Literature DB >> 18580690

Infant hearing loss and connexin testing in a diverse population.

Lisa A Schimmenti1, Ariadna Martinez, Milhan Telatar, Chih-Hung Lai, Nina Shapiro, Michelle Fox, Berta Warman, Matthew McCarra, Barbara Crandall, Yvonne Sininger, Wayne W Grody, Christina G S Palmer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Previous studies of connexin-related hearing loss have typically reported on mixed age groups or adults. To further address epidemiology and natural history of connexin-related hearing loss, we conducted a longitudinal study in an ethnically diverse cohort of infants and toddlers under 3 years of age. Our study compares infants with and without connexin-related hearing loss to examine differences in the prevalence of connexin and non-connexin-related hearing loss by ethnic origin, detection by newborn hearing screening, phenotype, neonatal risk factors, and family history. This is the first study to differentiate infants with and without connexin-related hearing loss.
METHODS: We enrolled 95 infants with hearing loss from whom both exons of Cx26 were sequenced and the Cx30 deletion was assayed. Demographic, family history, newborn hearing screening data, perinatal, and audiologic records were analyzed.
RESULTS: Genetic testing identified biallelic Cx26/30 hearing loss-associated variants in 24.7% of infants with a significantly lower prevalence in Hispanic infants (9.1%). Eighty-two infants underwent newborn hearing screening; 12 infants passed, 3 had connexin-related hearing loss. No differences in newborn hearing screening pass rate, neonatal complications, or hearing loss severity were detected between infants with and without connexin-related hearing loss. Family history correlates with connexin-related hearing loss.
CONCLUSIONS: Connexin-related hearing loss occurs in one quarter of infants in an ethnically diverse hearing loss population but with a lower prevalence in Hispanic infants. Not all infants with connexin-related hearing loss fail newborn hearing screening. Family history correlates significantly with connexin-related hearing loss. Genetic testing should not be deferred because of newborn complications. These results will have an impact on genetic testing for infant hearing loss.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18580690     DOI: 10.1097/gim.0b013e31817708fa

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  12 in total

1.  Deaf adults' reasons for genetic testing depend on cultural affiliation: results from a prospective, longitudinal genetic counseling and testing study.

Authors:  Patrick Boudreault; Erin E Baldwin; Michelle Fox; Loriel Dutton; Leeelle Tullis; Joyce Linden; Yoko Kobayashi; Jin Zhou; Janet S Sinsheimer; Yvonne Sininger; Wayne W Grody; Christina G S Palmer
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2010-05-20

2.  Vestibular dysfunction in DFNB1 deafness.

Authors:  Kelley M Dodson; Susan H Blanton; Katherine O Welch; Virginia W Norris; Regina L Nuzzo; Jacob A Wegelin; Ruth S Marin; Walter E Nance; Arti Pandya; Kathleen S Arnos
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 2.802

3.  A prospective, longitudinal study of the impact of GJB2/GJB6 genetic testing on the beliefs and attitudes of parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing infants.

Authors:  Christina G S Palmer; Ariadna Martinez; Michelle Fox; Jin Zhou; Nina Shapiro; Yvonne Sininger; Wayne W Grody; Lisa A Schimmenti
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.802

4.  Suggestion of GLYAT gene underlying variation of bone size and body lean mass as revealed by a bivariate genome-wide association study.

Authors:  Yan-Fang Guo; Li-Shu Zhang; Yong-Jun Liu; Hong-Gang Hu; Jian Li; Qing Tian; Ping Yu; Feng Zhang; Tie-Lin Yang; Yan Guo; Xiang-Lei Peng; Meng Dai; Wei Chen; Hong-Wen Deng
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Does an Otolaryngology-Specific Database Have Added Value? A Comparative Feasibility Analysis.

Authors:  Angela M Bellmunt; Rhonda Roberts; Walter T Lee; Kris Schulz; Melissa A Pynnonen; Matthew G Crowson; David Witsell; Kourosh Parham; Alan Langman; Andrea Vambutas; Sheila E Ryan; Jennifer J Shin
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 3.497

6.  The high frequency of GJB2 gene mutation c.313_326del14 suggests its possible origin in ancestors of Lithuanian population.

Authors:  Violeta Mikstiene; Audrone Jakaitiene; Jekaterina Byckova; Egle Gradauskiene; Egle Preiksaitiene; Birute Burnyte; Birute Tumiene; Ausra Matuleviciene; Laima Ambrozaityte; Ingrida Uktveryte; Ingrida Domarkiene; Tautvydas Rancelis; Loreta Cimbalistiene; Eugenijus Lesinskas; Vaidutis Kucinskas; Algirdas Utkus
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 2.797

7.  Factors influencing parental decision about genetics evaluation for their deaf or hard-of-hearing child.

Authors:  Christina G S Palmer; Jason T Lueddeke; Jin Zhou
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 8.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of 235delC mutation of GJB2 gene.

Authors:  Jun Yao; Yajie Lu; Qinjun Wei; Xin Cao; Guangqian Xing
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 5.531

9.  Cordblood-Based High-Throughput Screening for Deafness Gene of 646 Newborns in Jinan Area of China.

Authors:  Shou-Xia Li; Ding-Li Chen; Su-Bin Zhao; Li-Li Guo; Hai-Qin Feng; Xiao-Fang Zhang; Li-Li Ping; Zhi-Ming Yang; Cai-Xia Sun; Gen-Dong Yao
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 3.372

10.  Large scale newborn deafness genetic screening of 142,417 neonates in Wuhan, China.

Authors:  Zongjie Hao; Denggang Fu; Yang Ming; Jinlong Yang; Qi Huang; Weilong Lin; Huan Zhang; Bin Zhang; Aifen Zhou; Xijiang Hu; Cong Yao; Yunping Dong; Huijun Z Ring; Brian Z Ring
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.