1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Molecular genetic testing in athletes: Why and when a position statement from the Italian Society of Sports Cardiology

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references106

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology

          The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) previously developed guidance for the interpretation of sequence variants. 1 In the past decade, sequencing technology has evolved rapidly with the advent of high-throughput next generation sequencing. By adopting and leveraging next generation sequencing, clinical laboratories are now performing an ever increasing catalogue of genetic testing spanning genotyping, single genes, gene panels, exomes, genomes, transcriptomes and epigenetic assays for genetic disorders. By virtue of increased complexity, this paradigm shift in genetic testing has been accompanied by new challenges in sequence interpretation. In this context, the ACMG convened a workgroup in 2013 comprised of representatives from the ACMG, the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) to revisit and revise the standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants. The group consisted of clinical laboratory directors and clinicians. This report represents expert opinion of the workgroup with input from ACMG, AMP and CAP stakeholders. These recommendations primarily apply to the breadth of genetic tests used in clinical laboratories including genotyping, single genes, panels, exomes and genomes. This report recommends the use of specific standard terminology: ‘pathogenic’, ‘likely pathogenic’, ‘uncertain significance’, ‘likely benign’, and ‘benign’ to describe variants identified in Mendelian disorders. Moreover, this recommendation describes a process for classification of variants into these five categories based on criteria using typical types of variant evidence (e.g. population data, computational data, functional data, segregation data, etc.). Because of the increased complexity of analysis and interpretation of clinical genetic testing described in this report, the ACMG strongly recommends that clinical molecular genetic testing should be performed in a CLIA-approved laboratory with results interpreted by a board-certified clinical molecular geneticist or molecular genetic pathologist or equivalent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Worldwide epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: a Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study.

            The global burden of atrial fibrillation (AF) is unknown. We systematically reviewed population-based studies of AF published from 1980 to 2010 from the 21 Global Burden of Disease regions to estimate global/regional prevalence, incidence, and morbidity and mortality related to AF (DisModMR software). Of 377 potential studies identified, 184 met prespecified eligibility criteria. The estimated number of individuals with AF globally in 2010 was 33.5 million (20.9 million men [95% uncertainty interval (UI), 19.5-22.2 million] and 12.6 million women [95% UI, 12.0-13.7 million]). Burden associated with AF, measured as disability-adjusted life-years, increased by 18.8% (95% UI, 15.8-19.3) in men and 18.9% (95% UI, 15.8-23.5) in women from 1990 to 2010. In 1990, the estimated age-adjusted prevalence rates of AF (per 100 000 population) were 569.5 in men (95% UI, 532.8-612.7) and 359.9 in women (95% UI, 334.7-392.6); the estimated age-adjusted incidence rates were 60.7 per 100 000 person-years in men (95% UI, 49.2-78.5) and 43.8 in women (95% UI, 35.9-55.0). In 2010, the prevalence rates increased to 596.2 (95% UI, 558.4-636.7) in men and 373.1 (95% UI, 347.9-402.2) in women; the incidence rates increased to 77.5 (95% UI, 65.2-95.4) in men and 59.5 (95% UI, 49.9-74.9) in women. Mortality associated with AF was higher in women and increased by 2-fold (95% UI, 2.0-2.2) and 1.9-fold (95% UI, 1.8-2.0) in men and women, respectively, from 1990 to 2010. There was evidence of significant regional heterogeneity in AF estimations and availability of population-based data. These findings provide evidence of progressive increases in overall burden, incidence, prevalence, and AF-associated mortality between 1990 and 2010, with significant public health implications. Systematic, regional surveillance of AF is required to better direct prevention and treatment strategies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              2014 ESC Guidelines on diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                International Journal of Cardiology
                International Journal of Cardiology
                Elsevier BV
                01675273
                October 2022
                October 2022
                : 364
                : 169-177
                Article
                10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.05.071
                35662561
                55cd4976-be24-4461-81ef-f527af083921
                © 2022

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-017

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-037

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-012

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-029

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-004

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article