Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 25, Issue 5, pp 1597–1602 | Cite as

Genetic Data, Two-Sided Markets and Dynamic Consent: United States Versus France

  • Henri-Corto Stoeklé
  • Mauro Turrini
  • Philipe Charlier
  • Jean-François Deleuze
  • Christian Hervé
  • Guillaume VogtEmail author


Networks for the exchange and/or sharing of genetic data are developing in many countries. We focus here on the situations in the US and France. We highlight some recent and remarkable differences between these two countries concerning the mode of access to, and the storage and use of genetic data, particularly as concerns two-sided markets and dynamic consent or dynamic electronic informed consent (e-IC). This brief overview suggests that, even though the organization and function of these two-sided markets remain open to criticism, dynamic e-IC should be more widely used, especially in France, if only to determine its real effectiveness.


Genetic data Two-sided market Dynamic e-IC 



Funding was provided by ATIGE.


  1. AVIESAN. (2016). Plan France Médecine Génomique 2025 [France Genomic Medicine Plan 2025].Google Scholar
  2. Godard, B., Schmidtke, J., Cassiman, J. J., & Ayme, S. (2003). Data storage and DNA banking for biomedical research: Informed consent, confidentiality, quality issues, ownership, return of benefits A professional perspective. European Journal of Human Genetics, 11(Suppl 2), S88–S122. Scholar
  3. Godart, B. (2009). Genomics seen by researchers and leaders from different ethno-cultural communities: Limits on scientific advances in science? In Human, humanity and scientific progress (pp. 35–43). Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
  4. Grady, C., Eckstein, L., Berkman, B., Brock, D., Cook-Deegan, R., Fullerton, S. M., et al. (2015). Broad consent for research with biological samples: Workshop conclusions. American Journal of Bioethics, 15(9), 34–42. Scholar
  5. Hayden, E. C. (2017). The rise and fall and rise again of 23andMe. Nature, 550, 174–177. Scholar
  6. Hervé, C., Stoekle, H. C., & Vogt, G. (2016). «Un marché aux données génétiques » qui interroge [“A genetic data market” that questions]. Le Monde.Google Scholar
  7. Karlson, E. W., Boutin, N. T., Hoffnagle, A. G., & Allen, N. L. (2016). Building the partners healthcare biobank at partners personalized medicine: Informed consent, return of research results, recruitment lessons and operational considerations. Journal of Personalized Medicine. Scholar
  8. Kaye, J., Whitley, E. A., Lund, D., Morrison, M., Teare, H., & Melham, K. (2015). Dynamic consent: A patient interface for twenty-first century research networks. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23(2), 141–146. Scholar
  9. Levy, C., Rybak, A., Cohen, R., & Jung, C. (2017). The Jarde law, a real simplification of research in France? Archives de Pediatrie, 24(6), 571–577. Scholar
  10. Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2017). Eliciting meta consent for future secondary research use of health data using a smartphone application—A proof of concept study in the Danish population. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(1), 51. Scholar
  11. Rochet, J. C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Steinsbekk, K. S., Kare Myskja, B., & Solberg, B. (2013). Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: Is passive participation an ethical problem? European Journal of Human Genetics, 21(9), 897–902. Scholar
  13. Stoekle, H. C. (2017). Médecine personnalisé et bioéthique: Enjeux éthiques dans l’échange et le partage des données génétiques [personalized medicine and bioethics: Ethical issues in the exchange and sharing of genetic data] L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  14. Stoekle, H. C., Deleuze, J. F., Vogt, G., & Herve, C. (2017a). Toward dynamic informed consent. Médecine Sciences (Paris), 33(2), 188–192. Scholar
  15. Stoekle, H. C., Forster, N., Charlier, P., Bloch, O. C., Herve, C., Turrini, M., et al. (2018). Genetic data sharing: A new type of capital. Médecine Sciences (Paris), 34(8–9), 735–739. Scholar
  16. Stoekle, H. C., Mamzer-Bruneel, M. F., Frouart, C. H., Le Tourneau, C., Laurent-Puig, P., Vogt, G., et al. (2017b). Molecular tumor boards: Ethical issues in the new era of data medicine. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1, 1. Scholar
  17. Stoekle, H. C., Mamzer-Bruneel, M. F., Vogt, G., & Herve, C. (2016). 23andMe: A new two-sided data-banking market model. BMC Medical Ethics, 17, 19. Scholar
  18. Villani, C. (2018). Donner un sens à l’intelligence artificielle: Pour une stratégie nationale et européenne [Giving meaning to artificial intelligence: For a national and European strategy].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henri-Corto Stoeklé
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mauro Turrini
    • 3
  • Philipe Charlier
    • 4
    • 5
  • Jean-François Deleuze
    • 2
    • 6
    • 7
  • Christian Hervé
    • 8
  • Guillaume Vogt
    • 1
    • 2
    • 9
    Email author
  1. 1.Laboratory of Neglected Human Genetics (NHG)CNRGH-CEAEvryFrance
  2. 2.Centre National de Recherche en Génomique Humaine (CNRGH), Direction de la recherche fondamentale, CEA, Institut de biologie François JacobUniversité Paris SaclayEvryFrance
  3. 3.Université de Nantes - Maison des Sciences de l’Homme (MSH)NantesFrance
  4. 4.Département de la Recherche et de l’EnseignementMusée du Quai Branly - Jacques ChiracParisFrance
  5. 5.UVSQ (Laboratoire DANTE - EA 4498)Montigny-le-BretonneuxFrance
  6. 6.LaBex GenMedFondation Jean DaussetParisFrance
  7. 7.Centre d’études du polymorphisme humain (CEPH)Fondation Jean DaussetParisFrance
  8. 8.International Academy of Ethics, Medicine and Public HealthParis Descartes UniversityParisFrance
  9. 9.Laboratoire Neglected Human GeneticsINSERM, Université Paris DescartesParisFrance

Personalised recommendations