BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Scheuner MT, Peredo J, Benkendorf J, Bowdish B, Feldman G, Fleisher L, Mulvihill JJ, Watson M, Herman GE, Evans J. Reporting genomic secondary findings: ACMG members weigh in. Genet Med 2015;17:27-35. [PMID: 25394173 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.165] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Biancalana V, Laporte J. Diagnostic use of Massively Parallel Sequencing in Neuromuscular Diseases: Towards an Integrated Diagnosis. J Neuromuscul Dis 2015;2:193-203. [PMID: 27858740 DOI: 10.3233/JND-150092] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Swanson K, Sparks TN, Lianoglou BR, Chen F, Downum S, Patel S, Rego S, Yip T, Van Ziffle J, Koenig BA, Slavotinek AM, Norton ME. Preference for secondary findings in prenatal and pediatric exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2021. [PMID: 34057224 DOI: 10.1002/pd.5973] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Kost RG, Poppel SM, Coller BS. Informed consent for next-generation nucleotide sequencing studies: Aiding communication between participants and investigators. J Clin Transl Sci 2017;1:115-20. [PMID: 28649453 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2016.21] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Miller DT, Lee K, Gordon AS, Amendola LM, Adelman K, Bale SJ, Chung WK, Gollob MH, Harrison SM, Herman GE, Hershberger RE, Klein TE, McKelvey K, Richards CS, Vlangos CN, Stewart DR, Watson MS, Martin CL; ACMG Secondary Findings Working Group. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2021 update: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med 2021;23:1391-8. [PMID: 34012069 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-021-01171-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Gornick MC, Scherer AM, Sutton EJ, Ryan KA, Exe NL, Li M, Uhlmann WR, Kim SY, Roberts JS, De Vries RG. Effect of Public Deliberation on Attitudes toward Return of Secondary Results in Genomic Sequencing. J Genet Couns 2017;26:122-32. [PMID: 27307100 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-9987-0] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Raghuram Pillai P, Prows CA, Martin LJ, Myers MF. Decisional conflict among adolescents and parents making decisions about genomic sequencing results. Clin Genet 2020;97:312-20. [PMID: 31654527 DOI: 10.1111/cge.13658] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Ackerman SL, Koenig BA. Understanding variations in secondary findings reporting practices across U.S. genome sequencing laboratories. AJOB Empirical Bioethics 2017;9:48-57. [DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2017.1405095] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Ross LF, Clayton EW. Ethical Issues in Newborn Sequencing Research: The Case Study of BabySeq. Pediatrics 2019;144:e20191031. [PMID: 31719124 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2019-1031] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Fiore RN, Goodman KW. Precision medicine ethics: selected issues and developments in next-generation sequencing, clinical oncology, and ethics. Curr Opin Oncol 2016;28:83-7. [PMID: 26569425 DOI: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000247] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Clayton EW, Ross LF, Rothstein MA. Correspondence on "Exploring the motivations of research participants who chose not to learn medically actionable secondary findings about themselves" by Schupmann et al. Genet Med 2021:S1098-3600(21)04139-3. [PMID: 34906493 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.08.017] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Roche MI, Berg JS. Incidental Findings with Genomic Testing: Implications for Genetic Counseling Practice. Curr Genet Med Rep 2015;3:166-76. [PMID: 26566463 DOI: 10.1007/s40142-015-0075-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 57] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 48] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Gollob MH, Hershberger RE, Gordon AS, Harrison SM, Lee K, Martin CL, Miller DT; ACMG Secondary Findings Working Group. Response to McGurk et al. Genet Med 2021:S1098-3600(21)05373-9. [PMID: 34906521 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.10.021] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Kalia SS, Adelman K, Bale SJ, Chung WK, Eng C, Evans JP, Herman GE, Hufnagel SB, Klein TE, Korf BR, McKelvey KD, Ormond KE, Richards CS, Vlangos CN, Watson M, Martin CL, Miller DT. 