Legal issues in governing genetic biobanks: the Italian framework as a case study for the implications for citizen’s health through public-private initiatives

Abstract

This paper outlines some of the challenges faced by regulation of genetic biobanking, using case studies coming from the Italian legal system. The governance of genetic resources in the context of genetic biobanks in Italy is discussed, as an example of the stratification of different inputs and rules: EU law, national law, orders made by authorities and soft law, which need to be integrated with ethical principles, technological strategies and solutions. After providing an overview of the Italian legal regulation of genetic data processing, it considers the fate of genetic material and IP rights in the event of a biobank’s insolvency. To this end, it analyses two case studies: a controversial bankruptcy case which occurred in Sardinia, one of the first examples of private and public partnership biobanks. Another case study considered is the Chris project: an example of partnership between a research institute in Bolzano and the South Tyrolean Health System. Both cases seem to point in the same direction, suggesting expediency of promoting and improving public-private partnerships to manage biological tissues and biotrust to conciliate patent law and public interest.

Reflections on dynamic consent in biomedical research: the story so far

“…From 2008 onwards, a number of international projects began piloting DC and similar approaches. For example, the Italian-based CHRIS study (which commenced in 2011) [12][13][14], implemented 'an interactive DC process for empowering participants' autonomy' and experienced notable resource benefits by adapting their recruitment approaches. The RUDY (UK rare diseases) study [15,16], initiated in 2014, incorporated DC to build a partnership model with participants detailing their rare disease experiences.…”

A new frontier: The challenges surrounding the deepening impact of data protection regulations on bankruptcy law

“…20 Although initially both sides followed an "internationally agreed-upon set of principles" 21 as embodied in the 1980 Privacy Guidelines of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 22 subsequent development gradually 23 led to significant divergence between the two. In particular, the Council of Europe's Convention 108 24 (last amended in 2018) 25 introduced standards that were not only more stringent than the OECD Guidelines but whose application was mandatory. No such steps were taken in the US.…”

Estrategias de implementación de la medicina personalizada de precisión en otros sistemas sanitarios públicos internacionales. Estado del arte.

“…Italia contempla un plan de evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias específico para MPP que cuenta además con una metodología específica, un grupo de toma de decisiones y una división del trabajo de evaluación en agencias regionales, sin embargo carece de un plan de evaluación de la implementación de la MPP. La fuente de financiación principal de la MPP en Italia es de origen público 51,[67][68][69][70][71] .…”