FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK
BIOPRESERVATION AND BIOBANKING Volume 12, Number 1, 2014 ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. DOI: 10.1089/bio.2014.1211
Biobanking on Multiple Continents: Will International Coordination Follow? Jim Vaught,1 Marianna Bledsoe,2 and Peter Watson3
wo recent articles1,2 by Scott et al. and Basik et al. provided excellent overviews of the current state of biobanking and future directions. As noted by Scott et al. referencing an Indiana University article, ‘‘biobanks exist on every continent, even Antarctica.’’ A map in this article shows that many current biobanks are centered in institutions in North America and Europe. However this landscape is quickly changing. Several meetings in the fall of 2013 highlighted the expanding global nature of biobanking, including the Annual Biobank China conference (http://www.scrcnet.org/ biobank2013/eindex.asp) and ESBB meeting in Verona Italy (http://www.esbb.org/verona/), as well as the French BIOBANQUES annual network meeting in Paris. During the ESBB meeting, planning for new biobanking networks in Israel and Africa were presented. H3Africa (http://h3africa.org/), as noted in our Biobanking in Emerging Countries Section in the December 2013 issue3 will have major infrastructure and ethical-regulatory challenges to overcome as it develops in the coming year. In Europe BBMRI-ERIC (Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure - European Research Infrastructure Consortium, http://bbmri-eric.eu/) held its inaugural conference in Austria in September 2013. As noted on its web site BBMRI-ERIC ‘‘will increase efficacy and excellence of European biomedical research by: facilitating access to quality-defined human health/disease-relevant biological resources; including associated data in an efficient and ethically and legally compliant manner; reducing the fragmentation of the biomedical research landscape through harmonization of procedures, implementation of common standards and fostering high-level collaboration; capacity building in countries with less developed biobanking communities, thereby contributing to Europe’s cohesion policy.’’ As noted in multiple presentations at Annual Biobank China and ESBB, there are a number of recurring themes among existing and emerging biobanks and biobanking networks. In China, there are multiple efforts underway to develop new biobanks and networks. The international nature of the participants at the September meeting in Shanghai reflected the ever-expanding global nature of biobanking, as plans develop to realize the tremendous opportunities available for the growth of biospecimen resources in China. In the presentations at ESBB by Akin Abayomi concerning H3Africa, and Yehudit Cohen con-
T
1 2 3
cerning the new national biobanking network in Israel, securing initial funding and planning for sustainability of these programs were noted as major focuses and challenges. And as always, any new biobanking effort requires close attention to infrastructure (e.g. IT systems, security, equipment validation and maintenance, quality management) and the ethical-regulatory frameworks. In their article ‘‘Biopsies: Next-Generation Biospecimens for Tailoring Therapy,’’2 Basik et al. provide an excellent overview of the current state of biobanking practice, and propose a new paradigm for the future of tumor biobanking. Although this review focuses mostly on biospecimens from small biopsies and in the context of cancer research, there are several general themes that are applicable to current and new biobanking initiatives: the necessity for multidisciplinary teams including data managers and statisticians as well as pathologists, clinical coordinators and researchers; close attention to processes that recognize the effects of preanalytical variables on biospecimen quality; a comprehensive quality management system involving evidence-based standard procedures; collection and sharing of clinical data; comprehensive ethical and regulatory policies and; a plan for long-term sustainability. We think that we can agree that a vast amount of biobanking and biospecimen research knowledge is generated and shared at ISBER, Asian Network of Research Resource Centers (ANRRC), ESBB, Annual Biobank China and other international meetings, and within important efforts such as BIOBANQUES, BBMRI-ERIC and H3Africa. With the excellent analyses provided by the two articles described above, we think that the stage is set for additional dialogs that can move us to the next level of coordination (not necessarily harmonization) of biobanking practices and procedures. And we have not mentioned the emergence of biological resource educational programs, particularly in Europe, that will contribute to the ‘‘professionalization’’ and global coordination of biobanking initiatives. However, as we listened to various presentations during those meetings in the fall, we were impressed by the fact that as new biobanking networks are being developed, there is a tendency to ‘‘start from scratch’’ regarding some components such as policies and procedures for informed consent, information/inventory systems, business, and basic