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. Genet Med 2017;19:249-55. [PMID: 27854360 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.190] [Cited by in Crossref: 910] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 761] [Article Influence: 151.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Jiang S, Anis AH, Cromwell I, Mohammadi T, Schrader KA, Lucas J, Armour CM, Clausen M, Bombard Y, Regier DA. Health-care practitioners' preferences for the return of secondary findings from next-generation sequencing: a discrete choice experiment. Genet Med 2020;22:2011-9. [PMID: 32820245 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0927-x] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Aizawa Y, Nagami F, Ohashi N, Kato K. A proposal on the first Japanese practical guidance for the return of individual genomic results in research settings. J Hum Genet 2020;65:251-61. [PMID: 31873219 DOI: 10.1038/s10038-019-0697-y] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Cook L, Schulze J. Connecting Gaucher and Parkinson Disease: Considerations for Clinical and Research Genetic Counseling Settings. J Genet Counsel 2017;26:1165-72. [DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0123-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Pinard A, Miltgen M, Blanchard A, Mathieu H, Desvignes JP, Salgado D, Fabre A, Arnaud P, Barré L, Krahn M, Grandval P, Olschwang S, Zaffran S, Boileau C, Béroud C, Collod-Béroud G. Actionable Genes, Core Databases, and Locus-Specific Databases. Hum Mutat 2016;37:1299-307. [PMID: 27600092 DOI: 10.1002/humu.23112] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Ormond KE, O'daniel JM, Kalia SS. Secondary findings: How did we get here, and where are we going? J Genet Couns 2019;28:326-33. [DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1098] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Delanne J, Nambot S, Chassagne A, Putois O, Pelissier A, Peyron C, Gautier E, Thevenon J, Cretin E, Bruel AL, Goussot V, Ghiringhelli F, Boidot R, Tran Mau-Them F, Philippe C, Vitobello A, Demougeot L, Vernin C, Lapointe AS, Bardou M, Luu M, Binquet C, Lejeune C, Joly L, Juif C, Baurand A, Sawka C, Bertolone G, Duffourd Y, Sanlaville D, Pujol P, Geneviève D, Houdayer F, Thauvin-Robinet C, Faivre L. Secondary findings from whole-exome/genome sequencing evaluating stakeholder perspectives. A review of the literature. Eur J Med Genet 2019;62:103529. [PMID: 30165243 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.08.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
20 Foussier L, Vitellius G, Bouligand J, Amazit L, Bouvattier C, Young J, Trabado S, Lombès M. Functional Characterization of Glucocorticoid Receptor Variants Is Required to Avoid Misinterpretation of NGS Data. J Endocr Soc 2019;3:865-81. [PMID: 31008420 DOI: 10.1210/js.2019-00028] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
21 Chaudhari BP, Manickam K, McBride KL. A pediatric perspective on genomics and prevention in the twenty-first century. Pediatr Res 2020;87:338-44. [PMID: 31578042 DOI: 10.1038/s41390-019-0597-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
22 Amor DJ, Chitty LS, Van den Veyver IB. Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: The 59 genes ACMG recommends reporting as secondary findings when sequencing postnatally should be reported when detected on fetal (and parental) sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2020;40:1508-14. [PMID: 32091628 DOI: 10.1002/pd.5670] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
23 Toledo RA, Burnichon N, Cascon A, Benn DE, Bayley J, Welander J, Tops CM, Firth H, Dwight T, Ercolino T, Mannelli M, Opocher G, Clifton-bligh R, Gimm O, Maher ER, Robledo M, Gimenez-roqueplo A, Dahia PLM; The NGS in PPGL (NGSnPPGL) Study Group. Consensus Statement on next-generation-sequencing-based diagnostic testing of hereditary phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2017;13:233-47. [DOI: 10.1038/nrendo.2016.185] [Cited by in Crossref: 123] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 102] [Article Influence: 20.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
24 Gornick MC, Cobain E, Le LQ, Bartnik N, Stoffel E, Schuetze S, Talpaz M, Chinnaiyan A, Roberts JS; Michigan Oncology Sequencing Study. Oncologists' Use of Genomic Sequencing Data to Inform Clinical Management. JCO Precis Oncol 2018;2:PO. [PMID: 32914003 DOI: 10.1200/PO.17.00122] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
25 Ryan KA, De Vries RG, Uhlmann WR, Roberts JS, Gornick MC. Public's Views toward Return of Secondary Results in Genomic Sequencing: It's (Almost) All about the Choice. J Genet Couns 2017;26:1197-212. [PMID: 28357777 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0095-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
