Search

BackgroundThe non-POU domain containing octamer-binding gene (NONO) is located on chromosome Xq13.1 and encodes a member of a small family of RNA-binding and DNA-binding proteins that perform a variety of tasks involved in RNA synthesis, transcriptional regulation and DNA repair. Loss-of-function variants in NONOhave been described as a cause of intellectual disability in males but have not been described in association with congenital heart defects or cardiomyopathy. In this article, we seek to further define the phenotypic consequences of NONO depletion in human subjects.MethodsWe searched a clinical database of over 6000 individuals referred for exome sequencing and over 60 000 individuals referred for CNV analysis.ResultsWe identified two males with atrial and ventricular septal defects, left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC), developmental delay and intellectual disability, who harboured de novo, loss-of-function variants in NONO. We also identified a male infant with developmental delay, congenital brain anomalies and severe LVNC requiring cardiac transplantation, who inherited a single-gene deletion of NONOfrom his asymptomatic mother.ConclusionsWe conclude that in addition to global developmental delay and intellectual disability, males with loss-of-function variants in NONOmay also be predisposed to developing congenital heart defects and LVNC with the penetrance of these cardiac-related problems being influenced by genetic, epigenetic, environmental or stochastic factors. Brain imaging of males with NONO deficiency may reveal structural defects with abnormalities of the corpus callosum being the most common. Although dysmorphic features vary between affected individuals, relative macrocephaly is a common feature.

Recently, a new genetic test has been developed that allows a more detailed examination of the genome when compared with a standard chromosome analysis. Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH microarray; also known as chromosome microarray analysis) in effect, combines chromosome and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses allowing detection not only of aneuploidies, but also of all known microdeletion and microduplication disorders, including telomere rearrangements. Since 2004, this testing has been available in the Medical Genetics Laboratory at Baylor College of Medicine for postnatal evaluation and diagnosis of individuals with suspected genomic disorders. Subsequently, to assess the feasibility of offering CGH microarray for prenatal diagnosis, a prospective study was conducted on 98 pregnancies in a clinical setting comparing the results obtained from array CGH with those obtained from a standard karyotype. This was followed by the availability of prenatal testing on a clinical basis in 2005. To date, we have analyzed over 8000 cases referred to our clinical laboratory, including approximately 300 prenatal cases. With the clinical introduction of any new testing strategy, and particularly one focused on genetic disorders, issues of patient education, result interpretation, and genetic counseling must be anticipated and strategies adopted to allow the implementation of the testing with maximum benefit and minimum risk. In this article, we describe our experience with over 8000 clinical prenatal and postnatal cases of CGH microarray ordered by our clinical service or referred to the Baylor Medical Genetics Laboratory and describe the strategies used to optimize patient and provider education, facilitate clinical interpretation of results, and provide counseling for unique clinical circumstances.

Recently, a new genetic test has been developed that allows a more detailed examination of the genome when compared with a standard chromosome analysis. Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH microarray; also known as chromosome microarray analysis) in effect, combines chromosome and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses allowing detection not only of aneuploidies, but also of all known microdeletion and microduplication disorders, including telomere rearrangements. Since 2004, this testing has been available in the Medical Genetics Laboratory at Baylor College of Medicine for postnatal evaluation and diagnosis of individuals with suspected genomic disorders. Subsequently, to assess the feasibility of offering CGH microarray for prenatal diagnosis, a prospective study was conducted on 98 pregnancies in a clinical setting comparing the results obtained from array CGH with those obtained from a standard karyotype. This was followed by the availability of prenatal testing on a clinical basis in 2005. To date, we have analyzed over 8000 cases referred to our clinical laboratory, including approximately 300 prenatal cases. With the clinical introduction of any new testing strategy, and particularly one focused on genetic disorders, issues of patient education, result interpretation, and genetic counseling must be anticipated and strategies adopted to allow the implementation of the testing with maximum benefit and minimum risk. In this article, we describe our experience with over 8000 clinical prenatal and postnatal cases of CGH microarray ordered by our clinical service or referred to the Baylor Medical Genetics Laboratory and describe the strategies used to optimize patient and provider education, facilitate clinical interpretation of results, and provide counseling for unique clinical circumstances.

