MitchellA., They See the Future and It Works for Them, New York Times, October 11, 1996.
2.
WetterstrandK., DNA Sequencing Costs, National Human Genome Research Institute (2014), available at <http://www.genome.gov/sequencingcosts> (last visited July 9, 2014).
3.
SchrijverI.AzizN. and FarkasD. H., Opportunities and Challenges Associated with Clinical Diagnostic Genome Sequencing: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology, Journal of Molecular Diagnostics14, no. 6 (2012): 525–540.
SaffitzJ. E., Genomic Pathology: A Disruptive Innovation, Personalized Medicine9, no. 3 (2012): 237–239.
6.
See MaQ. C.EnnisC. A. and AparicioS., Opening Pandora's Box – The New Biology of Driver Mutations and Clonal Evolution in Cancer as Revealed by Next Generation Sequencing, Current Opinion in Genetics & Development22, no. 1 (2012): 3–9CalvoS. E.ComptonA. G. and HershmanS. G., Molecular Diagnosis of Infantile Mitochondrial Disease with Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing, Science Translational Medicine4, no. 118 (2012): 118ra10, available at <http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/4/118/118ra10.full.pdf> (last visited August 26, 2014); ChiuR. W.AkolekarR. and ZhengY. W., Non-Invasive Prenatal Assessment of Trisomy 21 by Multiplexed Maternal Plasma DNA Sequencing: Large Scale Validity Study, British Medical Journal (Clinical Research ed.)342 (2011): C7401, available at <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3019239/pdf/bmj.c7401.pdf> (last visited August 26, 2014).
7.
MoorthieS.HallA. and WrightC. F., Informatics and Clinical Genome Sequencing: Opening the Black Box, Genetics in Medicine15, no. 3 (2013): 165–171.
8.
BurkeW.AntommariaA. H. M. and BennettR., Recommendations for Returning Genomic Incidental Findings? We Need to Talk!Genetics in Medicine15, no. 11 (2013): 854–859; GreenR. C.BergJ. S. and GrodyW. W., ACMG Recommendations for Reporting of Incidental Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing, Genetics in Medicine15, no. 7 (2013): 565–574.
9.
DeweyF. E.GroveM. E. and PanC., Clinical Interpretation and Implications of Whole-Genome Sequencing, JAMA311, no. 10 (2014): 1035–1044.
10.
GargisA. S.KalmanL. and BerryM. W., Assuring the Quality of Next-Generation Sequencing in Clinical Laboratory Practice, Nature Biotechnology30, no. 11 (2012): 1033–1036; see Federal Register 76 (May 19, 2011): 28990; Transcript, CDRH Public Meeting on Ultra High Throughput Sequencing for Clinical Diagnostic Applications – Approaches to Assess Analytical Validity (June 23, 2011), available at <http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/UCM266607.pdf> (last visited May 5, 2014); WalcoffS. D. and PfeiferJ. D., Modernizing US Regulatory and Reimbursement Policy to Support Continued Innovation in Genomic Pathology, Personalized Medicine9, no. 3 (2012): 295–308.
11.
GinsburgG. S., Realizing the Opportunities of Genomics in Health Care, JAMA309, no. 14 (2013): 1463–1464.
12.
JavittG. H. and CarnerK. S., Regulation of Next Generation Sequencing, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics42, no. 3, Supp. (2014): 9–21.
13.
CollinsF. S. and HamburgM. A., First FDA Authorization for Next-Generation Sequencer, New England Journal of Medicine369, no. 25 (2013): 2369–2371.
14.
DeverkaP. and DreyfusJ. C., Clinical Integration of Next Generation Sequencing: Coverage and Reimbursement Challenges, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics42, no. 3, Supp. (2014): 22–41.
Cook-DeeganR. and ChandrasekharanS., Patents and Genome-Wide DNA Sequence Analysis: Is It Safe to Go into the Human Genome?Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics42, no. 3, Supp. (2014): 42–50.
18.
EvansB. J., Economic Regulation of Next-Generation Sequencing, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics42, no. 3, Supp. (2014): 51–66.
19.
Id.
20.
For full scope and methodology of this study, seeCurnutteM.McGuireA. L. and KaufmanD. J., Development of the Clinical NGS Industry in a Shifting Policy Climate, Nature Biotechnology (forthcoming, October 2014).