Incidental findings in human subjects research: what do investigators owe research participants?

The use of brain imaging technology as a common tool of research has spawned concern and debate over how investigators should respond to incidental findings discovered in the course of research. In this article, we argue that investigators have an obligation to respond to incidental findings in view of their entering into a professional relationship with research participants in which they are granted privileged access to private information with potential relevance to participants' health. We discuss the scope and limits of this professional obligation to respond to incidental findings, bearing in mind that the relationship between investigators and research participants differs fundamentally from the doctor-patient relationship.     

Incidental findings in pediatric research

The approach to incidental research findings in children emerges by considering the child-parent relationship and balancing divergent interests and preferences. Incidental findings with clear and proximate clinical importance should be disclosed to both. We recommend that particularly sensitive or private information (e.g., pregnancy or drug use) should be disclosed to the adolescent first, while particularly serious information (e.g., cancer) should first be disclosed to the parent. These approaches allow the researcher to form an alliance with one party prior to engaging the other. However, unlike clinical settings, where there may be presumptive expectations of confidentiality about sharing information within the family, in most research settings it is reasonable to plan to disclose such information to both parties. It is important to communicate this plan during the informed consent process separately to adolescents to avoid enrolling adolescents when sensitive incidental findings such as pregnancy and drug use may be detected. The approach to incidental findings without clear and proximate benefit is challenging. Researchers should plan more limited disclosure of such incidental findings for pediatric participants than for adult participants.     

The risks and benefits of searching for incidental findings in MRI research scans.

We weigh the presumed benefits of routinely searching all research scans for incidental findings (IFs) against its substantial risks, including false-positive and false-negative findings, and the possibility of triggering unnecessary, costly evaluations and perhaps harmful treatments. We argue that routinely searching for IFs may not maximize benefits and minimize risks to participants.     

Legal liability and research ethics boards: the case of neuroimaging and incidental findings

Neuroimaging research covers a wide range of intriguing issues from revealing brain structures to investigating what happens in our brain when we lie. The field appears to be thriving, but skepticism and alertness to the various ethical, scientific, policy and philosophical challenges associated with it also appear to be on the rise. One particularly complex issue concerns what to do with incidental findings that emerge during the course of neuroimaging research. Research ethics boards (REBs) play a central role in research oversight. In this paper, we will consider some of the potential issues associated with REB liability in negligence in the context of incidental findings in neuroimaging research.     

Incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain research

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to investigate brain structure ("structural MRI") and function (so-called "functional MRI") has become increasingly common among neuroscientists, psychologists, and even economists in recent years. Yet, despite this increase in use, relatively little attention has been paid to the issue of incidental findings. The current paper discusses these issues, and anticipates the future of incidental findings in the context of other neuroimaging tools currently being used to investigate the living brain.     

Incidental findings in genetics research using archived DNA

Despite calls by some commentators for disclosing incidental findings in genetics research, several factors weigh in favor of caution. The technology of genetics has the power to uncover a vast array of information. The most potent argument for restraint in disclosure is that much research is pursued without consent so that the individual participant may not know that research is being conducted at all. Often the work is done by investigators and at institutions with which the person has no prior contact. Past practice is also relevant; genetics researchers historically have chosen not to disclose incidental findings, of which misattributed paternity and pleiotropic alleles such as ApoE have been the most common. Many people choose not to have genetic tests when given a choice. It may be desirable to discuss the topic of incidental findings when consent for research is obtained, but given the risk of unwanted surprise when there has been no prior discussion, the potential utility of incidental findings should be very high before they are even offered to individuals.     

The Management of Incidental Findings in Neuro-Imaging Research: Framework and Recommendations

This paper addresses the question of how incidental findings (IFs) in clinical research should be managed by researchers, focusing in detail on IFs discovered in neuroimaging research. It begins by engaging the larger research ethics issue of whether researchers have any obligations of clinical care to participants, and assesses the content and merits of one particular framework for answering this question, Richardson and Belsky's ancillary care model. From here the paper develops an organizational structure for integrating the ancillary care model with existing research ethics standards, with the aim of better understanding their respective domains. It makes a distinction between incidental findings that are anticipated by informed consent documents, and those that are unanticipated, arguing that this distinction is critical for evaluating researcher obligations. Finally, it takes on the issue of incidental findings in neuroimaging research, translating the standards discussed into recommendations for both unanticipated and anticipated findings.     

Bridging philosophical and practical implications of incidental findings in brain research

Empirical studies and ethical-legal analyses have demonstrated that incidental findings in the brain, most commonly vascular in origin, must be addressed in the current era of imaging research. The challenges, however, are substantial. The discovery and management of incidental findings vary, at minimum, by institutional setting, professional background of investigators, and the inherent differences between research and clinical protocols. In the context of human subjects protections, the challenges of disclosure of unexpected and potentially meaningful clinical information concern privacy and confidentiality, communication, and responsibility for follow-up. Risks, including a blurring of boundaries between research and clinical practice, must be weighed against the possible benefit to subjects and a moral duty to inform. Identification and examination of these challenges have been met by scientific interest and a robust, interdisciplinary response resulting in the pragmatic recommendations discussed here.     

