A review of the key issues associated with the commercialization of biobanks
Open accessAbstract
Biobanks1 have emerged as a significant research tool, gaining support from both the scientific community and regional, national and international research funding agencies. However, developing and maintaining these platforms is expensive. Indeed, in a recent survey of operational personnel representing 456 biobanks, funding shortages concerned 71% of those surveyed and 37% identified ‘funding’ as ‘the biobank's greatest challenge.’2 Thus, unsurprisingly, biobanks may seek support from the private sector or philanthropic organizations, which have an interest in sustaining them as research resources. The scientific community is also increasingly facing pressure to commercialize and translate their work, thus increasing expectations of industry partnerships.3 Funding agencies, in part, create and reinforce this commercialization pressure, by earmarking grants for projects that aim to bring products and therapies to the market within a short amount of time.4 This commercialization process creates a range of policy challenges for scientists, research participants, and funders. The goal of this document is to outline the policy issues associated with the commercialization of biobanks and, where possible, to review the relevant evidence and/or ethical and legal norms.5 We do not attempt to provide suggestions for policy reform. Nevertheless, given that securing funding for biobanks remains a challenge and that researchers are increasingly pressured to work with industry and to rapidly translate their work, a scoping document of this nature—one that draws together international expertise and relevant research—seems timely and, we hope, can stand as a resource for future research and policy work. ‘Commercialization’ can refer to a number of different activities. It can refer to the commercialization of biobank resources (data or samples of human biological material) or of research results derived or products developed from those resources. It can also refer to publicly funded biobanks partnering with or receiving funding from private, for-profit entities like biotech companies, pharmaceutical corporations, or the medical device industry. For the purposes of this scoping document, we will largely focus on the introduction of private funding and partnerships to an existing, publicly funded biobank. This focus is justified because many biobanks are not-for-profit entities associated with larger (often publicly-funded) bodies, such as universities and hospitals, and funded, often through short-term grants, by these bodies, by the government, or by a mixture of public and private funds.6 Survey evidence indicates that these biobanks are greatly concerned with securing adequate long-term funding.7 As Meijer and colleagues note, with the expansion and change in the size, goals and structure of biobanks, ‘stable sources of core funding will be necessary in most cases, from the public sector, patient organizations and private foundations.’8 Given this reality, we believe that commercialization will particularly and uniquely impact publicly supported biobanks, as they consider various means, including private partnerships, to ensure financial security.9 Of course, biobanks vary greatly in organization, priorities, and funding,10 and thus commercialization will affect different biobanks in different ways. Not every biobank will seek commercial partnerships in response to financial pressures, and, indeed, delineating which factors (eg type of biobank; organizational structure; research goals and focus) influence the development of private partnerships may be an important question for future research. Indeed, we hope this overview of issues will inform these future funding decisions. In addition to our primary focus on the introduction of private financing and partnerships, some of the emerging research and commentaries on the issues associated with commercialization are relevant to a range of other activities and are worth considering here. For example, issues of public trust can be triggered by a variety of commercialization practices, as we will see. Thus, where appropriate, we will discuss commercialization activities beyond just the introduction of private funding. Before turning to the issues at hand, it may be useful to set out some of the scenarios in which commercialization may occur. In this paper, as noted, we largely concentrate on the introduction of private funding to a pre-existing publicly funded biobank. In such a case, a chief concern for the biobank will be retaining participants who were, presumably, originally recruited with an understanding that the biobank would be a ‘public good.’ In this case, issues related to consent, participant retention, and withdrawal of biological material and associated data are particularly important. We can contrast this with a scenario in which the biobank is a public-private partnership from its inception. In such as case, enrollment of participants and obtaining consent to
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Biobanks or other repositories or databases used in their study have commercial interests that might influence research integrity.
