LIVE 2019 Petrie-Flom Center Annual Conference: Consuming Genetics: Ethical and Legal Considerations of New Technologies, Friday, May 17, 2019 from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM EDT
Wasserstein Hall, Milstein West (2019) Petrie-Flom Center 23 Everett St., Rm. 327 Cambridge, MA 02138 |
https://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/2019-petrie-flom-center-annual-conference
This year’s conference is organized in collaboration with Nita A. Farahany, Duke Law School, and Henry T. Greely, Stanford Law School.
REAL TIME Press Coverage for http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com
Director & Founder, Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group, Boston
Editor-in-Chief, Open Access Online Scientific Journal, http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com
Editor-in-Chief, BioMed e-Series, 16 Volumes in Medicine, https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/biomed-e-books/
@pharma_Bi
@AVIVA1950
Logo, Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group, Boston
Our BioMed e-series
WE ARE ON AMAZON.COM
https://lnkd.in/ekWGNqA
- Cardiovascular Diseases, Volume Three: Etiologies of Cardiovascular Diseases: Epigenetics, Genetics and Genomics. On Amazon.com since 11/29/2015
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B018PNHJ84
- VOLUME 1: Genomics Orientations for Personalized Medicine. On Amazon.com since 11/23/2015
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B018DHBUO6
- VOLUME 2: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS & BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology – Work-in-Progress
2019 Petrie-Flom Center Annual Conference: Consuming Genetics:
Ethical and Legal Considerations of New Technologies
The Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School is pleased to announce plans for our 2019 annual conference: “Consuming Genetics: The Ethical and Legal Considerations of Consumer Genetic Technologies.” This year’s conference is organized in collaboration with Nita A. Farahany, Duke Law School, and Henry T. Greely, Stanford Law School.
Description
Breakthroughs in genetics have often raised complex ethical and legal questions, which loom ever larger as genetic testing is becoming more commonplace, affordable, and comprehensive and genetic editing becomes poised to be a consumer technology. As genetic technologies become more accessible to individuals, the ethical and legal questions around the consumer use of these technologies become more pressing.
Already the global genetic testing and consumer/wellness genomics market was valued at $2.24 billion in 2015 and is expected to double by 2025 to nearly $5 billion. The rise of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and DIY kits raise questions about the appropriate setting for these activities, including a concern that delivering health-related results directly to consumers might cause individuals to draw the wrong medical conclusions. At the same time, advances in CRISPR and other related technologies raise anxieties about the implications of editing our own DNA, especially as access to these technologies explode in the coming years.
In an age where serial killers are caught because their relatives chose to submit DNA to a consumer genealogy database, is genetic privacy for individuals possible? Does the aggregation of data from genetic testing turn people into products by commercializing their data? How might this data reduce or exacerbate already significant health care disparities? How can we prepare for widespread access to genetic editing tools?
As these questions become more pressing, now is the time to re-consider what ethical and regulatory safeguards should be implemented and discuss the many questions raised by advancements in consumer genetics.
This event is free and open to the public, but space is limited and registration is required. Register now!
#DTCgenome
@PetrieFlom
@pharma_BI
@AVIVA1950
Agenda
8:30 – 9:00am, Registration
A continental breakfast will be available.
9:00 – 9:10am, Welcome Remarks
9:10 – 10:10am, Consumer Genetic Technologies: Rights, Liabilities, and Other Obligations
- Gary Marchant, Regent’s Professor, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law and Director, Center for Law, Science, and Innovation, Arizona State University (with Mark Barnes, Ellen W. Clayton, and Susan M. Wolf) – Liability Implications of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing
- Insurance may not cover BRCA genetic testing even for Patients with diagnosis of Breast cancer
- Anya Prince, Associate Professor of Law, University of Iowa College of Law and Member of the University of Iowa Genetics Cluster – Consuming Genetics as an Insurance Consumer
- Life insurance company initiated genetic testing: (a) Gatekeeping policy underwriting new comer applicants (b) Wellness Employer wellness programs incentivize healthy behavior Incorporate genetic testing into wellness Programs Test for preventing genetic conditions Like BRCA, Lynch syndrome, preventable – win/win proposition –>>> Healthier employees. Studies show shift of cost from employer to employee and employer have access to genetic information of employees.