Understanding incidental findings in the context of genetics and genomics.

Human genetic and genomic research can yield information that may be of clinical relevance to the individuals who participate as subjects of the research. It has been common practice among researchers to notify participants during the informed consent process that no individual results will be disclosed, "incidental" or otherwise. However, as genetic information obtained in research becomes orders of magnitude more voluminous, increasingly accessible online, and more informative, this precedent may no longer be appropriate. There is not yet consensus on the responsibilities of researchers to disclose individual research results to research participants. Empirical research suggests that participants want to know individual research results. On the other hand, the increased resolution and power afforded by new genomic analyses may lead to findings of statistical, but not necessarily clinical, significance. This paper addresses the issues to be considered in deciding whether and how to disclose "incidental" findings or other findings of clinical significance that arise in the course of human genomic and genetic research. What research results should be offered, and what should not be offered? For which research should individual results be offered to research participants, when should they be offered, how, and to whom?     

论规范性文件不予一并审查:判断要素及其认定规则——基于1799份裁判文书的分析

规范性文件“能否一并审查”是对规范性文件合法性进行实质审查的先决问题。根据现有的制度规定,可将司法实践中规范性文件不予一并审查的类型划分为基础性要件缺失、附带性要件缺失和例外情形等三类,每种类型都包含多种情形和不同判断要素。法院应当采取更加积极宽容的态度,尽可能地将更多的规范性文件纳入一并审查的范围。对于不予一并审查的规范性文件的认定,应当在区分规范性文件与非规范性文件的基础上,综合运用多种认定标准明确界定规范性文件排除审查的范围。应当赋予第三人一并审查的请求主体资格,并明确当事人延迟提出一并审查请求“正当理由”的判断标准。对于不予一并审查例外情形的认定,应审慎对待,严格约束法院司法裁量权的行使。     

Brain concentrations of cocaine and benzoylecgonine in fatal cases

Since cocaine in blood rapidly hydrolyzes to benzoylecgonine, cocaine concentrations determined in postmortem blood may not reflect the presence or concentration of cocaine in the body at the time of death. The interpretative value of the determination of cocaine and benzoylecgonine in brain tissue was investigated. Cocaine and benzoylecgonine were quantitated by coextraction and formation of the propyl derivative of benzoylecgonine followed by selected ion monitoring gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) using electron ion impact ionization. Cocaine and benzoylecgonine were found to be evenly distributed throughout the brain. Cocaine and benzoylecgonine concentrations were stable in frozen brain tissue (-4 degrees C) on reanalysis after 1 to 3 months of storage, and in refrigerated tissue (10 degrees C) after 30 days of storage. Blood, brain, and liver concentrations of cocaine and benzoylecgonine in 37 cocaine overdose cases and 46 cases in which cocaine was incidental to the cause of death were reviewed. The ratios of cocaine/benzoylecgonine in the toxic cases (brain mean 14.7 and blood mean 0.64) were clearly different from those found in the incidental cases (brain mean 0.87 and blood mean 0.27). The brain/blood ratios of cocaine and benzoylecgonine concentrations generally were characteristic of the time elapsed since cocaine dosing. In cocaine overdose cases, the mean ratio was 9.6 for cocaine and 0.36 for benzoylecgonine. These are within the range found in animal studies for brain/blood ratios of cocaine and benzoylecgonine 0.5 to 2 h after cocaine administration. In incidental cases, the brain/blood ratios were mean 2.5 for cocaine and 1.4 for benzoylecgonine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Genomic research and incidental findings.

The Human Genome Project showed that there is significant genetic variation within the population. Current research is accumulating large databases that may reveal genetic variations associated with disease or health risks, even if not intended as part of the study design. These incidental findings create legal, ethical, and financial challenges for researchers. Current federal and international guidelines are not adequate. Plans for dealing with incidental findings need to be established in the study design and reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board.     

Incidental findings and ancillary-care obligations.

Recent work on incidental findings, concentrating on the difficult problems posed by the ambiguous results often generated by high-tech medicine, has proceeded largely independently from recent work on medical researchers' ancillary-care obligations, the obligations that researchers have to deal with diseases or conditions besides the one(s) under study. This paper contends that the two topics are morally linked, and specifically that a sound understanding of ancillary-care obligations will center them on incidental findings. The paper sets out and defends an understanding of ancillary-care obligations, which is based on the idea that when participants signed up for a study they may -- independently of their beliefs and expectations and of those of the researchers -- be taken to have partially entrusted certain aspects of their health into the researchers' hands. This partial entrustment model of ancillary-care obligations, in turn, has substantive implications for how to deal ethically with incidental findings; for instance, it suggests that researchers have no moral obligation to hunt for incidental findings.     