26 ACMG Board of Directors. ACMG policy statement: updated recommendations regarding analysis and reporting of secondary findings in clinical genome-scale sequencing. Genet Med 2015;17:68-9. [PMID: 25356965 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.151] [Cited by in Crossref: 210] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 171] [Article Influence: 26.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
27 Vaknin N, Azoulay N, Tsur E, Tripolszki K, Urzi A, Rolfs A, Bauer P, Achiron R, Lipitz S, Goldberg Y, Berger R, Shohat M. High rate of abnormal findings in Prenatal Exome Trio in low risk pregnancies and apparently normal fetuses. Prenat Diagn 2021. [PMID: 34918830 DOI: 10.1002/pd.6077] [Reference Citation Analysis]
28 Wolf SM. The Continuing Evolution of Ethical Standards for Genomic Sequencing in Clinical Care: Restoring Patient Choice. J Law Med Ethics 2017;45:333-40. [PMID: 30100701 DOI: 10.1177/1073110517737531] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
29 Lupski JR. Clinical genomics: from a truly personal genome viewpoint. Hum Genet 2016;135:591-601. [PMID: 27221143 DOI: 10.1007/s00439-016-1682-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
30 Saelaert M, Mertes H, De Baere E, Devisch I. Incidental or secondary findings: an integrative and patient-inclusive approach to the current debate. Eur J Hum Genet 2018;26:1424-31. [PMID: 29970927 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-018-0200-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
31 Johnson LM, Hamilton KV, Valdez JM, Knapp E, Baker JN, Nichols KE. Ethical considerations surrounding germline next-generation sequencing of children with cancer. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2017;17:523-34. [PMID: 28399664 DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2017.1316665] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
32 Saelaert M, Mertes H, Moerenhout T, De Baere E, Devisch I. Ethical values supporting the disclosure of incidental and secondary findings in clinical genomic testing: a qualitative study. BMC Med Ethics 2020;21:9. [PMID: 32000764 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-0452-0] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
33 Hamilton JG, Shuk E, Garzon MG, Rodríguez VM, Westerman J, Hay JL, Offit K, Robson ME. Decision-Making Preferences About Secondary Germline Findings That Arise From Tumor Genomic Profiling Among Patients With Advanced Cancers. JCO Precis Oncol 2017;1. [PMID: 31938761 DOI: 10.1200/PO.17.00182] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
34 Kuderer NM, Burton KA, Blau S, Senecal F, Gadi VK, Parker S, Mahen E, Veenstra D, Carlson JJ, Lyman GH, Blau CA. Participant Attitudes Toward an Intensive Trial of Multiple Biopsies, Multidimensional Molecular Analysis, and Reporting of Results in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. JCO Precis Oncol 2017;1:PO. [PMID: 32913975 DOI: 10.1200/PO.17.00076] [Reference Citation Analysis]
35 Kalatharan V, Lemaire M, Lanktree MB. Opportunities and Challenges for Genetic Studies of End-Stage Renal Disease in Canada. Can J Kidney Health Dis 2018;5:2054358118789368. [PMID: 30046452 DOI: 10.1177/2054358118789368] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
36 Maxwell KN, Hart SN, Vijai J, Schrader KA, Slavin TP, Thomas T, Wubbenhorst B, Ravichandran V, Moore RM, Hu C, Guidugli L, Wenz B, Domchek SM, Robson ME, Szabo C, Neuhausen SL, Weitzel JN, Offit K, Couch FJ, Nathanson KL. Evaluation of ACMG-Guideline-Based Variant Classification of Cancer Susceptibility and Non-Cancer-Associated Genes in Families Affected by Breast Cancer. Am J Hum Genet 2016;98:801-17. [PMID: 27153395 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.02.024] [Cited by in Crossref: 79] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 67] [Article Influence: 15.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
37 Harris S, Gilmore K, Hardisty E, Lyerly AD, Vora NL. Ethical and counseling challenges in prenatal exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2018;38:897-903. [PMID: 30171820 DOI: 10.1002/pd.5353] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
38 Mackley MP, Fletcher B, Parker M, Watkins H, Ormondroyd E. Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. Genet Med 2017;19:283-93. [PMID: 27584911 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.109] [Cited by in Crossref: 74] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 70] [Article Influence: 12.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]