These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32342295)

  • 1. Legacy Genetic Testing Results for Cancer Susceptibility: How Common are Conflicting Classifications in a Large Variant Dataset from Multiple Practices?
    Yin K; Liu Y; Lamichhane B; Sandbach JF; Patel G; Compagnoni G; Kanak RH; Rosen B; Ondrula DP; Smith L; Brown E; Gold L; Whitworth P; App C; Euhus D; Semine A; Dwight Lyons S; Lazarte MAC; Parmigiani G; Braun D; Hughes KS
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):2212-2220. PubMed ID: 32342295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical Variant Classification: A Comparison of Public Databases and a Commercial Testing Laboratory.
    Gradishar W; Johnson K; Brown K; Mundt E; Manley S
    Oncologist; 2017 Jul; 22(7):797-803. PubMed ID: 28408614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Analysis of hereditary cancer gene variant classifications from ClinVar indicates a need for regular reassessment of clinical assertions.
    Davidson AL; Kondrashova O; Leonard C; Wood S; Tudini E; Hollway GE; Pearson JV; Newell F; Spurdle AB; Waddell N
    Hum Mutat; 2022 Dec; 43(12):2054-2062. PubMed ID: 36095262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sources of discordance among germ-line variant classifications in ClinVar.
    Yang S; Lincoln SE; Kobayashi Y; Nykamp K; Nussbaum RL; Topper S
    Genet Med; 2017 Oct; 19(10):1118-1126. PubMed ID: 28569743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Scaling resolution of variant classification differences in ClinVar between 41 clinical laboratories through an outlier approach.
    Harrison SM; Dolinksy JS; Chen W; Collins CD; Das S; Deignan JL; Garber KB; Garcia J; Jarinova O; Knight Johnson AE; Koskenvuo JW; Lee H; Mao R; Mar-Heyming R; McFaddin AS; Moyer K; Nagan N; Rentas S; Santani AB; Seppälä EH; Shirts BH; Tidwell T; Topper S; Vincent LM; Vinette K; Rehm HL;
    Hum Mutat; 2018 Nov; 39(11):1641-1649. PubMed ID: 30311378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Variability in gene-based knowledge impacts variant classification: an analysis of FBN1 missense variants in ClinVar.
    Baudhuin LM; Kluge ML; Kotzer KE; Lagerstedt SA
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2019 Oct; 27(10):1550-1560. PubMed ID: 31227806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Conflicting Interpretation of Genetic Variants and Cancer Risk by Commercial Laboratories as Assessed by the Prospective Registry of Multiplex Testing.
    Balmaña J; Digiovanni L; Gaddam P; Walsh MF; Joseph V; Stadler ZK; Nathanson KL; Garber JE; Couch FJ; Offit K; Robson ME; Domchek SM
    J Clin Oncol; 2016 Dec; 34(34):4071-4078. PubMed ID: 27621404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical implications of conflicting variant interpretations in the cancer genetics clinic.
    Zukin E; Culver JO; Liu Y; Yang Y; Ricker CN; Hodan R; Sturgeon D; Kingham K; Chun NM; Rowe-Teeter C; Singh K; Zell JA; Ladabaum U; McDonnell KJ; Ford JM; Parmigiani G; Braun D; Kurian AW; Gruber SB; Idos GE
    Genet Med; 2023 Jul; 25(7):100837. PubMed ID: 37057674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Data sharing to improve concordance in variant interpretation across laboratories: results from the Canadian Open Genetics Repository.
    Mighton C; Smith AC; Mayers J; Tomaszewski R; Taylor S; Hume S; Agatep R; Spriggs E; Feilotter HE; Semenuk L; Wong H; Lazo de la Vega L; Marshall CR; Axford MM; Silver T; Charames GS; Di Gioacchino V; Watkins N; Foulkes WD; Clavier M; Hamel N; Chong G; Lamont RE; Parboosingh J; Karsan A; Bosdet I; Young SS; Tucker T; Akbari MR; Speevak MD; Vaags AK; Lebo MS; Lerner-Ellis J;
    J Med Genet; 2022 Jun; 59(6):571-578. PubMed ID: 33875564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical variants paired with phenotype: A rich resource for brain gene curation.