“Authors should disclose funding sources for biobanks or other repositories or databases used in their study because these entities also have commercial interests that might influence research integrity.124 125”
From Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology using Mendelian Randomisation (STROBE-MR): explanation and elaboration. (2021) · cites this paper as [125]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review
Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167 · Cited by 2,147 · see citing works
Bhandari, M., Busse, J. W., Jackowski, D., Montori, V. M., Schünemann, H. J., Sprague, S., Mears, D., Schemitsch, E. H., Heels-Ansdell, D., & Devereaux, P. J. (2004) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 550 · see citing works
The Havasupai Indian tribe case--lessons for research involving stored biologic samples.
Mello, M. M., & Wolf, L. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp1005203 · Cited by 348 · see citing works
Biobanking for better healthcare
Riegman, P. H. J., Morente, M. M., Betsou, F., et al. (2008) · Molecular Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2008.07.004 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Research Ethics Recommendations for Whole-Genome Research: Consensus Statement
Caulfield, T., McGuire, A. L., Cho, M. K., Buchanan, J. A., Burgess, M., Danilczyk, U. G., Diaz, C. M., Fryer-Edwards, K. A., Green, S. K., Hodosh, M. A., et al. (2008) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060073 · Cited by 238 · see citing works
Self-citationKettis-Lindblad, Å., Ring, L., Viberth, E., et al. (2005) · European Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/eurpub/cki198 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
Vaught, J., Rogers, J., Carolin, T., & Compton, C. C. (2011) · JNCI Monographs · doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgr009 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
National Biobanks: Clinical Labor, Risk Production, and the Creation of Biovalue
Mitchell, R., & Waldby, C. (2009) · Science Technology & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243909340267 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Assessing the Privacy Risks of Data Sharing in Genomics
Heeney, C., Hawkins, N., de Vries, J., Boddington, P., & Kaye, J. S. (2010) · Public Health Genomics · doi:10.1159/000294150 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Self-citationJoly, Y., Dove, E. S., Knoppers, B. M., Bobrow, M., & Chalmers, D. (2012) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002549 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Self-citationBurke, W., Burton, H., Hall, A., Karmali, M. A., Khoury, M. J., Knoppers, B. M., Meslin, E. M., Stanley, F. J., Wright, C. F., & Zimmern, R. L. (2010) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/gim.0b013e3182011222 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Self-citationO’Doherty, K. C., Hawkins, A. K., & Burgess, M. (2012) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.06.026 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationGodard, B., Marshall, J. K., & Laberge, C. M. (2007) · Public Health Genomics · doi:10.1159/000101756 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey
Critchley, C. R., Nicol, D., Otlowski, M. F. A., et al. (2010) · European Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckq136 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Self-citationNot worth the paper it's written on? Informed consent and biobank research in a Norwegian context
Skolbekken, J., Ursin, L. O., Solberg, B., Christensen, E., & Ytterhus, B. (2005) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/09581590500523319 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Genomics and Privacy: Implications of the New Reality of Closed Data for the Field
Greenbaum, D. S., Sboner, A., Mu, X. J., & Gerstein, M. (2011) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002278 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Connecting the public with biobank research: reciprocity matters
Gottweis, H., GASKELL, G. D., & Starkbaum, J. (2011) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3083 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationSterckx, S., Cockbain, J., Howard, H. C., Huys, I., & Borry, P. (2012) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2012.143 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Self-citationBenefit sharing and biobanking in Australia
Nicol, D., & Critchley, C. R. (2011) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662511402425 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citationCritchley, C. R., Nicol, D., Otlowski, M. F. A., & Chalmers, D. (2014) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662513519937 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Self-citationStem cell banking: between traceability and identifiability
Knoppers, B. M., & Isasi, R. M. (2010) · Genome Medicine · doi:10.1186/gm194 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Role of Ethics in Commercial Genetic Research: Notes on the Notion of Commodification
Hoeyer, K. (2005) · Medical Anthropology · doi:10.1080/01459740590905642 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Closure of population biobanks and direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies
Zawati, M. H., Borry, P., & Howard, H. C. (2011) · Human Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00439-011-1019-4 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Self-citationCommercialization and Collaboration: Competing Policies in Publicly Funded Stem Cell Research?
