Skip to main content
Premium Trial:

Request an Annual Quote

The Bind of Incidental Findings

Genetic studies are increasingly able to identify information that could be of benefit to study participants, but many consent forms and other rules often prevent researchers from sharing that information, The New York Times reports. The Times outlines a number of cases in which researchers found that certain study participants had a gene predisposing them to cancer, but the researchers were bound by consent and ethics board rules to not return the results. In addition to consent and ethics issues, the paper adds that many of the results are from research labs, not ones that are certified for clinical analysis. Further, some samples that are used in studies are decades old. "My gut feeling is that there is a moral obligation to return results," says Barbara Koenig from the University of California, San Francisco. "But that comes at an enormous cost. If you were in a study 20 years ago, where does my obligation end?"

The Scan

PNAS Papers on Siberian Dog Ancestry, Insect Reproduction, Hippocampal Neurogenesis

In PNAS this week: ancestry and admixture among Siberian dogs, hormone role in fruit fly reproduction, and more.

For Better Odds

Bloomberg reports that a child has been born following polygenic risk score screening as an embryo.

Booster Decision Expected

The New York Times reports the US Food and Drug Administration is expected to authorize a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech SARS-CoV-2 vaccine this week for individuals over 65 or at high risk.

Snipping HIV Out

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports Temple University researchers are to test a gene-editing approach for treating HIV.