{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01636520241171404, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.875739644970414, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Return of research results from pharmacogenomic versus disease susceptibility studies: what's drugs got to do with it?

One of the most controversial ethical issues in genomics research is the return of individual research results to research subjects. As new technologies, including whole-genome sequencing, provide an increased opportunity for researchers to find clinically relevant research results, the questions related to if, when and how individual research results should be returned become more central to the ethical conduct of genomic research. In the absence of federal guidance on this issue, many groups and individuals have developed recommendations and suggestions to address these questions. Most of these recommendations have focused on the return of individual results from disease susceptibility studies. However, in addition to predicting the development of disease, genomic research also includes predicting an individual's response to drugs, especially the risk of developing adverse events. This article evaluates and compares the return of individual research results from disease susceptibility studies versus pharmacogenomic studies.