Alaska Native (AN) and American Indian (AI) people are underrepresented in health research, yet many decline to participate in studies due to past researcher misconduct. Southcentral Foundation (SCF), an Alaska Native-owned and operated health care organization, is transforming the relationship between researchers and the tribal community by making trust and accountability required features of health research in AN/AI communities. In 1998, SCF assumed ownership from the federal government of health services for AN/AI people in south central Alaska and transformed the health system into a relationship-based model of care. This change reimagines how researchers interact with tribal communities and established community oversight of all health research conducted with AN/AI people in the region. We describe the SCF research review process, which requires tribal approval of the research concept, full proposal, and dissemination products, as well as local institutional review board approval, and a researcher-signed contract. This review evaluates research through the lens of tribal principles, practices, and priorities. The SCF example provides a framework for other tribes and organizations seeking to reshape the future of health research in AN/AI communities.

Despite evidence that pharmacogenetics can improve tamoxifen pharmacotherapy, there are few studies with American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) people. We examined variation in cytochrome P450 (CYP) genes (CYP2D6, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and CYP2C9) and tamoxifen biotransformation in AIAN patients with breast cancer (n = 42) from the Southcentral Foundation in Alaska and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana. We tested for associations between CYP diplotypes and plasma concentrations of tamoxifen and metabolites. Only the CYP2D6 variation was significantly associated with concentrations of endoxifen (P = 0.0008) and 4‐hydroxytamoxifen (P = 0.0074), tamoxifen's principal active metabolites, as well as key metabolic ratios. The CYP2D6 was also the most significant predictor of active metabolites and metabolic ratios in a multivariate regression model, including all four genes as predictors, with minor roles for other CYP genes. In AIAN populations, CYP2D6 is the largest contributor to tamoxifen bioactivation, illustrating the importance of validating pharmacogenetic testing for therapy optimization in an understudied population.

Precision medicine initiatives, such as Cancer Breakthrough 2020, promise to improve cancer outcomes by tailoring treatment to an individual's genes, environment, and lifestyle. This promise will fall short unless researchers successfully engage diverse communities, including those with histories of medical and research abuse. We examined a rural Alaska Native community's viewpoints about biospecimen collection and storage; interest and recall in reporting family health history; and interest and engagement in biospecimen collection for conducting a genetic test for cancer. In 2014, four focus groups were held with 28 adult Alaska Native rural community members. Thematic analysis was performed after establishing a coding scheme by team consensus. Study participants shared interest in engaging in genetic cancer research and suggested ways to improve community engagement in research. These included transparency and continuous communication with researchers at all stages of the research, clear communication about the intent of the research, and that research and results take into consideration the community's needs. These suggestions may be beneficial for future efforts to expand precision medicine research in Alaska Native communities and similar, diverse populations.

Background: Multiple factors, including experiences with unethical research practices, have made some Indigenous groups in the United States and Canada reticent to participate in potentially beneficial health-related research. Yet, Indigenous peoples have also expressed a willingness to participate in research when certain conditions related to the components of data management—including data collection, analysis, security and storage, sharing, dissemination, and withdrawal—are met. A scoping review was conducted to better understand the terms of data management employed in health-related research involving Indigenous communities in the United States and Canada. Methods: PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and Web of Science were searched using terms related to the populations and topics of interest. Results were screened and articles deemed eligible for inclusion were extracted for content on data management, community engagement, and community-level research governance. Results: The search strategy returned 734 articles. 31 total articles were extracted, of which nine contained in-depth information on data management and underwent detailed extraction. All nine articles reported the development and implementation of data management tools, including research ethics codes, data-sharing agreements, and biobank access policies.These articles reported that communities were involved in activities and decisions related to data collection (n=7), data analysis (n=5), data-sharing (n=9), dissemination (n=7), withdrawal (n=4), and development of data management tools (n=9). The articles also reported that communities had full or shared ownership of (n=5), control over (n=9), access to (n=1), and possession of data (n=5).All nine articles discussed the role of community engagement in research and community-level research governance as means for aligning the terms of data management with the values, needs, and interests of communities. Conclusions: There is need for more research and improved reporting on data management in health-related research involving Indigenous peoples in the United States and Canada. Findings from this review can provide guidance for the identification of data management terms and practices that may be acceptable to Indigenous communities considering participation in health-related research.

As genetic testing technology advances, genetic testing will move into standard practice in the primary care setting. Genetic research, testing, and return of results are complex topics that require input from Alaska Native and American Indian (ANAI) communities as policies are developed for implementation. This study employed a day and half long public deliberation with ANAI primary care patients to elicit value-laden views of genetic research, testing, and return of results. Participants emphasized the need for a balance between the potential for genetics research, testing, and return of results to empower individuals and improve health with the potential to expose individuals and communities to privacy breaches, discrimination, and emotional harms. Public deliberation was well received by this group of participants and elicited rich discussion on the complex topic of genetic research, testing, and return of results.