
 
 
December 10, 2018
Updated Common Rule: Key Changes for Research Using 
Stored Biospecimens  
On January 19, 2017, the Department of Health and Human 
Federal Register 2885), and again to January 21, 2019 (83 
Services (HHS) and 15 other federal departments and 
Federal Register 28497), from the original compliance date 
agencies jointly published a final rule to amend the uniform 
of January 19, 2018.  
set of regulations—known as the Common Rule—that 
govern the ethical conduct of research supported by these 
Definition of Human Subject Research 
agencies involving humans (82 Federal Register 7149). 
The Common Rule defines human subject research to 
According to HHS, the purpose of the final rule is to 
include not only studies that obtain data “through 
modernize, simplify, and strengthen the Common Rule to 
intervention or interaction with an individual,” but also 
better protect human research subjects, while facilitating 
studies that obtain “identifiable private information.” Thus, 
new research and reducing burden and ambiguity for 
it applies to noninterventional research using biospecimens 
investigators. The Common Rule had remained virtually 
and stored data provided the specimens and data are 
unchanged since it was adopted in 1991, while the research 
identifiable. The Common Rule states that information is 
landscape has undergone significant transformation.  
identifiable if the subject’s identity “may readily be 
ascertained” by the researcher. A biospecimen or genome 
Traditionally, the Common Rule has protected the rights 
sequence stripped of any accompanying identifiers (e.g., 
and welfare of individuals participating in clinical trials and 
name, address, social security number) is not considered to 
other interventional research. However, much of today’s 
be readily identifiable. 
health research involves the analysis of health information 
rather than direct interactions with research subjects due to 
The final rule modifies the definition of human subject 
the growth in health data analytics, that is, using large 
research to clarify the current interpretation of the 
databases of clinical, genomic, and other types of data in 
regulations by explicitly stating that it includes obtaining 
health research. Consequently, the primary risk for these 
and analyzing “information and biospecimens through 
research participants is no longer physical harm, but rather 
intervention,” as well as research that “obtains, uses, 
loss of privacy and loss of control over the use of their 
analyzes, or generates identifiable private information or 
information.  
identifiable biospecimens.” Research using nonidentifiable 
private information and nonidentifiable biospecimens 
The rapid growth of research involving biospecimens, 
remains outside the scope of the Common Rule. 
which increasingly are collected and used for whole 
genome sequencing and other genetic analysis, in particular 
IRB Review and Informed Consent 
has resulted in new challenges in the protection of human 
Under the Common Rule, research protocols must be 
research subjects. Repositories store biospecimens for 
reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board 
possible use in future (i.e., secondary) research that may be 
(IRB) to ensure that the rights and welfare of the research 
unrelated to the primary clinical or research use of the 
subjects are protected. The regulation lists several criteria 
material. For example, the All of Us research program—part 
for IRB approval, including the requirement that 
of the Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) to accelerate 
researchers obtain and appropriately document the informed 
research on personalized treatments tailored to a patient’s 
consent of their research subjects. 
characteristics—seeks to establish a national cohort of at 
least 1 million Americans who will contribute biospecimens 
The informed consent process includes an explanation of 
for genome sequencing and other unspecified analyses. 
the purpose of the research, a description of the research 
procedures, and a description of the risks and benefits of the 
The final rule made a series of changes to the Common 
research, among other things. An IRB may decide to waive 
Rule, including, among others, making the informed 
the informed consent requirement if it determines that the 
consent process more transparent and imposing strict new 
research poses no more than minimal risk to the subjects, 
requirements on the information given to prospective 
the waiver will not adversely affect their rights and welfare, 
research subjects; changes to existing and creation of new 
and the research is not practicable without a waiver. 
exemptions to the requirements; and definitional changes, 
among other things. Many of these changes together create 
The final rule adds new informed consent requirements 
a new approach to regulating research with identifiable 
relating to any research involving the collection of 
private information and biospecimens, and it is these 
identifiable biospecimens or private information. 
changes that have generally received the most attention. 
Specifically, it requires that the informed consent include 
The general compliance date of the revised common rule 
either a statement that de-identified biospecimens may be 
(referred to as the “2018 Rule” or the “2018 
used in future research without additional consent or that 
Requirements”) was delayed initially to July 19, 2018 (83 
the subject’s biospecimens or private information will never 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Updated Common Rule: Key Changes for Research Using Stored Biospecimens 
be used in future research (45 C.F..R §46.116(b)(9)). In 
personal health information (PHI) may not be used or 
addition, it requires, where applicable, that the consent 
disclosed for research purposes without the individual’s 
include statements about the possibility of commercial 
authorization, unless authorization is waived by an IRB (or 
profit from such research where that exists and whether the 
equivalent privacy board). These HIPAA requirements 
research will include whole genome sequencing (45 C.F.R. 