- Life Insurance – JH Vitality program, get Apple watch if meet goals, premium is lower – incentive
- DTC companies beginning to market to Insurance
- Employment Legal Landscape:
- legal regulations
- Jessica Roberts, Professor, Alumnae College Professor in Law, and Director of the Health Law & Policy Institute, University of Houston Law Center – In Favor of Genetic Conversion: An Argument for Genetic Property Rights
- Ownership right to Genetic Property rights of the Information, consented to transfer or abandonment
- Conversion – Informed consent
- Family not in treatment relationship with the Researcher – Court rejected the claim family donated to research unfair benefir of the Hospital from the data and tissue donated
- Claim of conversion – Common Law
- Gene by Gene Family Tree DNA
- Courts shows a newfound openness to claims for genetic conversion
- claims for genetic conversion will not stifle reaserch or create moral harms
- consumers genetics, claims for genetic conversion are actually necessary to adequately protect people’s interests in their DNA
- Moderator: I. Glenn Cohen, Faculty Director and James A. Attwood and Leslie Williams Professor of Law
10:10 – 10:20am, Break
10:20 – 11:40am, Privacy in the Age of Consumer Genetics
- Jorge Contreras, Professor, College Of Law and Adjunct Professor, Human Genetics, University of Utah – Direct to Consumer Genetics and Data Ownership
- Seema Mohapatra, Associate Professor of Law, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law – Abolishing the Myth of “Anonymous” Gamete Donation in the Age of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing
- Kayte Spector-Bagdady, Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Chief, Research Ethics Service, Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine (CBSSM), University of Michigan Medical School – Improving Commercial Health Data Sharing Policy: Transparency, Accountability, and Ethics for Academic Use of Private Health Data Resources
- Liza Vertinsky, Associate Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law and Emory Global Health Institute Faculty Fellow (with Yaniv Heled) – Genetic Privacy and Public Figures
- Moderator: Nita Farahany, Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy, Duke Law School
11:40am – 12:40pm, Tinkering with Ourselves: The Law and Ethics of DIY Genomics
- Barbara J. Evans, Mary Ann & Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Director, Center on Biotechnology & Law, University of Houston Law Center; Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Cullen College of Engineering, University of Houston – Programming Our Genomes, Programming Ourselves: The Moral and Regulatory Limits of Self-Harm When Consumers Wield Genomic Technologies
- Maxwell J. Mehlman, Distinguished University Professor, Arthur E. Petersilge Professor of Law, and Director of the Law-Medicine Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, and Professor of Biomedical Ethics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine (with Ronald A. Conlon) – Governing Non-Traditional Biology
- Patricia J. Zettler, Associate Professor, Center for Law Health and Society, Georgia State University College of Law (with Christi Guerrini and Jacob S. Sherkow) – Finding a Regulatory Balance for Genetic Biohacking
- Moderator: Henry T. Greely, Director, Center for Law and the Biosciences; Professor (by courtesy) of Genetics, Stanford School of Medicine; Chair, Steering Committee of the Center for Biomedical Ethics; and Director, Stanford Program in Neuroscience and Society, Stanford University
12:40 – 1:20pm, Lunch
Lunch will be provided.
1:20 – 2:20pm, Regulating Consumer Genetic Technologies
- James Hazel, postdoctoral fellow, Center for Genetic Privacy and Identity in Community Settings (GetPreCiSe), Vanderbilt University Medical Center – Privacy Best Practices for Consumer Genetic Testing Services: Are Industry Efforts at Self-Regulation Sufficient?
- Scott Schweikart, Senior Research Associate, Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association and Legal Editor, AMA Journal of Ethics – Human Gene Editing: An Ethical Analysis and Arguments for Regulatory Guidance at Both the National and Global Levels
- Catherine M. Sharkey, Crystal Eastman Professor of Law, NYU School of Law (with Kenneth Offit) – Regulatory Aspects of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: The Emerging Role of the FDA
- Genetic predisposition – BRCA I & II – approved Testing
- Pharmaco-genetic Test authorization – incorrect interpretation, incorrect action based on results
- Regulatory model, pathway
- False positive and False negative BRCA I & II
- 23&Me – huge DB, big data who controls the data
- Across regulatory – liability issues on who own big data
- Moderator: Rina Spence, President of SpenceCare International LLC
2:20 – 2:30pm, Break
2:30 – 3:50pm, Consumer Genetics and Identity
- Kif Augustine-Adams, Ivan Meitus Chair and Professor of Law, BYU Law School – Generational Failures of Law and Ethics: Rape, Mormon Orthodoxy, and the Revelatory Power of Ancestry DNA
- Complex Sorrows: Anscestry DNA – 20 Millions records. Complete anonymity and privacy collapsed
- Jonathan Kahn, James E. Kelley Chair in Tort Law and Professor of Law, Mitchell-Hamline School of Law – Precision Medicine and the Resurgence of Race in Genomic Medicine
- precision medicine – classification of individuals into subpopulations that differ in their susceptability to a particular disease
- Blurring DIversity and Genetic Variation, Empirical and Normative Inclusion
- NHGRI – underrepresented of diversity in the community of genomics research professional is a socioeconomics issue not a genetics one – underrepresentation in DBs
- What does Diversity mean?
