Transformation of the Taiwan Biobank 3.0: vertical and horizontal integration

Abstract

Researchers expect a high quality of biospecimens/data and value-added services from biobanks. Therefore, the concept of "biobank 3.0" was introduced so that biobanks could better meet the needs of stakeholders and maintain sustainable operations. Theoretically, the Taiwan Biobank (TWB) has already gone through the concepts of biobank 1.0 and 2.0. However, three challenges still need to be addressed before it can be transformed into a new generation of the TWB (namely, the TWB 3.0): (1) the difficulty of integrating other biobanks' resources, (2) the efficiency and effectiveness of the release and use of biospecimens/data, and (3) the development of income and revenue models of sustainability. To address these issues, this paper proposes a framework for the TWB 3.0 transformation based on a dual-pillar approach composed of a "physically" vertical integration driven by the TWB and a "virtually" horizontal network led by the National Health Research Institutes (NHRI) of Taiwan. Using prominent biobanks such as the Biobanking and BioMolecular Resources Research Infrastructure-European Research Infrastructure Consortium (BBMRI-ERIC), the UK Biobank, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH)'s All of Us Research Program as models, the TWB can strengthen its ongoing TWB 2.0 operations in regional and/or international collaboration, increase the value of data collected and develop closer relationships with biobank participants and users. To these ends, the authors highlight key issues that include, but are not limited to, the harmonization of relevant ELSI standards for various biobanks' integrations; the value-added services and the efficiency of Big Data Era related research and/or precision medicine development, and financial concerns related to biobank sustainability. This paper concludes by discussing how greater participant engagement and the uptake of Information Technology (IT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications can be used in partnership with vertical and horizontal integration as part of a four-pronged approach to promote biobank sustainability, and facilitate the TWB 3.0 transformation.

Precision health in Taiwan: A data-driven diagnostic platform for the future of disease prevention

“…Taiwan has a diverse Chinese ethnic group, thus placing it in a unique position to preserve biological data from different ethnic groups (including aboriginal and Han populations). Integrating and using medical records in the NHI’s database and the genetic profiles of donors in Taiwan’s biobanks is one way of addressing some of the knowledge transition issues associated with precision medicine, and can significantly reduce expenses in this regard [14] . Taiwan’s biobanks and NHI database include billions of images of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, as well as their associated data, which can be exchanged with a network of cooperative biobanks globally.…”

“…In our previous work, Lin et al also reported a framework for how to integrate biobanks vertically and horizontally [14] , so that these institutions can contribute to biological science and share their data widely and globally. Currently, trying to alleviate public concerns regarding privacy infringement, subject to administrative regulations, electronic medical records (EMR) and data from NHI database can be synchronized by and under the supervision of the statistic center of the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW).…”

“…Without a doubt, biobanks are crucial for the implementation of precision health. Notably, some medically advanced countries such as the U.S., the U.K., Japan, and Taiwan have already developed biobanks to maintain biomedical big data of patients or healthy people for research purposes [25] , [26] , [14] . Moreover, progress in the area of information technology opens up a myriad of possibilities for data storage, processing, and its application to health care systems [27] .…”

Perspectives and experiences of researchers regarding feedback of incidental genomic research findings: A qualitative study

“…Aspects such as return of genetic information derived during research continue to be an issue globally and a topic of intense debate [1][2][3]. Although human GGR can yield information that may be of clinical relevance to the individuals who participate in research, there is not yet a consensus on the responsibilities of researchers to disclose individual research results to research participants [4,5]. In many settings, there is no legal obligations for researchers to return genetic results to participants despite patient willingness to receive the results [6,7].…”

Microbiome Forensic Biobanking: A Step toward Microbial Profiling for Forensic Human Identification

“…Public biobanks belong to, or operate on behalf of, public institutions, notably university hospitals, and are financed by the state. In general, they can be distinguished between tissue banks of the pathology units of universities and central hospitals and national biobanks such as those in the United Kingdom [5], Taiwan [6], or Estonia [7]. Public biobanks are not for profit and operate in the spirit of public service for research, while private biobanks are primarily composed of collections of samples and data collected by pharmaceutical companies and clinical research organizations and essentially come from clinical studies.…”