Mutations in GJB2 are associated with hereditary hearing loss. DNA sequencing of GJB2 in a cohort of hearing impaired patients and a multi‐ethnic control group is reported. Among 610 hearing impaired cases, 43 DNA sequence variations were identified in the coding region of GJB2 including 24 mutations, 8 polymorphisms, 3 unclassified variants (G4D, R127C, M163V), 1 controversial variant (V37I), and 7 novel variants (G12C, N14D, V63A, T86M, L132V, D159, 592_600delinsCAGTGTTCATGACATTC). Sixteen non‐coding sequence variations were also identified among cases including the IVS1+1A>G mutation, 2 polymorphisms, and 13 novel variants. A diagnosis of GJB2‐associated hearing loss was confirmed for 63 cases (10.3%). Heterozygous mutations were found in 39 cases (6.4%). Eleven cases carrying novel or unclassified variants (1.8 %) and 18 cases carrying the controversial V37I variant were identified (3%). In addition, 294 control subjects from 4 ethnic groups were sequenced for GJB2. Thirteen sequence variations in the coding region of GJB2 were identified among controls including 2 mutations, 6 polymorphisms, 2 unclassified variants (G4D, T123N), 1 controversial variant (V37I), and 2 novel variants (R127L, V207L). Nine sequence variations were identified among controls in the non‐coding regions in and around GJB2 exon 2. Of particular interest among controls were the variability in carrier rates and ethnic stratification of alleles, and the complex genotypes among Asians, 47% of whom carried two to four sequence variations in the coding region of GJB2. These data provide new information about carrier rates for GJB2‐based hearing loss in various ethnic groups and contribute to evaluation of the pathogenicity of the controversial V37I variant. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of using a targeted array-CGH strategy for prenatal diagnosis of genomic imbalances in a clinical setting of current pregnancies.Methods: Women undergoing prenatal diagnosis were counseled and offered array-CGH (BCM V4.0) in addition to routine chromosome analysis. Array-CGH was performed with DNA directly from amniotic fluid cells with whole genome amplification, on chorionic villus samples with amplification as necessary, and on cultured cells without amplification.Results: Ninety-eight pregnancies (56 amniotic fluid and 42 CVS specimens) were studied with complete concordance between karyotype and array results, including 5 positive cases with chromosomal abnormalities. There was complete concordance of array results for direct and cultured cell analysis in 57 cases tested by both methods. In 12 cases, the array detected copy number variation requiring testing of parental samples for optimal interpretation. Array-CGH results were available in an average of 6 and 16 days for direct and cultured cells, respectively. Patient acceptance of array-CGH testing was 74%.Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using array-CGH for prenatal diagnosis, including reliance on direct analysis without culturing cells. Use of array-CGH should increase the detection of abnormalities relative to the risk, and is an option for an enhanced level of screening for chromosomal abnormalities in high risk pregnancies.

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of using a targeted array-CGH strategy for prenatal diagnosis of genomic imbalances in a clinical setting of current pregnancies.

This study was undertaken to characterize pain in individuals with hereditary multiple exostosis (HME). Two hundred ninety-three patients with HME completed a questionnaire designed to assess pain as well as its impact on their life. Eighty-four percent of participants reported having pain, indicating that pain is a real problem in HME. Of those with pain, 55.1% had generalized pain. Two factors were found to be associated with pain outcome: HME-related complications and surgery. Individuals who had HME-related complications were five times more likely to have pain, while those who had surgery were 3.8 more likely to have pain. No differences were found between males and females with respect to pain, surgery, or HME-related complications. The results of this study indicate that the number of individuals with HME who have pain has been underestimated and that pain is a problem that must be addressed when caring for individuals with HME.

This workgroup aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for pregnant individuals at general risk for fetal trisomy 21, trisomy 18, or trisomy 13 and to evaluate the utility of NIPS for other chromosomal disorders.

No Abstract.

No Abstract.