Genetic cancer susceptibility testing: Increased technology, increased complexity

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 33, Issue 31, 2015, Pages 3533-3534

  Yu, Peter Paul ^a   Vose, Julie M ^b   Hayes, Daniel F ^c  

^a PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; EDITORIAL; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUMOR GENE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; NEOPLASM; ONCOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT;

GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENETIC TESTING; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84947246610     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.3628     Document Type: Editorial

References (13)

1. Robson M, Bradbury AR, Banu A, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: Genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0996
2. Dreifus C: A never-ending genetic quest: Mary-Claire King's pioneering gene work, from breast cancer to human rights. New York Times, February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/science/mary-claire-kings-pioneering-gene-work-from-breast-cancer-to-human-rights.html?-r=0
3. Easton DF, Pharoah PD, Antoniou AC, et al: Gene-panel sequencing and the prediction of breast-cancer risk. N Engl J Med 372:2243-2257, 2015
4. Rehm H, Berg J, Brooks L, et al: ClinGen: The clinical genome resource. N Engl J Med 372:2235-2242, 2015
5. Teutsch SM, Bradley LA, Palomaki GE, et al: The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initiative: Methods of the EGAPP Working Group. Genet Med 11:3-14, 2009
6. Simon RM, Paik S, Hayes DF: Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:1446-1452, 2009
7. IOM (Institute of Medicine): Evolution of Translational Omics: Lessons Learned and the Path Forward. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2012
8. Hayes DF, Allen J, Compton C, et al: Breaking a vicious cycle. Sci Transl Med 5:196cm6, 2013
9. Evans B, Burke W, Jarvik GP: The FDA and genomic tests: Getting regulation right. N Engl J Med 372:2258-2264, 2015
10. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO): Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs) Comments for the FDA. http://www.asco.org/sites/www.asco.org/files/asco-ldt-comments-for-fda-020115-0.pdf
11. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO): NGS Comments. http://www.asco.org/sites/www.asco.org/files/asco-ngs-comments-03.20.2015.pdf
12. Green RC, Berg J, Grody WW, et al: ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. https://www.acmg.net/docs/ACMG-Releases-Highly-Anticipated-Recommendations-on-Incidental-Findings-in-Clinical-Exome-and-Genome-Sequencing.pdf
13. Polite B, Griggs J, Moy B, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement on Medicaid reform. J Clin Oncol 32:4162-4167, 2014