Header Logo

Connection

Tina Pesaran to Genetic Testing

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Tina Pesaran has written about Genetic Testing.
Connection Strength

4.023
  1. The Evolution of Constitutional Sequence Variant Interpretation. Clin Lab Med. 2020 06; 40(2):135-148.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.670
  2. Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant curation guidelines for the analysis of germline PALB2 sequence variants. Am J Hum Genet. 2025 Oct 02; 112(10):2266-2280.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.242
  3. ClinGen guidance for use of the PP1/BS4 co-segregation and PP4 phenotype specificity criteria for sequence variant pathogenicity classification. Am J Hum Genet. 2024 01 04; 111(1):24-38.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.214
  4. Gene-specific ACMG/AMP classification criteria for germline APC variants: Recommendations from the ClinGen InSiGHT Hereditary Colorectal Cancer/Polyposis Variant Curation Expert Panel. Genet Med. 2024 02; 26(2):100992.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.211
  5. The landscape of reported VUS in multi-gene panel and genomic testing: Time for a change. Genet Med. 2023 12; 25(12):100947.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.208
  6. Closing the gap: Systematic integration of multiplexed functional data resolves variants of uncertain significance in BRCA1, TP53, and PTEN. Am J Hum Genet. 2021 12 02; 108(12):2248-2258.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.185
  7. Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes Among Women With Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast. J Clin Oncol. 2021 12 10; 39(35):3918-3926.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.184
  8. Genotype-phenotype correlations among TP53 carriers: Literature review and analysis of probands undergoing multi-gene panel testing and single-gene testing. Cancer Genet. 2020 10; 248-249:11-17.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.171
  9. Assessment of Diagnostic Outcomes of RNA Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 10 02; 2(10):e1913900.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.160
  10. A clinical guide to hereditary cancer panel testing: evaluation of gene-specific cancer associations and sensitivity of genetic testing criteria in a cohort of 165,000 high-risk patients. Genet Med. 2020 02; 22(2):407-415.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.158
  11. Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant curation guidelines for the analysis of germline CDH1 sequence variants. Hum Mutat. 2018 11; 39(11):1553-1568.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.150
  12. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 08 01; 110(8):855-862.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.147
  13. Somatic TP53 variants frequently confound germ-line testing results. Genet Med. 2018 08; 20(8):809-816.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.141
  14. ClinGen and Genetic Testing. N Engl J Med. 2015 10; 373(14):1376-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  15. Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients. Genet Med. 2014 Nov; 16(11):830-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  16. Quantifying evidence for phenotypic specificity (PP4) for syndromic phenotypes: Large-scale integration of rare germline FH variants from diagnostic laboratory testing for HLRCC and renal cancer. Genet Med. 2025 Nov; 27(11):101565.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.060
  17. Characteristics predicting reduced penetrance variants in the high-risk cancer predisposition gene TP53. HGG Adv. 2025 Oct 09; 6(4):100484.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.060
  18. Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant curation guidelines for the analysis of germline ATM sequence variants. Am J Hum Genet. 2024 Nov 07; 111(11):2411-2426.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  19. Evidence-based recommendations for gene-specific ACMG/AMP variant classification from the ClinGen ENIGMA BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variant Curation Expert Panel. Am J Hum Genet. 2024 Sep 05; 111(9):2044-2058.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  20. Challenges and approaches to calibrating patient phenotype as evidence for cancer gene variant classification under ACMG/AMP guidelines. Hum Mol Genet. 2024 04 08; 33(8):724-732.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  21. Functional analysis and clinical classification of 462 germline BRCA2 missense variants affecting the DNA binding domain. Am J Hum Genet. 2024 03 07; 111(3):584-593.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.054
  22. Using the ACMG/AMP framework to capture evidence related to predicted and observed impact on splicing: Recommendations from the ClinGen SVI Splicing Subgroup. Am J Hum Genet. 2023 07 06; 110(7):1046-1067.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  23. Optimising clinical care through CDH1-specific germline variant curation: improvement of clinical assertions and updated curation guidelines. J Med Genet. 2023 06; 60(6):568-575.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  24. Risk of Late-Onset Breast Cancer in Genetically Predisposed Women. J Clin Oncol. 2021 11 01; 39(31):3430-3440.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  25. Case-case analysis addressing ascertainment bias for multigene panel testing implicates BRCA1 and PALB2 in endometrial cancer. Hum Mutat. 2021 10; 42(10):1265-1278.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  26. Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant interpretation guidelines for germline TP53 variants. Hum Mutat. 2021 03; 42(3):223-236.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.044
  27. The Contribution of Germline Predisposition Gene Mutations to Clinical Subtypes of Invasive Breast Cancer From a Clinical Genetic Testing Cohort. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 12 14; 112(12):1231-1241.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.043
  28. Differences in patient ascertainment affect the use of gene-specified ACMG/AMP phenotype-related variant classification criteria: Evidence for TP53. Hum Mutat. 2020 03; 41(3):537-542.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  29. Classification of variants of uncertain significance in BRCA1 and BRCA2 using personal and family history of cancer from individuals in a large hereditary cancer multigene panel testing cohort. Genet Med. 2020 04; 22(4):701-708.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  30. Gene-specific criteria for PTEN variant curation: Recommendations from the ClinGen PTEN Expert Panel. Hum Mutat. 2018 11; 39(11):1581-1592.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  31. A Bayesian framework for efficient and accurate variant prediction. PLoS One. 2018; 13(9):e0203553.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.037
  32. Recommendations for interpreting the loss of function PVS1 ACMG/AMP variant criterion. Hum Mutat. 2018 11; 39(11):1517-1524.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.037
  33. Advocating for the consumer: clinical confirmation of all direct-to-consumer raw data alterations remains critical. Genet Med. 2019 03; 21(3):760-761.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.037
  34. Associations Between Cancer Predisposition Testing Panel Genes and Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2017 Sep 01; 3(9):1190-1196.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  35. Clinical laboratories collaborate to resolve differences in variant interpretations submitted to ClinVar. Genet Med. 2017 10; 19(10):1096-1104.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.033
  36. Efforts Toward Consensus Variant Interpretation by Commercial Laboratories. J Clin Oncol. 2017 04 10; 35(11):1261-1262.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.033
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.