Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Science and Society
  • Published:

Data sharing in genomics — re-shaping scientific practice

Abstract

Funding bodies have recently introduced a requirement that data sharing must be a consideration of all funding applications in genomics. As with all new developments this condition has had an impact on scientific practice, particularly in the area of publishing and in the conduct of research. We discuss the challenges that must be addressed if the full benefits of data sharing, as envisaged by funders, are to be realized.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. The Digital Archiving Consultancy (DAC), The Bioinformatics Research Centre, University of Glasgow (BRC), The National e-Science Centre (NeSC). Large-scale Data Sharing in the Life Sciences: Data Standards, Incentives, Barriers and Funding Models (The “Joint Data Standards Study”). [online], <http://www.nesc.ac.uk/technical_papers/UKeS-2006-02.pdf> (2005).

  2. McCarthy, M. I. et al. Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 356–369 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gibbons, S. M. C., Kaye, J., Smart, A., Heeney, C. & Parker, M. Governing genetic databases: challenges facing research regulation and practice. J. Law Soc. 34, 163–189 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Couzin, J. Genetic privacy. Whole-genome data not anonymous, challenging assumptions. Science 321, 1278 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. [No authors listed]. DNA databases shut after identities compromised. Nature 455, 13 (2008).

  6. Kaiser, J. House weighs proposal to block mandatory 'open access'. Science 321, 1621 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ziman, J. Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzmann, S. S. P. & Trow, M. The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies (Sage Publications, London, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature 447, 661–678 (2007).

  10. Cambon-Thomsen, A. Assessing the impact of biobanks. Nature Genet. 34, 25–26 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Campbell, E. G. et al. Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. JAMA 287, 473–480 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Foster, M. W. & Sharp, R. R. Share and share alike: deciding how to distribute the scientific and social benefits of genomic data. Nature Rev. Genet. 8, 633–639 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nissenbaum, H. Protecting privacy in an information age: the problem of privacy in public. Law Philos. 17, 559 –596 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Karp D. R. et al. Ethical and practical issues associated with aggregating databases. PLoS Med. 5, e190 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McGuire, A. L. & Gibbs, R. A. Genetics: no longer de-identified. Science 312, 370–371 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Homer, N. et al. Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000167 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lunshof, J. E., Chadwick, R., Vorhaus, D. B. & Church, G. M. From genetic privacy to open consent. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 406–411 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McGuire, A. L., Caulfield, T. & Cho, M. K. Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 152–156 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Caulfield, T. et al., Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement. PLoS Biol. 6, e73 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McGuire A. L., Hamilton J. A., Lunstroth R. J. D., McCulloch L. B. & Goldman, A. DNA data sharing: research participants' perspectives. Genet. Med. 10, 46–53 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Winickoff, D. E. Partnership in U.K. Biobank: a third way for genomic property? J. Law Med. Ethics 35, 440–456 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mascalzoni, D., Hicks, A., Pramstaller, P. & Wjst, M. Informed consent in the genomics era. PLoS Med. 5, e192 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Muula, A. S. & Mfutso-Bengo, J. M. Responsibilities and obligations of using human research specimens transported across national boundaries. J. Med. Ethics 33, 35–38 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Upshur, R., Lavery, J. & Tindana, P. Taking tissue seriously means taking communities seriously. BMC Med. Ethics 8, 11 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Langat, S. K. Reuse of samples: ethical issues encountered by two institutional ethics review committees in Kenya. Bioethics 19, 537–549 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hoedemaekers, R., Gordijn, B., Hekster, Y. & Van Agt, F. The complexities of ethical evaluation of genomics research. HEC Forum 18, 18–36 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Zika, E. et.al. Sample and data use and protection in biobanking in Europe: legal issues. Pharmocogenomics 9, 773–781 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Caulfield T. Biobanks and blanket consent: the proper place of the public perception and public good rationales. King's Law J. 18, 209–226 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions. J.K., C.H., N.H. and J. de V. are funded by the Wellcome Trust, under grant codes WT 081407/Z/06/Z, WT 076070/Z/04/Z, WT 077869/Z/05/Z and WT 083326/Z/07/Z. P.B. is funded by EU FP6, Procardis Project number 037273.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane Kaye.

Related links

Related links

FURTHER INFORMATION

1000 Genomes Project

Avon Longitudinal Study (ALSPAC)

Bermuda Principles

Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI)

Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP)

European Genotyping Archive

Fort Lauderdale Agreement

Genetic Association Information Network (GAIN)

Genome Canada Data Release & Resource Sharing Policy

HapMap project

Human Genome Project

National Institute of Health Data Sharing Policy and Implementation Guidance

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

OECD Guidelines for Human Biobanks and Genetics Research Databases

Public Population Project Genomics Consortium (P3G)

UK Medical Research Council policy on data sharing and preservation

Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaye, J., Heeney, C., Hawkins, N. et al. Data sharing in genomics — re-shaping scientific practice. Nat Rev Genet 10, 331–335 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2573

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2573

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing