Patients to learn from: on the need for systematic integration of research and care in academic health care
Patients suffering from rare, extreme or extremely complex sets of symptoms have something to expect from efforts to improve care through research. Biomedical research and care have often been approached as distinct worlds which are and should be only loosely connected. For observational research focusing on data drawn from real-world settings, however, that approach is found wanting. Integrating research and care responsibly is the main challenge instead. Integrated IT infrastructures facilitating Personalized medicine and Big Data are crucial components of a learning health care system, in which patients regularly play a double role: as individuals to be treated and as cases to learn from. Drawing on the example of the Dutch Parelsnoer Institute (PSI), a national biobanking and IT infrastructure integrated with clinical care procedures, this article outlines the reforms that are needed. Systematic integration of research and care offers a promising avenue, provided that a number of conditions are met: data and IT infrastructures will require overhauls in order to facilitate secure, high-quality data integration between research and care; institutional focus is needed to bring patient populations and expertise together; ethical frameworks and approaches for integrating research and care responsibly require further elaboration; clinical procedures and professional responsibilities may need to be adapted in order to accommodate research requirements in clinical processes; and involvement of patients and other stakeholders in design and research priority setting is needed to further the goals of real-world and patient relevance. Integrating research and care in academic medicine in a more systematic fashion offers a promising perspective to current and future patients. In order to live up to these promises, research and care should be integrated more systematically in academic health science, with patients being included as research participants by default. Data and tissue infrastructures and facilities can provide a platform for doing so. At the same time, many issues remain to be settled. New ethical ways and means for protecting and respecting patient-participants in such a double role are also needed in this respect. In this way a deeper transformation is at stake as well: a change towards a setting in which patients fully take centre stage in debate and action on the future of biomedicine.
[1] Chambers DA, Feero WG, Khoury MJ. Convergence of Im plementation Science, Precision Medicine, and the Learning Health Care System: A New Model for Biomedical Research. JAMA. 2016 May 10; 315: 1941–1942.
[2] Krumholz HM, Terry SF, Waldstreicher J. Data Acquisition, Curation, and Use for a Continuously Learning Health System. JAMA. 2016 Oct 25; 316: 1669–1670.
[3] Dzau VJ, Ackerly DC, Sutton-Wallace P, Merson MH, Williams RS, Krishnan KR, et al. The role of academic health science systems in the transformation of medicine. The Lancet. 2010 maart; 375: 949–953.
[4] Staa T-P van, Goldacre B, Gulliford M, Cassell J, Pirmohamed M, Taweel A, Delaney B, Smeeth L. Pragmatic randomised tri als using routine electronic health records: putting them to the test. BMJ. 2012 Feb 7; 344:e55.
[5] Manniën J, Ledderhof T, Verspaget H, Snijder R, Flikkenschild E, Scherrenburg N van, et al. The Parelsnoer Institute: A Na tional Network of Standardized Clinical Biobanks in the Neth erlands. Open Journal of Bioresources [Internet]. 2017 Feb 17 [cited 2017 Feb 21]; 4(1). Available from: http://open bioresources.metajnl.com/articles/10.5334/ojb.23/
[6] Parelsnoer [Internet]. [cited 2017 Jun 28]. Available from: http:// parelsnoer.org/page/en/
[7] Douglas CM, Scheltens P. Rethinking biobanking and transla tional medicine in the Netherlands: how the research processstands to matter for patient care. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015 Jun; 23: 736–738.
[8] Aalten P, Ramakers IH, Biessels GJ, Deyn PP de, Koek HL, OldeRikkert MG, Oleksik AM, Richard E, Smits LL, van Swieten JC, Teune LK, van der Lugt A, Barkhof F, Teunissen CE, Rozendaal N, Verhey FR, van der Flier WM. The Dutch Parelsnoer Institute - Neurodegenerative diseases; methods, de sign and baseline results. BMC Neurology. 2014 Dec 31; 14: 254.
[9] van der Flier WM, Pijnenburg YAL, Prins N, Lemstra AW, Bouwman FH, Teunissen CE, van Berckel BN, Stam CJ, Barkhof F, Visser PJ, van Egmond E, Scheltens P. Optimiz ing patient care and research: the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014; 41: 313–327.
[10] Straus SE, Glasziou P, Richardson WS, Haynes RB. Evi dence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach It. 4th edi tion. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2010. 312 p.
[11] SWAN UK | Syndromes Without A Name is a project run by Genetic Alliance UK offering Support and Information to Fami lies of Children with undiagnosed genetic conditions [Internet]. [cited 2015 Dec 10]. Available from: http://undiagnosed.org.uk/
[12] Miettinen OS. Up from Clinical Epidemiology & EBM [Inter net]. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2011 [cited 2016 Jan 21]. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-90-481 9501-5
[13] Alkuraya FS. Human knockout research: new horizons and op portunities. Trends in Genetics. 2015; 31: 108–115.
[14] Nelson EC, Dixon-Woods M, Batalden PB, Homa K, Citters ADV, Morgan TS, et al. Patient focused registries can improve health, care, and science. BMJ. 2016; 354: i3319.
[15] Vink G, Braak RC van den, Punt C, Verkooijen H, Noo MD, Meijer G, et al. The Prospective Dutch ColoRectal Cancer co hort (PLCRC) − a prospective nationwide observational cohort study. European Journal of Cancer. 2017; 72: S55.
[16] European Commission. Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World - a Vision for Europe [Internet]. European Com mission, DG Research and Innovation; 2016. Available from: https://bookshop.europa.eu/en/open-innovation-open-science-o pen-to-the-world-pbKI0416263/
[17] Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IjJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scien tific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data. 2016; 3: 160018.
[18] Boeckhout M, Douglas CMW. Governing the research-care di vide in clinical biobanking: Dutch perspectives. Life Sciences Society and Policy. 2015; 11: 7.
[19] Cavoukian A, Jonas J. Privacy by design in the age of big data [Internet]. Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, Canada; 2012 [cited 2017 Feb 21]. Available from: https:// datatilsynet.no/globalassets/global/seminar_foredrag/innebygdper sonvern/privacy-by-design-and-big-data_ibmvedlegg1.pdf
[20] Kass NE, Faden RR, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Tunis S, Beauchamp TL. The Research-Treatment Distinction: A Prob lematic Approach for Determining Which Activities Should Have Ethical Oversight. Hastings Center Report. 2013; 43: S4–15.
[21] Strech D. Ethical review of biobank research: Should RECs re view each release of material from biobanks operating under an already-approved broad consent and data protection model? European Journal of Medical Genetics. 2015; 58: 545–549.
[22] Chalmers D, Burgess M, Edwards K, Kaye J, Meslin EM, Nicol D. Marking Shifts in Human Research Ethics in the Develop ment of Biobanking. Public Health Ethics. 2015; 8: 63–71.
[23] Kaye J, Curren L, Anderson N, Edwards K, Fullerton SM, Kanellopoulou N, et al. From patients to partners: partici pant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nat Rev Genet. 2012; 13: 371–376.
[24] O’Doherty KC, Burgess MM, Edwards K, Gallagher RP, Haw kins AK, Kaye J, et al. From consent to institutions: Designing adaptive governance for genomic biobanks. Social Science & Medicine. 2011; 73: 367–374.
[25] Boers SN, Delden JJM van, Bredenoord AL. Broad Consent Is Consent for Governance. The American Journal of Bioethics. 2015; 15: 53–55.
[26] Bovenberg J, Kattenberg M, Baselmans B, Sinke M, Hoekstra R, Boomsma DI, et al. Enhancing Biobank Participants’ Rightsfrom Paper to Portal. Scripted. 2016; 13: 70.
[27] Budin-Ljøsne I, Teare HJA, Kaye J, Beck S, Bentzen HB, Cae nazzo L, et al. Dynamic Consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research. BMC Medical Ethics. 2017; 18: 4.
[28] Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. The Lancet. 2014; 383: 156–165.
[29] Sireau N. Rare diseases challenges and opportunities for social entrepreneurs [Internet]. Sheffield, England: Greenleaf Pub lishing; 2013 [cited 2015 Nov 26]. Available from: http://gse. publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/glbj/raredis
[30] Mitchell D, Geissler J, Parry-Jones A, Keulen H, Schmitt DC, Vavassori R, et al. Biobanking from the patient perspective. Research Involvement and Engagement. 2015; 1: 4.