Abstract
AbstractBiobanking—the storage of human biological samples, including tissue, blood, urine, and genetic data—raises many ethical, legal, and social issues, including confidentiality and privacy. Pediatric biobanking is more complicated, with difficulties arising because children lack capacity to consent and acquire this capacity upon maturity when the research is still ongoing. Yet given the limited availability of pediatric samples, the translational nature of biobanking presents a unique opportunity to share samples and produce clinically necessary information about pediatric development and diseases. Guidance on navigating these legal and ethical difficulties is needed for those involved in pediatric biobanking—including researchers, participants, and families, and those involved in biobank governance. This paper seeks to map the current regulatory framework governing pediatric biobanking to determine what guidance is currently offered. Regulatory mapping of current international and national guidelines on pediatric biobanking addressing the ethical, legal, and social nuances of pediatric biobanking was undertaken. This paper finds that international guidelines around biobanking are mostly for adults, and even when pediatric-specific, documents are non-binding, inconsistent, or only limited guidance is offered on a range of important issues specific to pediatric biobanks. Conclusion: This paper shows a need for consistent, comprehensive, and clear regulation on pediatric biobanking so that research can more quickly, efficiently, and ethically be translated to useful information and treatment in pediatric care.
What is Known:• Pediatric biobanking presents new opportunities to conduct valuable translational research to benefit pediatric populations. However, the storage of pediatric biological samples raises many ethical, legal and social issues—in part because child participants may be considered to lack capacity to consent but can acquire this capacity upon maturity when the research is still ongoing. Pediatric biobanks must grapple with issues of consent, confidentiality and privacy, and long-term participation regarding child participants.
What is New:• Regulatory guidance on these ethical, legal, and social issues is needed for researchers, participants, and families and those involved in biobank governance. This paper identifies nationally specific and international guidance on biobanking and summarizes the guidance provided in relation to these pediatric specific issues. It finds that most guidance is non-binding and inconsistent between guidance documents and may offer only limited guidance to stakeholders. A need for consistent, comprehensive, and clear regulation on pediatric biobanking is needed at an international level to enable research.
Funder
Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology
Centre for Healthcare Transformation
Queensland University of Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference50 articles.
1. University of British Columbia, Office of Biobank Education and Research, Canadian Tissue Repository Network (2023) Biobank locator. In: Biobank Resource Centre. https://biobanking.org/locator. Accessed 4 Aug 2023
2. Gramatiuk SM, Bagmut IY, Sheremet MI, Sargsyan K, Yushko AM, Filipchenko SM, Maksymyuk VV, Tarabanchuk VV, Moroz PV, Popovich AI (2021) Pediatric biobanks and parents of disabled children associations opinions on establishing children repositories in developing countries. J Med Life 14:50–55. https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2020-0106
3. Brothers KB (2011) Biobanking in pediatrics: the human nonsubjects approach. Pers Med 8:71–79. https://doi.org/10.2217/pme.10.70
4. Then S-N, Jowett S (2020) Removal and use of paediatric tissue for research purposes: legal and ethical issues in Australia. J Paediatr Child Health 56:359–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14763
5. Otlowski M, Eckstein L, McWhirter R (2018) Regulation of genetic testing. In: White B, McDonald F, Willmott L (eds) Health law in Australia. Thomson Reuters, Sydney, Australia, pp 839–874