Bethesda, Maryland, [email protected]. George Washington University, Washington, DC. BC Cancer Agency, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
1
2
infrastructure development planning, However, many now appreciate that biobanking, like other research tools, is a fundamental platform that needs to be standardized to the extent possible to allow datasets to be combined and research based on them to be replicated. So perhaps there needs to be a renewed effort among the various leading organizations in the biobanking world to compile resources and make these available to assist emerging biobanks in making their start-up more efficient and to promote greater standardization. This will require more widespread sharing of information and procedures across international borders. One good example of such an effort is from the Canadian Tumour Repository Network and its biobank resource center (CTRNet, http://www.ctrnet.ca/), where an extensive library of SOPs and other policies and procedures is freely available. And there are other networks that publish their procedures and policies, but global coordination is lacking. We would like to think that going forward Biopreservation and Biobanking can contribute to such a global effort,
EDITORIAL
along with established international organizations. And as always we are open to your ideas, either in the form of manuscripts or emails with your thoughts on topics we can address to advance the fields of biobanking and biopreservation.
References 1. Scott C, Caulfield T, Borgelt E, et al. Personal medicine – the new banking crisis. Nature Biotech 2012;30:141–147. 2. Basik M, Aguilar-Mahecha A, Rousseau, et al. Biopsies: Next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy. Nat Reviews Clinical Oncol 2013;10:437–450. 3. Abayomi A, Christoffels A, Grewal R, et al. Challenges of biobanking in South Africa to facilitate indigenous research in an environment burdened with human immunodeficiency virus, tuberculosis, and emerging noncommunicable diseases. Biopreserv Biobank 2013;11: 347–354, 4. Editorial: Reducing our irreproducibility. Nature. April 25, 2013; 496 (398); doi:10.1038/496398a.
BIOPRESERVATION AND BIOBANKING Volume 12, Number 1, 2014 ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. DOI: 10.1089/bio.2014.1211
Biobanking on Multiple Continents: Will International Coordination Follow? Jim Vaught,1 Marianna Bledsoe,2 and Peter Watson3
wo recent articles1,2 by Scott et al. and Basik et al. provided excellent overviews of the current state of biobanking and future directions. As noted by Scott et al. referencing an Indiana University article, ‘‘biobanks exist on every continent, even Antarctica.’’ A map in this article shows that many current biobanks are centered in institutions in North America and Europe. However this landscape is quickly changing. Several meetings in the fall of 2013 highlighted the expanding global nature of biobanking, including the Annual Biobank China conference (http://www.scrcnet.org/ biobank2013/eindex.asp) and ESBB meeting in Verona Italy (http://www.esbb.org/verona/), as well as the French BIOBANQUES annual network meeting in Paris. During the ESBB meeting, planning for new biobanking networks in Israel and Africa were presented. H3Africa (http://h3africa.org/), as noted in our Biobanking in Emerging Countries Section in the December 2013 issue3 will have major infrastructure and ethical-regulatory challenges to overcome as it develops in the coming year. In Europe BBMRI-ERIC (Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure - European Research Infrastructure Consortium, http://bbmri-eric.eu/) held its inaugural conference in Austria in September 2013. As noted on its web site BBMRI-ERIC ‘‘will increase efficacy and excellence of European biomedical research by: facilitating access to quality-defined human health/disease-relevant biological resources; including associated data in an efficient and ethically and legally compliant manner; reducing the fragmentation of the biomedical research landscape through harmonization of procedures, implementation of common standards and fostering high-level collaboration; capacity building in countries with less developed biobanking communities, thereby contributing to Europe’s cohesion policy.’’ As noted in multiple presentations at Annual Biobank China and ESBB, there are a number of recurring themes among existing and emerging biobanks and biobanking networks. In China, there are multiple efforts underway to develop new biobanks and networks. The international nature of the participants at the September meeting in Shanghai reflected the ever-expanding global nature of biobanking, as plans develop to realize the tremendous opportunities available for the growth of biospecimen resources in China. In the presentations at ESBB by Akin Abayomi concerning H3Africa, and Yehudit Cohen con-
