site_Home/
Public_Policy/Recently_Files_Comments/Tissue%20Banking%20White%20Paper%203-7-07%20final
%20combined.pdf
PurposePRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
• To identify – Current barriers to the collection,
storage, distribution, and use of human specimens and data in research
– Strategies for overcoming these barriers while protecting subjects
ParticipantsPRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
– IRB members– Lawyers– Ethicists– Researchers– Repository managers– Patient advocates– Representatives from academia,
industry and government
Barrier 1PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Diversity of banks and confusion about what types of banking activities constitute research activities or human subjects research under existing regulations
Barrier 1Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
A. OHRP should provide criteria for and examples of when a “collection” of human specimens is considered a research activity under the Common Rule. Specific attention should be paid to multiple-use and research support collections. OHRP should re-evaluate whether the mere collection of excess specimens for possible future use constitutes research for the purposes of regulatory oversight.
Barrier 2PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Lack of single comprehensive ethical and regulatory framework that addresses the full spectrum of activities related to specimen banking and use. The current situation is a patchwork of regulations and guidance addressing the collection, storage, distribution, and use of human specimens and associated data.
Barrier 2Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
B. OHRP, FDA, NIH, and other relevant federal funding agencies should work with other stakeholders (e.g., researchers, repository managers, IRBs, lawyers, ethicists, patient advocates, and research subjects) to develop a comprehensive framework for the collection, banking, and use of human specimens in research.
Barrier 3PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Lack of harmony among federal regulations.
Barrier 3Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
C. Federal regulatory and funding agencies should develop standardized language and definitions for use in regulations, policy documents, and educational materials related to specimen banking.
D. FDA should explore whether there are ways to more closely align the FDA definition of human subject with the Common Rule definition, which requires obtaining data through a research intervention or interaction or the use of individually identifiable information.
.
Barrier 3Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
E. OHRP should define more specifically when research using human specimens and associated data is or is not human subjects research and when it is exempt under the Common Rule. Case studies and examples would help clarify the confusion in this area.
F. DHHS should modify the Privacy Rule to exempt all research that is exempt under the Common Rule.
Barrier 4PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Misunderstanding and over-interpretation of the risks associated with the banking and use of specimens.
Barrier 4Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
G. OHRP should develop additional guidance to help IRBs assess the level of risk related to the collection, storage, distribution, and research use of specimens and associated data.
H. DHHS/OCR should work with OHRP to develop additional guidance to help IRBs and Privacy Boards evaluate risks to privacy and confidentiality with a view toward improving consistency of subject privacy protections.
Barrier 4Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
I. Federal regulatory and funding agencies should work with appropriate stakeholders to develop additional educational materials for IRBs, patients and the public about how to evaluate the benefits and risks of participation in genetics research on human
specimens.
.
Barrier 5PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Differing and confusing regulatory requirements for obtaining informed consent for the use of specimens in research and the HIPAA Privacy Rule requirement for authorization for the research use of protected health information.
Barrier 5Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
J. OHRP should issue guidance clarifying when waiver of informed consent for collection, storage, distribution, and use of specimens in research is appropriate. This should include:
i) guidance on determining when research using biological specimens is minimal risk
ii) guidance on interpreting the “practicability” requirement for waiver of informed consent.
.
Barrier 5Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
K. OHRP should provide additional guidance about the use of generalized informed consent for future research use of specimens and associated data and develop acceptable consent models for specimen banking.
L. FDA should explore additional approaches to permit specimens and data to be used without consent for minimal risk research.
.
Barrier 5Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
M. DHHS/OCR should explore approaches for removing the requirement that the authorization for research use of protected health information obtained from a research repository or database be study-specific.
N. The Privacy Rule should be revised to allow authorization for use of protected health information collected as part of a clinical trial to cover both research and banking activities.
O. The Privacy Rule requirement to account for disclosures of protected health information pursuant to a waiver of authorization should be eliminated.
.
Barrier 6PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
Practical implementation issues related to informed consent and authorization.
Barrier 6Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
P. Funding agencies should support infrastructure to enable institutions to implement processes for routinely obtaining and tracking informed consent for future research use of specimens obtained during the course of medical care.
Q. OHRP should consider the acceptability of using alternative approaches to informed consent, such as ‘opt out’ notification, as a tool to be used in concert with a waiver of consent for future research on residual specimens.
Barrier 7PRIM&R Tissue Banking Working Group
The HIPAA Privacy Rule imposition of additional requirements for research that is covered by the Common Rule, adding unnecessary burden to patients, researchers, IRBs and institutions.
Barrier 7Recommendations to Federal Regulatory and Funding
Agencies
R. DHHS should modify the Privacy Rule to exempt research that is subject to the Common Rule because the Common Rule provides appropriate and equivalent protections.
Barriers not addressed, that merit further discussion
• Lack of clear guidance about how to deal with the complex issues of ownership of specimens, intellectual property considerations with regard to discoveries made using specimens
• Whether research results should be returned to subjects and if so, how and when.
Other Gnarly Issues
• Assessing community risk• Specimens from children
– When minor become majors