False-positive results released by direct-to-consumer genetic tests highlight the importance of clinical confirmation testing for appropriate patient care

[1]  T. Postmus.  Genetics of Parkinson's disease , 2018 .

[2]  Pascal Borry,et al.  Third party interpretation of raw genetic data: an ethical exploration , 2017, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[3]  W. Chung,et al.  23andMe Paves the Way for Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Health Risk Tests of Limited Clinical Utility , 2017, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  R. Green,et al.  Utilization of Genetic Counseling after Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study , 2017, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[5]  M. Couper,et al.  Diet and exercise changes following direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing , 2017, BMC Medical Genomics.

[6]  Ekland Abdiwahab,et al.  Primary care providers’ cancer genetic testing-related knowledge, attitudes, and communication behaviors: A systematic review and research agenda , 2017, Journal of general internal medicine.

[7]  Soma Das,et al.  Clinical Laboratories Collaborate to Resolve Differences in Variant Interpretations Submitted to ClinVar , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[8]  K. Helbig,et al.  Classification of Genes: Standardized Clinical Validity Assessment of Gene–Disease Associations Aids Diagnostic Exome Analysis and Reclassifications , 2017, Human mutation.

[9]  W. Chung,et al.  Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics , 2016, Genetics in Medicine.

[10]  Robert C. Green,et al.  Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: User Motivations, Decision Making, and Perceived Utility of Results , 2017, Public Health Genomics.

[11]  Acmg Board of Directors,et al.  Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[12]  Jefferey Chen,et al.  Sanger Confirmation Is Required to Achieve Optimal Sensitivity and Specificity in Next-Generation Sequencing Panel Testing. , 2016, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[13]  Ricardo Villamarín-Salomón,et al.  ClinVar: public archive of interpretations of clinically relevant variants , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[14]  Gabor T. Marth,et al.  A global reference for human genetic variation , 2015, Nature.

[15]  Emily H Turner,et al.  Actionable, pathogenic incidental findings in 1,000 participants' exomes. , 2013, American journal of human genetics.

[16]  Emily H Turner,et al.  Target-enrichment strategies for next-generation sequencing , 2010, Nature Methods.

[17]  角田美穂,et al.  National Society of Genetic Counselors(NSGC)倫理綱領と認定遺伝カウンセラー倫理綱領(京都大学試案)の比較検討 , 2009 .

[18]  Hanlee P. Ji,et al.  Next-generation DNA sequencing , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[19]  Elizabeth M. Smigielski,et al.  dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation , 2001, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  Lloyd M. Smith,et al.  Fluorescence detection in automated DNA sequence analysis , 1986, Nature.

[21]  F. Sanger,et al.  DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. , 1977, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.