ACMG Statements and Guidelines
These online statements and guidelines are definitive and may be cited using the digital object identifier (DOI). These recommendations are designed primarily as an educational resource for medical geneticists and other healthcare providers to help them provide quality medical genetics services; they should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. Please refer to the leading disclaimer in each document for more information.
Screening for autosomal recessive and X-linked conditions during pregnancy and preconception: a practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)
Carrier screening began 50 years ago with screening for conditions that have a high prevalence in defined racial/ethnic groups (e.g., Tay–Sachs disease in the Ashkenazi Jewish population; sickle cell disease in Black individuals). Cystic fibrosis was the first medical condition for which panethnic screening was recommended, followed by spinal muscular atrophy. Next-generation sequencing allows low cost and high throughput identification of sequence variants across many genes simultaneously. Since the phrase “expanded carrier screening” is nonspecific, there is a need to define carrier screening processes in a way that will allow equitable opportunity for patients to learn their reproductive risks using next-generation sequencing technology.Addendum: ACMG Practice Guideline: lack of evidence for MTHFR polymorphism testing
This is an addendum to the article available online at https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2012.165 .Risk categorization for oversight of laboratory-developed tests for inherited conditions: an updated position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)
This document represents an update to the proposed approach of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) to categorize laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) for inherited conditions according to risk.1 Risk classification has historically been a determinant of whether, and to what extent, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has overseen and regulated clinical tests. LDTs for constitutional variants continue to proliferate without a comprehensive federal regulatory framework in place.
