BackgroundIn specific situations it may be necessary to make an exception to the general rule of informed consent for scientific research with an intervention. Earlier reviews only described subsets of arguments for exceptions to waive consent.MethodsHere, we provide a more extensive literature review of possible exceptions to the rule of informed consent and the accompanying arguments based on literature from 1997 onwards, using both Pubmed and PsycINFO in our search strategy.ResultsWe identified three main categories of arguments for the acceptability of a consent waiver: data validity and quality, major practical problems, and distress or confusion of participants. Approval by a medical ethical review board always needs to be obtained. Further, we provide examples of specific conditions under which consent waiving might be allowed, such as additional privacy protection measures.ConclusionsThe reasons legitimized by the authors of the papers in this overview can be used by researchers to form their own opinion about requesting an exception to the rule of informed consent for their own study. Importantly, rules and guidelines applicable in their country, institute and research field should be followed. Moreover, researchers should also take the conditions under which they feel an exception is legitimized under consideration. After discussions with relevant stakeholders, a formal request should be sent to an IRB.

BackgroundDespite much debate, there is little evidence on consequences of consent procedures for residual tissue use. Here, we investigated these consequences for the availability of residual tissue for medical research, clinical practice, and patient informedness.MethodsWe conducted a randomised clinical trial with three arms in six hospitals. Participants, patients from whom tissue had been removed for diagnosis or treatment, were randomised to one of three arms: informed consent, an opt-out procedure with active information provision (opt-out plus), and an opt-out procedure without active information provision. Participants received a questionnaire six weeks post-intervention; a subsample of respondents was interviewed. Health care providers completed a pre- and post-intervention questionnaire. We assessed percentage of residual tissue samples available for medical research, and patient and health care provider satisfaction and preference. Health care providers and outcome assessors could not be blinded.ResultsWe randomised 1,319 patients, 440 in the informed consent, 434 in the opt-out plus, and 445 in the opt-out arm; respectively 60.7%, 100%, and 99.8% of patients’ tissue samples could be used for medical research. Of the questionnaire respondents (N = 224, 207, and 214 in the informed consent, opt-out plus, and opt-out arms), 71%, 69%, and 31%, respectively, indicated being (very) well informed. By questionnaire, the majority (53%) indicated a preference for informed consent, whereas by interview, most indicated a preference for opt-out plus (37%). Health care providers (N = 35) were more likely to be (very) satisfied with opt-out plus than with informed consent (p = 0.002) or opt-out (p = 0.039); the majority (66%) preferred opt-out plus.ConclusionWe conclude that opt-out with information (opt-out plus) is the best choice to balance the consequences for medical research, patients, and clinical practice, and is therefore the most optimal consent procedure for residual tissue use in Dutch hospitals.Trial RegistrationDutch Trial Register NTR2982

The genomes of thousands of individuals are profiled within Dutch healthcare and research each year. However, this valuable genomic data, associated clinical data and consent are captured in different ways and stored across many systems and organizations. This makes it difficult to discover rare disease patients, reuse data for personalized medicine and establish research cohorts based on specific parameters. FAIR Genomes aims to enable NGS data reuse by developing metadata standards for the data descriptions needed to FAIRify genomic data while also addressing ELSI issues. We developed a semantic schema of essential data elements harmonized with international FAIR initiatives. The FAIR Genomes schema v1.1 contains 110 elements in 9 modules. It reuses common ontologies such as NCIT, DUO and EDAM, only introducing new terms when necessary. The schema is represented by a YAML file that can be transformed into templates for data entry software (EDC) and programmatic interfaces (JSON, RDF) to ease genomic data sharing in research and healthcare. The schema, documentation and MOLGENIS reference implementation are available at https://fairgenomes.org.

We conclude that, while the majority of patients want to be informed about incidental findings, they also recognize that this may be difficult.