PURPOSE: Deletions of distal 9p are associated with trigonocephaly, mental retardation, dysmorphic facial features, cardiac anomalies, and abnormal genitalia. Previous studies identified a proposed critical region for the consensus phenotype in band 9p23, between 11.8 Mb and 16 Mb from the 9p telomere. Here we report 10 new patients with 9p deletions; 9 patients have clinical features consistent with 9p- syndrome, but possess terminal deletions smaller than most reported cases, whereas one individual lacks the 9p- phenotype and shows a 140-kb interstitial telomeric deletion inherited from his mother. METHODS: We combined fluorescence in situ hybridization and microarray analyses to delineate the size of each deletion. RESULTS: The deletion sizes vary from 800 kb to 12.4 Mb in our patients with clinically relevant phenotypes. Clinical evaluation and comparison showed little difference in physical features with regard to the deletion sizes. Severe speech and language impairment were observed in all patients with clinically relevant phenotypes. CONCLUSION: The smallest deleted region common to our patients who demonstrate a phenotype consistent with 9p- is <2 Mb of 9pter, which contains six known genes. These genes may contribute to some of the cardinal features of 9p deletion syndrome.
PURPOSE: Deletions of distal 9p are associated with trigonocephaly, mental retardation, dysmorphic facial features, cardiac anomalies, and abnormal genitalia. Previous studies identified a proposed critical region for the consensus phenotype in band 9p23, between 11.8 Mb and 16 Mb from the 9p telomere. Here we report 10 new patients with 9p deletions; 9 patients have clinical features consistent with 9p- syndrome, but possess terminal deletions smaller than most reported cases, whereas one individual lacks the 9p- phenotype and shows a 140-kb interstitial telomeric deletion inherited from his mother. METHODS: We combined fluorescence in situ hybridization and microarray analyses to delineate the size of each deletion. RESULTS: The deletion sizes vary from 800 kb to 12.4 Mb in our patients with clinically relevant phenotypes. Clinical evaluation and comparison showed little difference in physical features with regard to the deletion sizes. Severe speech and language impairment were observed in all patients with clinically relevant phenotypes. CONCLUSION: The smallest deleted region common to our patients who demonstrate a phenotype consistent with 9p- is <2 Mb of 9pter, which contains six known genes. These genes may contribute to some of the cardinal features of 9p deletion syndrome.
Authors: J B Ravnan; J H Tepperberg; P Papenhausen; A N Lamb; J Hedrick; D Eash; D H Ledbetter; C L Martin Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2005-09-30 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Giuseppe Merla; Cédric Howald; Charlotte N Henrichsen; Robert Lyle; Carine Wyss; Marie-Thérèse Zabot; Stylianos E Antonarakis; Alexandre Reymond Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2006-06-23 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Blake C Ballif; Scott G Sulpizio; Richard M Lloyd; Sara L Minier; Aaron Theisen; Bassem A Bejjani; Lisa G Shaffer Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2007-08-15 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Brigitte H W Faas; Nicole de Leeuw; Hanneke Mieloo; Jos Bruinenberg; Bert B A de Vries Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Lars Feuk; Aino Kalervo; Marita Lipsanen-Nyman; Jennifer Skaug; Kazuhiko Nakabayashi; Brenda Finucane; Danielle Hartung; Micheil Innes; Batsheva Kerem; Malgorzata J Nowaczyk; Joseph Rivlin; Wendy Roberts; Lili Senman; Anne Summers; Peter Szatmari; Virginia Wong; John B Vincent; Susan Zeesman; Lucy R Osborne; Janis Oram Cardy; Juha Kere; Stephen W Scherer; Katariina Hannula-Jouppi Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2006-09-27 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: C Biben; E Stanley; L Fabri; S Kotecha; M Rhinn; C Drinkwater; M Lah; C C Wang; A Nash; D Hilton; S L Ang; T Mohun; R P Harvey Journal: Dev Biol Date: 1998-02-15 Impact factor: 3.582
Authors: Xinyan Lu; Chad A Shaw; Ankita Patel; Jiangzhen Li; M Lance Cooper; William R Wells; Cathy M Sullivan; Trilochan Sahoo; Svetlana A Yatsenko; Carlos A Bacino; Pawel Stankiewicz; Zhishu Ou; A Craig Chinault; Arthur L Beaudet; James R Lupski; Sau W Cheung; Patricia A Ward Journal: PLoS One Date: 2007-03-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yue Luo; Karen E Hermetz; Jodi M Jackson; Jennifer G Mulle; Anne Dodd; Karen D Tsuchiya; Blake C Ballif; Lisa G Shaffer; Jannine D Cody; David H Ledbetter; Christa L Martin; M Katharine Rudd Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2011-07-04 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Érika L Freitas; Susan M Gribble; Milena Simioni; Társis P Vieira; Roseane L Silva-Grecco; Marly A S Balarin; Elena Prigmore; Ana C Krepischi-Santos; Carla Rosenberg; Karoly Szuhai; Arie van Haeringen; Nigel P Carter; Vera Lúcia Gil-da-Silva-Lopes Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2011-09-21 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Felippe Borlot; Brigid M Regan; Anne S Bassett; D James Stavropoulos; Danielle M Andrade Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Peter Spazzapan; Eric Arnaud; Genevieve Baujat; Mathilde Nizon; Valerie Malan; Francis Brunelle; Federico Di Rocco Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Patricia L Heard; Erika M Carter; Analisa C Crandall; Courtney Sebold; Daniel E Hale; Jannine D Cody Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Michela Barbaro; Antonio Balsamo; Britt Marie Anderlid; Anne Grethe Myhre; Monia Gennari; Annalisa Nicoletti; Maria Carla Pittalis; Mikael Oscarson; Anna Wedell Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Daniel L Di Bartolo; Mohamed El Naggar; Renius Owen; Trilochan Sahoo; Fred Gilbert; Venkat R Pulijaal; Susan Mathew Journal: Mol Cytogenet Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 2.009
Authors: Farmaditya E P Mundhofir; Willy M Nillesen; Bregje W M Van Bon; Dominique Smeets; Rolph Pfundt; Gaby van de Ven-Schobers; Martina Ruiterkamp-Versteeg; Tri I Winarni; Ben C J Hamel; Helger G Yntema; Sultana M H Faradz Journal: Indian J Hum Genet Date: 2013-04