In January 2009 the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) convened a 28-member multidisciplinary Working Group to update the recommendations of a 2004 NHLBI Working Group focused on Guidelines to the Return of Genetic Research Results. Changes in the genetic and societal landscape over the intervening five years raise multiple questions and challenges. The group noted the complex issues arising from the fact that the technologic and bioinformatic progress has made it possible to obtain considerable information on individuals which would not have been possible a decade ago. While unable to reach consensus on a number of issues, the Working Group produced five recommendations. The Working Group offers two recommendations addressing the criteria necessary to determine when genetic results should and may be returned to study participants, respectively. In addition, it suggests that a time limit be established to limit the duration of obligation of investigators to return genetic research results. The Group recommends the creation of a central body, or bodies, to provide guidance on when genetic research results are associated with sufficient risk and have established clinical utility to justify their return to study participants. The final Recommendation urges investigators to engage the broader community when dealing with identifiable communities to advise them on the return of aggregate and individual research results. Creation of an entity charged to provide guidance to IRBs, investigators, research institutions and research sponsors would provide rigorous review of available data, promote standardization of study policies regarding return of genetic research results, and enable investigators and study participants to clarify and share expectations for the handling of this increasingly valuable information with appropriate respect for the rights and needs of participants.
Death rates for AI/AN infants and children were higher than for Whites, with regional disparities. Several leading causes of death in the AI/AN pediatric population are potentially preventable.
Background Racial/ethnic minority groups have a higher burden of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but RCC among Hispanic Americans (HAs) and American Indians and Alaska Natives (AIs/ANs) are clinically not well characterized. We explored variations in age at diagnosis and frequencies of RCC histologic subtypes across racial/ethnic groups and Hispanic subgroups using National Cancer Database (NCDB) and Arizona Cancer Registry Data. Methods Adult RCC cases with known race/ethnicity were included. Logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate odds and 95% confidence interval (CI) of early‐onset (age at diagnosis <50 years) and diagnosis with clear cell RCC (ccRCC) or papillary RCC. Results A total of 405 073 RCC cases from NCDB and 9751 cases from ACR were identified and included. In both datasets, patients from racial/ethnic minority groups had a younger age at diagnosis than non‐Hispanic White (NHW) patients. In the NCDB, AIs/ANs had twofold increased odds (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.88‐2.59) of early‐onset RCC compared with NHWs. HAs also had twofold increased odds of early‐onset RCC (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.79‐2.55) in the ACR. In NCDB, ccRCC was more prevalent in AIs (86.3%) and Mexican Americans (83.5%) than NHWs (72.5%). AIs/ANs had twofold increased odds of diagnosis with ccRCC (OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.85‐2.58) in the NCDB, but the association was stronger in the ACR (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 2.08‐3.85). Similarly, Mexican Americans had significantly increased odds of diagnosis with ccRCC (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.78‐2.23) in the NCDB. Conclusions This study reports younger age at diagnosis and higher frequencies of ccRCC histologic subtype in AIs/ANs and Hispanic subgroups. These variations across racial/ethnic groups and Hispanic subgroups may have potential clinical implications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.