T
1 2 3
cerning the new national biobanking network in Israel, securing initial funding and planning for sustainability of these programs were noted as major focuses and challenges. And as always, any new biobanking effort requires close attention to infrastructure (e.g. IT systems, security, equipment validation and maintenance, quality management) and the ethical-regulatory frameworks. In their article ‘‘Biopsies: Next-Generation Biospecimens for Tailoring Therapy,’’2 Basik et al. provide an excellent overview of the current state of biobanking practice, and propose a new paradigm for the future of tumor biobanking. Although this review focuses mostly on biospecimens from small biopsies and in the context of cancer research, there are several general themes that are applicable to current and new biobanking initiatives: the necessity for multidisciplinary teams including data managers and statisticians as well as pathologists, clinical coordinators and researchers; close attention to processes that recognize the effects of preanalytical variables on biospecimen quality; a comprehensive quality management system involving evidence-based standard procedures; collection and sharing of clinical data; comprehensive ethical and regulatory policies and; a plan for long-term sustainability. We think that we can agree that a vast amount of biobanking and biospecimen research knowledge is generated and shared at ISBER, Asian Network of Research Resource Centers (ANRRC), ESBB, Annual Biobank China and other international meetings, and within important efforts such as BIOBANQUES, BBMRI-ERIC and H3Africa. With the excellent analyses provided by the two articles described above, we think that the stage is set for additional dialogs that can move us to the next level of coordination (not necessarily harmonization) of biobanking practices and procedures. And we have not mentioned the emergence of biological resource educational programs, particularly in Europe, that will contribute to the ‘‘professionalization’’ and global coordination of biobanking initiatives. However, as we listened to various presentations during those meetings in the fall, we were impressed by the fact that as new biobanking networks are being developed, there is a tendency to ‘‘start from scratch’’ regarding some components such as policies and procedures for informed consent, information/inventory systems, business, and basic
Bethesda, Maryland, [email protected]. George Washington University, Washington, DC. BC Cancer Agency, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
1
2
infrastructure development planning, However, many now appreciate that biobanking, like other research tools, is a fundamental platform that needs to be standardized to the extent possible to allow datasets to be combined and research based on them to be replicated. So perhaps there needs to be a renewed effort among the various leading organizations in the biobanking world to compile resources and make these available to assist emerging biobanks in making their start-up more efficient and to promote greater standardization. This will require more widespread sharing of information and procedures across international borders. One good example of such an effort is from the Canadian Tumour Repository Network and its biobank resource center (CTRNet, http://www.ctrnet.ca/), where an extensive library of SOPs and other policies and procedures is freely available. And there are other networks that publish their procedures and policies, but global coordination is lacking. We would like to think that going forward Biopreservation and Biobanking can contribute to such a global effort,
EDITORIAL
along with established international organizations. And as always we are open to your ideas, either in the form of manuscripts or emails with your thoughts on topics we can address to advance the fields of biobanking and biopreservation.
References 1. Scott C, Caulfield T, Borgelt E, et al. Personal medicine – the new banking crisis. Nature Biotech 2012;30:141–147. 2. Basik M, Aguilar-Mahecha A, Rousseau, et al. Biopsies: Next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy. Nat Reviews Clinical Oncol 2013;10:437–450. 3. Abayomi A, Christoffels A, Grewal R, et al. Challenges of biobanking in South Africa to facilitate indigenous research in an environment burdened with human immunodeficiency virus, tuberculosis, and emerging noncommunicable diseases. Biopreserv Biobank 2013;11: 347–354, 4. Editorial: Reducing our irreproducibility. Nature. April 25, 2013; 496 (398); doi:10.1038/496398a.