- Underrepresentation not race: Scientific workforce, recruitment sites recruitment cohort, Ancestry, Genetic variation, responsibilities for disparities
- Genetic Diversity rare alleles ->> actionable alleles
- Emily Largent, Assistant Professor, Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy and Senior Fellow, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania – Losing Our Minds? Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing and Alzheimer’s Disease
- Protect people and knowledge about one’s disease
- AD & APo-E Gene, e-2, e-3, e-4 – Carriers increase risk to AD too 40%
- Natalie Ram, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law – Genetic Genealogy and the Problem of Familial Forensic Identification
- Opt in to share genetic data on the platforms opt in national DB
- Genetic relatedness is stickier than social relations
- Voluntary sharing of genetic information – no other party can protect genetic information of any person, thu, if shared voluntarily
- Geneology is involuntarily disclosure of genetic information
- Familial Forensic Identification – Privacy for information held by Telephone companies
- Involuntarily Identification by genomic and genetic data genetic markers
- Moderator: Carmel Shachar, Executive Director, the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics and Lecturer at Law, Harvard Law School
- Genetic relatedness
3:50 – 4:00pm, Break
4:00 – 5:00pm, The Impact of Genetic Information
- Leila Jamal, Genetic Counselor, Division of Intramural Research and Co-Investigator, Centralized Sequencing Initiative, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Affiliated Scholar, Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health (with Benjamin Berkman and Will Schupmann) – An Ethical Framework for Genetic Counseling Practice in the Genomic Era
- Genetic Counseling – to benefit the patient, positive autonomy, benefiecence – how potentially impactful is the Test Information
- Nondirectiveness – Why?
- distance from eugenics + abortion politics
- persons ans patient autonomy – non-interference
- Genetic and Genomics Testing: Prenata, Pediatric, Vancer, other: Cardiology, Neurology, Hematology, Infectious diseases, pharmaco genomics, DTC, Ancestry
- Pre- Test Genetic Counseling – information and testing need, indication for testing
- Post-Test
- Informational Burden low vs high: Likely pathogenic, Pathogenic vs benign – natural history data
- potentially high impact – Testing that can reveal an action to be taken
- Relation with Patient close vs distant – recommendation based on best evidence +guidelines available
- Institutional role of Counselor
- Emily Qian, Genetic Counselor, Veritas Genetics (with Magalie Leduc, Rebecca Hodges, Bryan Cosca, Ryan Durigan, Laurie McCright, Doug Flood, and Birgit Funke) – Physician-Mediated Elective Whole Genome Sequencing Tests: Impacts on Informed Consent
- DTC
- Physician-initiated Genetic Testing
- Physician-initiated DTC
- Informed consent is a process: Topics covered – possible results & consequences
- Health Care Provider (HCP) Demographics: Neurology
- Analysis: Family Name
- Informed consent – who is responsible
- Consumers
- Vardit Ravitsky,@VarditRavitsky Associate Professor, Bioethics Programs, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, University of Montreal; Director, Ethics and Health Branch, Center for Research on Ethics – Non-Invasive Prenatal Whole Genome Sequencing: Ethical and Regulatory Implications for Post-Birth Access to Information
- Moderator: Melissa Uveges, Postdoctoral Fellow, Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics
- Clear conceptual approach
- Prioritize privacy/open future banning NIPW vs right to know unrestricted NIPW, prioritizing parental autonomy ->> allowing restrictions to be built in
5:00 – 5:15pm, Closing Remarks
Sponsored by the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School with support from the Center for Bioethics at Harvard Medical School and the Oswald DeN. Cammann Fund at Harvard University.
SOURCE
http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/2019-petrie-flom-center-annual-conference
Leave a Reply