often apply concurrently with the Common Rule if, for 
§46.116(c)(7) and (9)).     
example, the human subject research is conducted by a 
HIPAA-covered entity such as a hospital or any other 
Currently, if an IRB reviewing a secondary research project 
health care facility. To minimize duplicative regulation, the 
concludes that the original informed consent document does 
final rule exempts from the Common Rule any secondary 
not adequately describe the secondary research—which can 
research on identifiable information or biospecimens that is 
be challenging given details of the research may be hard to 
subject to the Privacy Rule. An example of this type of 
predict—then the researchers must either find the research 
research would be research that takes place at a HIPAA-
subjects and obtain their informed consent (unless waived 
regulated institution and that involves the investigator’s use 
by the IRB) to conduct the new research or strip the 
of PHI. 
identifiers from the research material. To help address this 
issue, the final rule added a new category of broad consent, 
Periodic Reexamination of Identifiability 
which allows researchers to gain consent for secondary 
Privacy advocates question whether the current definition 
research studies at the time of the initial study and consent 
of identifiability is sufficient to protect individual privacy. 
process. 
They point to new technologies that are making it easier to 
re-identify information or biospecimens considered to be 
Broad Consent for Storage, Maintenance, and 
nonidentifiable. For example, it is possible to re-identify 
Secondary Research 
supposedly de-identified genomic data by matching it with 
Broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary 
identifiable information from other public databases. In 
research use of identifiable information or biospecimens 
response to these concerns, the final rule requires 
differs from study-specific informed consent. It includes 
regulators—within one year and every four years 
some but not all of the core elements of informed consent, 
thereafter—to reexamine the definition of identifiable and 
as well as several additional elements. For example, broad 
assess which technologies and techniques can produce 
consent must include a general description of the types of 
identifiable information and biospecimens. Genomic 
research that may be conducted with the identifiable 
sequencing is expected to be one of the first technologies to 
information or biospecimens; a description of the 
be evaluated. 
identifiable information or biospecimens that might be used 
in the research; whether sharing of identifiable information 
Harmonization with FDA’s Human Research 
or biospecimens might occur; and the types of institutions 
Subjects Regulations 
and researchers that might conduct the research. 
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued its 
own set of Human Subject Regulations, which are similar, 
Under the final rule, researchers now have the option of 
but not identical, to the Common Rule (21 C.F.R. Parts 50 
obtaining—subject to limited IRB review—“broad consent” 
and 56). FDA generally applies these regulations to all the 
for the storage, maintenance, and yet-to-be specified 
research it regulates, including clinical trials of new drugs 
secondary research use of identifiable private information 
and medical devices, regardless of the source of funding for 
or biospecimens, rather than having to undergo full IRB 
the research. In certain cases, where a clinical study is both 
review and obtain study-specific informed consent (unless 
federally funded and is investigating an FDA-regulated 
waived by the IRB). 
medical product, researchers will be subject to both sets of 
regulations. Section 3023 of the 21st Century Cures Act 
The final rule creates a new pair of partial exemptions to 
(P.L. 114-255) requires the HHS Secretary, to the extent 
the Common Rule requirements for secondary research on 
possible, to harmonize differences between the Common 
identifiable biospecimens or information where broad 
Rule and the FDA Human Subject Regulations. This 
consent has been obtained. The first exemption allows 
harmonization must be completed by no later than 
researchers to store and maintain identifiable information 
December 13, 2019. The FDA has indicated its intention to 
or biospecimens for secondary research use, provided an 
undertake rulemaking in 2019 in the fall 2018 Unified 
IRB conducts a limited review to determine that broad 
Regulatory Agenda to accomplish harmonization. In the 
consent has been obtained and appropriately documented 
interim, the agency acknowledges that given the revisions 
(45 C.F.R. §46.104(d)(7)). The second exemption allows 
to the Common Rule and a lack of harmonization with FDA 
researchers to conduct secondary research on the stored 
regulations, confusion may arise for researchers subject to 
identifiable information or biospecimens, provided an IRB 
both sets of regulations. Therefore, FDA has published 
conducts a limited review to confirm that (1) broad consent 
guidance entitled “Impact of Certain Provisions of the 
was obtained and appropriately documented, and (2) the 
Revised Common Rule on FDA-Regulated Clinical 
secondary research falls within its scope (45 C.F.R. 
Investigators” to help clarify how to meet requirements of 
§46.104(d)(8)). The IRB also must determine that there are 
both sets of regulations, where necessary.  
adequate privacy protections in place. 
Amanda K. Sarata, Specialist in Health Policy   
HIPAA-Regulated Secondary Research 
IF11043
Under the Health Information Portability and 
Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, an individual’s 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Updated Common Rule: Key Changes for Research Using Stored Biospecimens 
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11043 · VERSION 2 · NEW