Search

The article focuses on the U.S. Common Rule's failure to adequately address group risks, Indigenous sovereignty, and historical research harms, arguing for revisions that prioritize collective well-being and robust community engagement. It highlights the ongoing impacts of research exploitation on Indigenous communities and advocates for Indigenous Data Sovereignty as a framework to ensure ethical and equitable research practices.

Meta-analyses of association results for blood pressure using exome-centric single-variant and gene-based tests identified 31 new loci in a discovery stage among 146,562 individuals, with follow-up and meta-analysis in 180,726 additional individuals (total n = 327,288). These blood pressure-associated loci are enriched for known variants for cardiometabolic traits. Associations were also observed for the aggregation of rare and low-frequency missense variants in three genes, NPR1, DBH, and PTPMT1. In addition, blood pressure associations at 39 previously reported loci were confirmed. The identified variants implicate biological pathways related to cardiometabolic traits, vascular function, and development. Several new variants are inferred to have roles in transcription or as hubs in protein-protein interaction networks. Genetic risk scores constructed from the identified variants were strongly associated with coronary disease and myocardial infarction. This large collection of blood pressure-associated loci suggests new therapeutic strategies for hypertension, emphasizing a link with cardiometabolic risk.

This article aims to explore the ethical issues arising from attempts to diversify genomic data and include individuals from underserved groups in studies exploring the relationship between genomics and health. We employed a qualitative synthesis design, combining data from three sources: 1) a rapid review of empirical articles published between 2000 and 2022 with a primary or secondary focus on diversifying genomic data, or the inclusion of underserved groups and ethical issues arising from this, 2) an expert workshop and 3) a narrative review. Using these three sources we found that ethical issues are interconnected across structural factors and research practices. Structural issues include failing to engage with the politics of knowledge production, existing inequities, and their effects on how harms and benefits of genomics are distributed. Issues related to research practices include a lack of reflexivity, exploitative dynamics and the failure to prioritise meaningful co-production. Ethical issues arise from both the structure and the practice of research, which can inhibit researcher and participant opportunities to diversify data in an ethical way. Diverse data are not ethical in and of themselves, and without being attentive to the social, historical and political contexts that shape the lives of potential participants, endeavours to diversify genomic data run the risk of worsening existing inequities. Efforts to construct more representative genomic datasets need to develop ethical approaches that are situated within wider attempts to make the enterprise of genomics more equitable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past two decades, the study of ancient genomes from Ancestral humans, or human paleogenomic research, has expanded rapidly in both scale and scope. Ethical discourse has subsequently emerged to address issues of social responsibility and scientific robusticity in conducting research. Here, we highlight and contextualize the primary sources of professional ethical guidance aimed at paleogenomic researchers. We describe the tension among existing guidelines, while addressing core issues such as consent, destructive research methods, and data access and management. Currently, there is a dissonance between guidelines that focus on scientific outcomes and those that hold scientists accountable to stakeholder communities,such as descendants. Thus, we provide additional tools to navigate the complexities of ancient DNA research while centering engagement with stakeholder communities in the scientific process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors agree with the article "Extending Research Protections to Tribal Communities," by B. Saunkeah and peers, which points out that research ethics principles outlined in Belmont Report do not offer adequate research protections for American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) peoples. Topics include the consideration for respect for sovereignty when recruiting AI/AN peoples, the importance of reconsidering group risks and harms to AI/AN individuals and the concept of reciprocity in research.

