OBJECTIVE: X inactivation pattern in X chromosome rearrangements usually favor the less unbalanced cells. It is correlated to a normal phenotype, small size or infertility. We studied the correlation between phenotype and X inactivation ratio in patients with X structural anomalies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During the 1999-2005 period, 12 X chromosome rearrangements, including three prenatal cases, were diagnosed in the Laboratoire de Cytogénétique of Strasbourg. In seven cases, X inactivation ratio could be assessed by late replication or methylation assay. RESULTS: In three of seven cases (del Xp, dup Xp, t(X;A)), X inactivation ratio and phenotype were consistent. The four other cases showed discrepancies between phenotype and X inactivation pattern: mental retardation and dysmorphism in a case of balanced X-autosome translocation, schizophrenia and autism in two cases of XX maleness and MLS syndrome (microphthalmia with linear skin defects) in a case of Xp(21.3-pter) deletion. CONCLUSION: Discrepancies between X inactivation ratio and phenotype are not rare and can be due to gene disruption, position effect, complex microrearrangements, variable pattern of X inactivation in different tissues or fortuitous association. In this context, the prognostic value of X inactivation study in prenatal diagnosis will be discussed.
OBJECTIVE: X inactivation pattern in X chromosome rearrangements usually favor the less unbalanced cells. It is correlated to a normal phenotype, small size or infertility. We studied the correlation between phenotype and X inactivation ratio in patients with X structural anomalies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During the 1999-2005 period, 12 X chromosome rearrangements, including three prenatal cases, were diagnosed in the Laboratoire de Cytogénétique of Strasbourg. In seven cases, X inactivation ratio could be assessed by late replication or methylation assay. RESULTS: In three of seven cases (del Xp, dup Xp, t(X;A)), X inactivation ratio and phenotype were consistent. The four other cases showed discrepancies between phenotype and X inactivation pattern: mental retardation and dysmorphism in a case of balanced X-autosome translocation, schizophrenia and autism in two cases of XX maleness and MLS syndrome (microphthalmia with linear skin defects) in a case of Xp(21.3-pter) deletion. CONCLUSION: Discrepancies between X inactivation ratio and phenotype are not rare and can be due to gene disruption, position effect, complex microrearrangements, variable pattern of X inactivation in different tissues or fortuitous association. In this context, the prognostic value of X inactivation study in prenatal diagnosis will be discussed.