Engaging the Community in Predictive Health Research: Reporting on
PredictER's November 2nd Expert Panel
Research and the Community
In most predictive health projects, researchers need to obtain human
biological materials that can be stored for immediate or later use and
then linked to detailed health information from medical records.
Building biobanks and predictive health research projects requires a
supportive public. To succeed researchers need a representative sample
of willing participants, good state and institutional policy, and (of
course) funding. (This research also benefits from highly motivated
advocacy groups such as Susan G. Komen for the Cure.) In a few words,
predictive health is one of the most community saturated forms of
medical research to date.
Ethical Issues
The great good that will be accomplished by predictive health
research, with its ability to forecast a person's health future with
reasonable probability, must be pursued with careful consideration.
These studies raise ethical, legal, and social questions beyond the
scope of the current paradigm of medical research. Very basic examples
of these questions include: What do researchers do when they find that
an individual tests positive for a gene or other biomarker that puts
them at significant risk for a disease in the future? Can an
individual's biological material be used first to study one type of
disease or treatment and then later another? What protections need to
be in place to ensure that the sensitive information in an
individual's health record and genes does not result in employment or
health insurance discrimination?
The Pace of Translation
While questions like these may seem very scary when rattled off one
after the other, the truth is that predictive health is the future of
medicine--a future that hopes to fulfill the ambitions of the human
genome project, by providing an individual with a personalized
assessment of risk and response to treatment. The human genome project
succeeded in decoding a great deal of information, but what that
information means for individuals with heart disease, a family history
of cancer, or a smoking addiction, has not been answered. If current
research succeeds, this information will be translated into real
clinical applications in the not too distant future. Research looking
to define these types of predictors is well underway at most
universities--some, as exemplified by Emory's Predictive Health
Initiative and the TGen (Translational Genomics) project in Arizona,
have worked to establish comprehensive predictive health research
programs. Meanwhile, as The Wall Street Journal recently reported many
(up to 1,400) genetic tests are already available for individuals
interested in assessing their risks for a number of diseases.
Moreover, many specific predictive tests are already being used to
chart treatment paradigms in hospital care.
PredictER Engaging the Community
Still, the fact that predictive health is occurring does not answer
any of the concerns voiced earlier. These are concerns that the
PredictER program at the IU Center for Bioethics is working to
address. On November 2nd, PredictER convened a panel of 35 experts and
community advocates to begin to give shape to many of these concerns
and to explore ways to reach out to the community, build
collaboration, and encourage research while protecting individual and
public interests. While the panel of experts shared an understanding
of the progress of predictive health, it took an entire day of
brainstorming and discussion to reach consensus on what issues may be
present with respect to engaging the community. In the end, it was
clear that predictive health will require physicians, researchers, and
the community to join in constructive, mutually beneficial work. In
the near future a white paper will be published by the Center for
Bioethics with a more detailed account of the November 2nd event. This
paper will also introduce the next step in PredictER's community
outreach mission--a plan to engage central Indiana community leaders
and to listen to their concerns about the future of predictive health
research. -- Patrick Barrett
Posted by PredictER at 12:21 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment