Ethical Issues in the Development of Readiness Cohorts in Alzheimer's Disease Research.

There is growing interest in the development of novel approaches to secondary prevention trials in Alzheimer's disease to facilitate screening and recruitment of research participants and to reduce the time and costs associated with clinical trials. Several international research collaborations are setting up research infrastructures that link existing research cohorts, studies or patient registries to establish 'trial-ready' or 'readiness' cohorts. From these cohorts, individuals are recruited into clinical trial platforms. In setting up such research infrastructures, researchers must make ethically challenging design decisions in at least three areas: re-contacting participants in existing research studies, obtaining informed consent for participation in a readiness cohort, and disclosure of Alzheimer's disease-related biomarkers. These ethical considerations have been examined by a dedicated workgroup within the European Prevention of Alzheimer's Dementia (EPAD) project, a trans-European longitudinal cohort and adaptive proof-of-concept clinical trial platform. This paper offers recommendations for the ethical management of re-contact, informed consent and risk disclosure which may be of value to other research collaborations in the process of developing readiness cohorts for prevention trials in Alzheimer's disease and other disease areas.

Psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosing Alzheimer's disease biomarkers to research participants: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Current Alzheimer's disease (AD) research initiatives focus on cognitively healthy individuals with biomarkers that are associated with the development of AD. It is unclear whether biomarker results should be returned to research participants and what the psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosure are. This systematic review therefore examines the psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosing genetic and nongenetic AD-related biomarkers to cognitively healthy research participants. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in eight scientific databases. Three independent reviewers screened the identified records and selected relevant articles. Results extracted from the included articles were aggregated and presented per effect group. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the data synthesis. None of the identified studies examined the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers. All studies but one concerned the disclosure of APOE genotype and were conducted in the USA. Study populations consisted largely of cognitively healthy first-degree relatives of AD patients. In this group, disclosure of an increased risk was not associated with anxiety, depression or changes in perceived risk in relation to family history. Disclosure of an increased risk did lead to an increase in specific test-related distress levels, health-related behavior changes and long-term care insurance uptake and possibly diminished memory functioning. CONCLUSION: In cognitively healthy research participants with a first-degree relative with AD, disclosure of APOE ε4-positivity does not lead to elevated anxiety and depression levels, but does increase test-related distress and results in behavior changes concerning insurance and health. We did not find studies reporting the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers and only one study included people without a family history of AD. Empirical studies on the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers and of disclosure to persons without a family history of AD are urgently needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO international prospective register for systematic reviews CRD42016035388 . Registered 19 February 2016.

Reproductive status in adult male long-term survivors of childhood cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the long-term effects of cancer therapies on reproductive status in adult male childhood cancer survivors, evaluated the treatment-related risk factors for hypergonadotropic hypogonadism and assessed the association between the FSH levels and the later need for assisted reproductive techniques (ART). METHODS: The study cohort included adult male 5-year survivors of childhood cancer who were treated in our institution between 1966 and 2003. Data concerning patient and treatment characteristics, FSH, LH and testosterone levels and pregnancy outcome were collected. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to evaluate the treatment-related risk factors for disturbances in reproductive endocrine status. The diagnostic and predictive values of FSH and later need for ART were evaluated. RESULTS: Data on reproductive endocrine status were available for 488 survivors (86.4%) of the 565 male survivors who visited the outpatient clinic in adulthood. The median follow-up time from initiation of treatment to first visit to the outpatient clinic in adulthood was 15 years. The prevalence rates of elevated FSH levels and decreased testosterone levels were 33 and 12%, respectively. The use of procarbazine, cyclophosphamide, vinca-alkaloids, other alkylating agents, pelvic/abdominal irradiation, total body irradiation and testicular surgery were identified as treatment-related risk factors for elevated FSH levels. During the follow-up period, 73 men reported 120 conceptions, which resulted in 103 live births. Of these men, 56 (77%) were able to achieve conception naturally. All men whose partners conceived by assisted reproductive techniques (n = 13) had elevated FSH levels at their first visit after their 18th birthday (sensitivity: 100%; 95% CI: 71-100%) and all male survivors with a normal FSH level did not need assisted reproductive techniques (negative predictive value: 100%; 95% CI: 89-100%). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of young adult male survivors of childhood cancer has elevated FSH levels. FSH appears to be a very sensitive marker for the need of assisted reproductive techniques in male childhood cancer survivors.