This paper describes the design, implementation, and process outcomes from three public deliberations held in three tribal communities. Although increasingly used around the globe to address collective challenges, our study is among the first to adapt public deliberation for use with exclusively Indigenous populations. In question was how to design deliberations for tribal communities and whether this adapted model would achieve key deliberative goals and be well received. We adapted democratic deliberation, an approach to stakeholder engagement, for use with three tribal communities to respect tribal values and customs. Public deliberation convenes people from diverse backgrounds in reasoned reflection and dialogue in search of collective solutions. The deliberation planning process and design were informed by frameworks of enclave deliberation and community-based participatory research, which share key egalitarian values. The deliberations were collaboratively designed with tribal leadership and extensive partner input and involvement in the deliberations. Each deliberation posed different, locally relevant questions about genomic research, but used the same deliberation structure and measures to gauge the quality and experience of deliberation. A total of 52 individuals participated in the deliberations across all three sites. Deliberants were balanced in gender, spanned decades in age, and were diverse in educational attainment and exposure to health research. Overall, the deliberations were positively evaluated. Participant perceptions and external observer datasets depict three deliberations that offered intensive conversation experiences in which participants learned from one another, reported feeling respected and connected to one another, and endorsed this intensive form of engagement. The adapted deliberations achieved key deliberative goals and were generally well received. Limitations of the study are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses that the indigenous Genomic Data Sovereignty in Precision Medicine. Topics discussed include commentary extends consideration of the conditions that impact Indigenous participation in precision medicine research and also the potential benefits derived from it; and takes for granted the colonial power relations that shape the aforementioned structural inequities.

The article presents a report from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists in the indigenous data sovereignties and data sharing in biological anthropology. It mentions that lack of conversation regarding Indigenous data sovereignties as concerning given that Indigenous and allied thinkers have often intervened data governance.

Biotinylated bleomycin [A.sub.5] is attached to streptavidin-derivatized microbubbles and a solution containing the conjugate is passed over a monolayer of cultured MCF-7 cells. No binding is seen on any tested cell line when the microbubbles lacked conjugated bleomycin [A.sub.5] or when the microbubble contained a bleomycin [A.sub.5] analogue lacking the carbohydrate moiety.

Integration of genomic technology into healthcare settings establishes new capabilities to predict disease susceptibility and optimize treatment regimes. Yet, Indigenous peoples remain starkly underrepresented in genetic and clinical health research and are unlikely to benefit from such efforts. To foster collaboration with Indigenous communities, we propose six principles for ethical engagement in genomic research: understand existing regulations, foster collaboration, build cultural competency, improve research transparency, support capacity building, and disseminate research findings. Inclusion of underrepresented communities in genomic research has the potential to expand our understanding of genomic influences on health and improve clinical approaches for all populations. Indigenous peoples are still underrepresented in genetic research. Here, the authors propose an ethical framework consisting of six major principles that encourages researchers and Indigenous communities to build strong and equal partnerships to increase trust, engagement and diversity in genomic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Technological advances have enabled the rapid generation of health and genomic data, though rarely do these technologies account for the values and priorities of marginalized communities. In this commentary, we conceptualize a blockchain genomics data framework built out of the concept of Indigenous Data Sovereignty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has inequitably impacted Indigenous communities in the United States. In this emergency state that highlighted existing inadequacies in US government and tribal public health infrastructures, many tribal nations contracted with commercial entities and other organization types to conduct rapid diagnostic and antibody testing, often based on proprietary technologies specific to the novel pathogen. They also partnered with public-private enterprises on clinical trials to further the development of vaccines. Indigenous people contributed biological samples for assessment and, in many cases, broadly consented for indefinite use for future genomics research. A concern is that the need for crisis aid may have placed Indigenous communities in a position to forego critical review of data use agreements by tribal research governances. In effect, tribal nations were placed in the unenviable position of trading short-term public health assistance for long-term, unrestricted access to Indigenous genomes that may disempower future tribal sovereignties over community members' data. Diagnostic testing, specimen collection, and vaccine research is ongoing; thus, our aim is to outline pathways to trust that center current and future equitable relationship-building between tribal entities and public-private interests. These pathways can be utilized to increase Indigenous communities' trust of external partners and share understanding of expectations for and execution of data protections. We discuss how to navigate genomic-based data use agreements in the context of pathogen genomics. While we focus on US tribal nations, Indigenous genomic data sovereignties relate to global Indigenous nations regardless of colonial government recognition., Competing Interests: KT serves as a non-compensated board member of a non-profit 501(c)3 Indigenous biobank initiative, the Native BioData Consortium, in the United States. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Haring, Blanchard, Korchmaros, Lund, Haozous, Raphaelito, Hudson and Tsosie.)