    Chopra M; Savatt JM; Bingaman TI; Good ME; Morgan A; Cooney C; Rossel AM; VanHoute B; Cordova I; Mahida S; Lanzotti V; Baldridge D; Gurnett CA; Piven J; Hazlett H; Pomeroy SL; Sahin M; Payne PRO; Riggs ER; Constantino JN;
    Genet Med; 2024 Mar; 26(3):101035. PubMed ID: 38059438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reinterpretation of common pathogenic variants in ClinVar revealed a high proportion of downgrades.
    Xiang J; Yang J; Chen L; Chen Q; Yang H; Sun C; Zhou Q; Peng Z
    Sci Rep; 2020 Jan; 10(1):331. PubMed ID: 31942019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinically impactful differences in variant interpretation between clinicians and testing laboratories: a single-center experience.
    Bland A; Harrington EA; Dunn K; Pariani M; Platt JCK; Grove ME; Caleshu C
    Genet Med; 2018 Mar; 20(3):369-373. PubMed ID: 29240077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Frequency of Discordant Variant Classification in the Human Gene Mutation Database: A Comparison of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Guidelines and ClinVar.
    Park KJ; Lee W; Chun S; Min WK
    Lab Med; 2021 May; 52(3):250-259. PubMed ID: 32926152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. ClinVar and HGMD genomic variant classification accuracy has improved over time, as measured by implied disease burden.
    Sharo AG; Zou Y; Adhikari AN; Brenner SE
    Genome Med; 2023 Jul; 15(1):51. PubMed ID: 37443081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Informing variant assessment using structured evidence from prior classifications (PS1, PM5, and PVS1 sequence variant interpretation criteria).
    Bhat V; Adzhubei IA; Fife JD; Lebo M; Cassa CA
    Genet Med; 2023 Jan; 25(1):16-26. PubMed ID: 36305854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Variant Classification Concordance using the ACMG-AMP Variant Interpretation Guidelines across Nine Genomic Implementation Research Studies.
    Amendola LM; Muenzen K; Biesecker LG; Bowling KM; Cooper GM; Dorschner MO; Driscoll C; Foreman AKM; Golden-Grant K; Greally JM; Hindorff L; Kanavy D; Jobanputra V; Johnston JJ; Kenny EE; McNulty S; Murali P; Ou J; Powell BC; Rehm HL; Rolf B; Roman TS; Van Ziffle J; Guha S; Abhyankar A; Crosslin D; Venner E; Yuan B; Zouk H; ; Jarvik GP
    Am J Hum Genet; 2020 Nov; 107(5):932-941. PubMed ID: 33108757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Consistency of
    Lincoln SE; Yang S; Cline MS; Kobayashi Y; Zhang C; Topper S; Haussler D; Paten B; Nussbaum RL
    JCO Precis Oncol; 2017 Jul; 1():. PubMed ID: 28782058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of renovo predictions on variants reclassified over time.
    Bonetti E; Tini G; Mazzarella L
    J Transl Med; 2024 Jul; 22(1):713. PubMed ID: 39085881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of Somatic and Germline Variant Interpretation in Hereditary Cancer Genes.
    Moody EW; Vagher J; Espinel W; Goldgar D; Hagerty KJ; Gammon A
    JCO Precis Oncol; 2019 Dec; 3():1-8. PubMed ID: 35100725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Genetic variants with discordant classifications: An assessment of genetic counselor attitudes and practices.
    Lahiri S; Reys B; Wunder J; Pirzadeh-Miller S
    J Genet Couns; 2023 Feb; 32(1):100-110. PubMed ID: 35978490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.