刑事附带民事诉讼制度与民事权利保护

在我国的诉讼立法和实践中，处理民事诉讼程序和刑事诉讼程序之间的适用关系时，采纳的是附带诉讼的原则，其基本的理念是公益优先。但在市场经济体制中注重私权保护的背景下，追诉犯罪与权利保护应被置于同等重要的位置，“刑优于民＂的解纷格局因利益的变迁而受到冲击．在刑事附带民事诉讼中应当加强对民事权利的保护，为此，有必要强调刑事附带民事诉讼中的民事诉讼的独立地位。     

Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

No consensus yet exists on how to handle incidental findings (IFs) in human subjects research. Yet empirical studies document IFs in a wide range of research studies, where IFs are findings beyond the aims of the study that are of potential health or reproductive importance to the individual research participant. This paper reports recommendations of a two-year project group funded by NIH to study how to manage IFs in genetic and genomic research, as well as imaging research. We conclude that researchers have an obligation to address the possibility of discovering IFs in their protocol and communications with the IRB, and in their consent forms and communications with research participants. Researchers should establish a pathway for handling IFs and communicate that to the IRB and research participants. We recommend a pathway and categorize IFs into those that must be disclosed to research participants, those that may be disclosed, and those that should not be disclosed.     

Sevoflurane concentrations in blood, brain, and lung after sevoflurane-induced death

Sevoflurane concentrations in blood, brain, and lung were measured in an individual apparently dying from sevoflurane inhalation. Sevoflurane is a volatile nonflammable fluorinated methyl isopropyl ether inhaled anesthetic, chemically related to desflurane and isoflurane. The incidence of abuse of sevoflurane is lower than that of other drugs of abuse possibly due to its inaccessibility to the general public and less pleasurable and addicting effects. The dead subject was an anesthetist found prone in bed holding an empty bottle of sevoflurane (Ultane). Serum, urine, and liver were screened for numerous drugs and metabolites using enzyme immunoassays and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Analysis did not reveal presence of any drug, including ethanol, other than sevoflurane. Sevoflurane was determined by headspace gas chromatography and revealed concentrations of 15 microg/mL in blood and 130 mg/kg in brain and lung. Autopsy revealed pulmonary edema and frothing in the lung, pathological findings associated with death by sevoflurane or hypoxia. The cause of death was ruled as sevoflurane toxicity and the manner of death as accident.     

Methanol Detected in a Subdural Hematoma as an Embalming Artifact

Analysis of subdural hematomata has been used to suggest antemortem drug concentrations, with the assumption that materials within the hematoma are less subject to metabolism or degradation during any survival period and postmortem interval. We report the case of an 87‐year‐old woman whose death had not been reported to the coroner's office until postembalming. Autopsy revealed a traumatic brain injury with subdural hematoma causing a mass effect. Testing of the clot indicated a methanol concentration of 51.8 mg%. No additional analyses were detected. These findings suggest that methanol can be present in a postmortem hematoma sample, yet not represent a poisoning. Our findings also suggest that while the interior of hematomata do not necessarily represent completely “protected space” from postmortem diffusion of some blood constituents, such diffusion is not facile, and analysis may still provide useful indications of antemortem drugs present, if not actual concentrations.     

Empirical analysis of current approaches to incidental findings

This paper presents results found through searching publicly available U.S. data sources for information about how to handle incidental findings (IF) in human subjects research, especially in genetics and genomics research, neuroimaging research, and CT colonography research. We searched the Web sites of 14 federal agencies, 22 professional societies, and 100 universities, as well as used the search engine Google for actual consent forms that had been posted on the Internet. Our analysis of these documents showed that there is very little public guidance available for researchers as to how to deal with incidental findings. Moreover, the guidance available is not consistent.     

宏观调控的法律规制

宏观调控问题已引起法学界热情的关注 ,但现有研究成果尚不足以形成立法资源 ,且学者间对宏观调控主体、领域、手段的法律规制等问题也存在着认识上的差异。立法上确定宏观调控主体 ,应以宏观调控的价值目标为根据 ;对宏观调控领域的法律规制 ,应把握宏观经济的层面界定 ;从逻辑学角度对现有宏观调控主体的研究成果进行检视 ,有利于确立宏观调控主体法治化的观念     

Rupture of splenic artery aneurysm.

Three cases of death from splenic artery aneurysm rupture were encountered from 1988 to 1991 at the Philadelphia Medical Examiner's Office. In two cases, cocaine was detected in the blood and was believed to have precipitated the rupture. Toxicologic testing for cocaine should be performed in all cases of splenic artery aneurysm rupture and its presence should be interpreted properly as contributory rather than incidental to death.