Bubela, T. M., Strotmann, A., Adams, R., et al. (2010) · Cell stem cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2010.06.010 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Biobanking and public health: is a human rights approach the tie that binds?
Meslin, E. M., & Garba, I. (2011) · Human Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00439-011-1061-2 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationGenomic databases access agreements: legal validity and possible sanctions
Joly, Y., Zeps, N., & Knoppers, B. M. (2011) · Human Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00439-011-1044-3 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Human Genome as Common Heritage: Common Sense or Legal Nonsense?
Ossorio, P. N. (2007) · The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics · doi:10.1111/j.1748-720x.2007.00165.x · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Intellectual property rights in publicly funded biobanks: much ado about nothing?
Pathmasiri, S., Deschênes, M., Joly, Y., Mrejen, T., Hemmings, F., & Knoppers, B. M. (2011) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1834 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Self-citationWithdrawal from Biobank Research: Considerations and the Way Forward
Hug, K., Hermerén, G., & Johansson, M. (2012) · Stem Cell Reviews and Reports · doi:10.1007/s12015-012-9399-y · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Motivations and Barriers to Sharing Biological Samples: A Case Study
Pereira, S. (2013) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm3020102 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Ownership Rights in Research Biobanks: Do We Need a New Kind of ‘Biological Property’?
de Faria, P. L. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-93872-1_18 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Caplan, A. L. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-93872-1_2 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Skrivankova, V. W., Richmond, R. C., Woolf, B. A. R., Davies, N. M., Swanson, S. A., VanderWeele, T. J., Timpson, N. J., Higgins, J. P. T., Dimou, N., Langenberg, C., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n2233 · Cited by 1,648 · see citing works
- Authors
- Caulfield, T., Burningham, S., Joly, Y., Master, Z., Shabani, M., Borry, P., Becker, A., Burgess, M., Calder, K., Critchley, C., Edwards, K., Fullerton, S. M., Gottweis, H., Hyde-Lay, R., Illes, J., Isasi, R., Kato, K., Kaye, J., Knoppers, B., Lynch, J., McGuire, A., Meslin, E., Nicol, D., O’Doherty, K., Ogbogu, U., Otlowski, M., Pullman, D., Ries, N., Scott, C., Sears, M., Wallace, H., & Zawati, M. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Albany Medical College (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Vienna (AT)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- McGill University (CA)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- University of Tasmania (AU)
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
- McMaster University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Caulfield, Timothy
- ORCID
- Caulfield, Timothy
- Burningham, Sarah
- Joly, Yann
- Master, Zubin
- Shabani, Mahsa
- Borry, Pascal
- Becker, Allan
- Burgess, Michael
- Critchley, Christine
- Fullerton, Stephanie M.
- Illes, Judy
- Isasi, Rosario
- Kaye, Jane
- Knoppers, Bartha
- Lynch, John
- McGuire, Amy
- Meslin, Eric
- Nicol, Dianne
- O’Doherty, Kieran
- Ogbogu, Ubaka
- Otlowski, Margaret
- Pullman, Daryl
- Ries, Nola
- Sears, Malcolm
- Zawati, Ma'n H.
- Venue
- Journal of Law and the Biosciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-02-25
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 94-110
- ISSN
- 2053-9711 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5033518
- OpenAlex
- W2009568583
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9
- FWCI
- 15.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Law and the Biosciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust
- Stem Cell Network
- University of Melbourne
- Genome Alberta
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001425)
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC002012)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Research, Science, and Academia
- Keywords
- biobanks, commercialization, industry partnerships, public-private partnerships, research translation, research ethics, research governance, research participants, biobank sustainability, research funding agencies, research participant rights, informed consent, biobank governance, biobank regulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review