AIM: To identify cryptic subtelomeric rearrangement, a possible cause of idiopathic mental retardation by means of multiprobe telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization (T-FISH). METHODS: Hundred patients (median age 3.0 years) with mental retardation and dysmorphic features were screened using specific T-FISH probes. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and comparative genomic hybridization were used for the confirmation of results. RESULTS: Telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization revealed 11 subtelomeric abnormalities in 10 patients (10%; 95% CI, 5.0-17.5). Four of these had only a deletion of subtelomere 2q, which was apparently a normal variant. Among 6 true aberrations (6%; 95% CI, 2.5-12.5) we found 2 de novo subtelomeric deletions and 4 unbalanced subtelomeric rearrangements (one de novo). All clinically significant subtelomeric rearrangements were confirmed by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Comparative genomic hybridization was used to investigate the whole genome of patients in whom a subtelomeric anomaly was found, confirming some, but not all subtelomeric rearrangements. CONCLUSION: Telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification are both very useful and interchangeable methods for detection of unbalanced chromosome rearrangements, but T-FISH also detects balanced rearrangements. In our experiment the resolution power of comparative genomic hybridization was too low for subtelomeric screening compared with T-FISH and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification.
AIM: To identify cryptic subtelomeric rearrangement, a possible cause of idiopathic mental retardation by means of multiprobe telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization (T-FISH). METHODS: Hundred patients (median age 3.0 years) with mental retardation and dysmorphic features were screened using specific T-FISH probes. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and comparative genomic hybridization were used for the confirmation of results. RESULTS: Telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization revealed 11 subtelomeric abnormalities in 10 patients (10%; 95% CI, 5.0-17.5). Four of these had only a deletion of subtelomere 2q, which was apparently a normal variant. Among 6 true aberrations (6%; 95% CI, 2.5-12.5) we found 2 de novo subtelomeric deletions and 4 unbalanced subtelomeric rearrangements (one de novo). All clinically significant subtelomeric rearrangements were confirmed by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Comparative genomic hybridization was used to investigate the whole genome of patients in whom a subtelomeric anomaly was found, confirming some, but not all subtelomeric rearrangements. CONCLUSION: Telomere fluorescent in situ hybridization and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification are both very useful and interchangeable methods for detection of unbalanced chromosome rearrangements, but T-FISH also detects balanced rearrangements. In our experiment the resolution power of comparative genomic hybridization was too low for subtelomeric screening compared with T-FISH and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification.
Authors: S Solinas-Toldo; S Lampel; S Stilgenbauer; J Nickolenko; A Benner; H Döhner; T Cremer; P Lichter Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: C Shaw-Smith; R Redon; L Rickman; M Rio; L Willatt; H Fiegler; H Firth; D Sanlaville; R Winter; L Colleaux; M Bobrow; N P Carter Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Liesbeth Rooms; Edwin Reyniers; Rob van Luijk; Stefaan Scheers; Jan Wauters; Berten Ceulemans; Jenneke Van Den Ende; Yolande Van Bever; R Frank Kooy Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Lisenka E L M Vissers; Bert B A de Vries; Kazutoyo Osoegawa; Irene M Janssen; Ton Feuth; Chik On Choy; Huub Straatman; Walter van der Vliet; Erik H L P G Huys; Anke van Rijk; Dominique Smeets; Conny M A van Ravenswaaij-Arts; Nine V Knoers; Ineke van der Burgt; Pieter J de Jong; Han G Brunner; Ad Geurts van Kessel; Eric F P M Schoenmakers; Joris A Veltman Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2003-11-18 Impact factor: 11.025