Towards a better understanding of the use of "biobanks"

Paris, April 29, 2003

CNRS/INSERM Joint Press Release

The recent proliferation of "biobanks" is a problem in relation to quality assurance and traceability of the biological data that they contain. Anne Cambon-Thomsen, director of research at the CNRS (Inserm unit 558), suggests a standardization of their data referencing systems and the creation of an indicator in order to be able to evaluate their use. This indicator is known as the "Biobank Impact Factor" (BIF). These issues are discussed in a letter to Nature Genetics, posted on Internet as of April 29, 2003.

Data banks and biological samples, or "biobanks" are a major strategic issue in the fields of biotechnology and genomics today. The storage of human biological products as well as those of animals and plants and ones from microorganisms make it possible to identify the genes involved in certain illnesses, thus creating new application possibilities for diagnosis and treatment. There are several extensive population collections being created at this time that have been the subject of highly publicized debates and are well known to researchers. In Europe, these collections can be found in Iceland, Sweden, the United Kingdom as well as in Estonia and Latvia. However, the public is less aware of the proliferation of smaller biobanks, put together by researchers and medical doctors, according to the development of their research needs. These banks, as well as their access, are generally managed within the institutions that created them and their use is much more limited, usually to a single field. Anne Cambon-Thomsen (CNRS-Inserm) proposes a solution to help researchers and the institutions responsible for these collections to put their data to the best possible use through the creation of a "Biobank Impact Factor" (BIF).

The notion of "impact factor" already exists in the field of research to characterize and prioritize the impact of scientific journals according to the interest that their articles generate in the scientific community. The impact factor makes it possible to direct researchers towards the most significant discoveries for their publications or their bibliographic research.* Thus, an article published in Nature (2002 impact factor: 27,955) or in Science (2002 impact factor: 23,329) will undoubtedly have a wider readership than a journal with an impact factor of 0.2. The idea of extending the impact factor concept to biobanks would be a major step towards improved management and optimal utilization of biological and genetic data. On the one hand, it would make it possible to evaluate the use of a given biobank and to measure the impact of this use on the resulting research. On the other hand, it would provide a means for giving due credit to researchers responsible for these databases for their contribution and would protect their rights. There is no standardization of the referencing of biobanks in scientific publications at this time. They may appear in the "materials and methods" section or under the references. Original biobankers may be listed among the co-authors or simply mentioned in the acknowledgements. As a result, some people hesitate before making their data accessible to just anyone out of the fear that their work will not be acknowledged.

By standardizing biobank referencing methods, the impact factor would make it possible to evaluate the contribution of a given bank to the outcome of specific research. As a result, those responsible could then take credit for the usefulness of their biobank when they are seeking financing.

Given the considerable accumulation of genetic data, the creation of biobanks or "biobanking", as it is known in English, tends to be increasingly recognized as an activity unto itself at the official level and to be financed independently. The ethical issues involved in the use of biobanks and particularly consent procedures and the protection of personal data have been the focus of many new developments. However, we only have very few indicators at this time to evaluate the extent to which these biobanks are used and the consequences of their use on the development of knowledge. The creation of an index such as the BIF would make it possible to give impetus to this conservation activity by promoting quality and the sharing of data. But Anne Cambon-Thomsen does not stop there. Her idea could be extended to tracking other resources of general interest such as transgenic mice or certain electronic databases, leading to the emergence of the concept of a "Bio-resources Impact Factor". In our information-oriented globalized world, it seems crucial that the material used to support the development of research be precisely evaluated and made accessible to all.