Literature DB >> 21915152

Parental insertional balanced translocations are an important cause of apparently de novo CNVs in patients with developmental anomalies.

Beata A Nowakowska1, Nicole de Leeuw, Claudia Al Ruivenkamp, Birgit Sikkema-Raddatz, John A Crolla, Reinhilde Thoelen, Marije Koopmans, Nicolette den Hollander, Arie van Haeringen, Anne-Marie van der Kevie-Kersemaekers, Rolph Pfundt, Hanneke Mieloo, Ton van Essen, Bert B A de Vries, Andrew Green, Willie Reardon, Jean-Pierre Fryns, Joris R Vermeesch.   

Abstract

In several laboratories, genome-wide array analysis has been implemented as the first tier diagnostic test for the identification of copy number changes in patients with mental retardation and/or congenital anomalies. The identification of a pathogenic copy number variant (CNV) is not only important to make a proper diagnosis but also to enable the accurate estimation of the recurrence risk to family members. Upon the identification of a de novo interstitial loss or gain, the risk recurrence is considered very low. However, this risk is 50% if one of the parents is carrier of a balanced insertional translocation (IT). The apparently de novo imbalance in a patient is then the consequence of the unbalanced transmission of a derivative chromosome involved in an IT. To determine the frequency with which insertional balanced translocations would be the origin of submicroscopic imbalances, we investigated the potential presence of an IT in a consecutive series of 477 interstitial CNVs, in which the parental origin has been tested by FISH, among 14,293 patients with developmental abnormalities referred for array. We demonstrate that ITs underlie ~2.1% of the apparently de novo, interstitial CNVs, indicating that submicroscopic ITs are at least sixfold more frequent than cytogenetically visible ITs. This risk estimate should be taken into account during counseling, and warrant parental and proband FISH testing wherever possible in patients with an apparently de novo, interstitial aberration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21915152      PMCID: PMC3260932          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2011.157

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  14 in total

1.  Familial insertion (3;5)(q25.3;q22.1q31.3) with deletion or duplication of chromosome region 5q22.1-5q31.3 in ten unbalanced carriers.

Authors:  Y H J M Arens; J J M Engelen; L C P Govaerts; C M van Ravenswaay; W H Loneus; J C M van Lent-Albrechts; M van der Blij-Philipsen; A J H Hamers; C T R M Schrander-Stumpel
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 2.  Intrachromosomal insertions: a case report and a review.

Authors:  K Madan; F H Menko
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.132

3.  Estimates of the frequency of chromosome abnormalities detectable in unselected newborns using moderate levels of banding.

Authors:  P A Jacobs; C Browne; N Gregson; C Joyce; H White
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 6.318

4.  Trisomy of chromosome 16p13.3 due to an unbalanced insertional translocation into chromosome 22p13.

Authors:  Thomy de Ravel; Peter Aerssens; Joris R Vermeesch; Jean-Pierre Fryns
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2005 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  Diagnostic genome profiling in mental retardation.

Authors:  Bert B A de Vries; Rolph Pfundt; Martijn Leisink; David A Koolen; Lisenka E L M Vissers; Irene M Janssen; Simon van Reijmersdal; Willy M Nillesen; Erik H L P G Huys; Nicole de Leeuw; Dominique Smeets; Erik A Sistermans; Ton Feuth; Conny M A van Ravenswaaij-Arts; Ad Geurts van Kessel; Eric F P M Schoenmakers; Han G Brunner; Joris A Veltman
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 6.  Interchromosomal insertions. Identification of five cases and a review.

Authors:  J O Van Hemel; H J Eussen
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.132

7.  Recurrence, submicroscopic complexity, and potential clinical relevance of copy gains detected by array CGH that are shown to be unbalanced insertions by FISH.

Authors:  Nicholas J Neill; Blake C Ballif; Allen N Lamb; Sumit Parikh; J Britt Ravnan; Roger A Schultz; Beth S Torchia; Jill A Rosenfeld; Lisa G Shaffer
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 9.043

8.  A familial complex chromosome translocation resulting in duplication of 6p25.

Authors:  J R Vermeesch; R Thoelen; Jean Pierre Fryns
Journal:  Ann Genet       Date:  2004 Jul-Sep

Review 9.  Interstitial 11q deletion derived from a maternal ins(4;11)(p14;q24.2q25): a patient report and review.

Authors:  Laura J C M Van Zutven; Yolande van Bever; Carolien C M Van Nieuwland; Gido C M Huijbregts; Diane Van Opstal; Anne R M von Bergh; Linda J A Corel; Dick Tibboel; Cokkie H Wouters; Pino J Poddighe
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.802

10.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of chromosome abnormalities: implications from the outcome for couples with chromosomal rearrangements.

Authors:  M Simopoulou; J C Harper; E Fragouli; A Mantzouratou; B E Speyer; P Serhal; D M Ranieri; A Doshi; J Henderson; C H Rodeck; J D A Delhanty
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.050

View more
  27 in total

1.  Next-generation sequencing of duplication CNVs reveals that most are tandem and some create fusion genes at breakpoints.

Authors:  Scott Newman; Karen E Hermetz; Brooke Weckselblatt; M Katharine Rudd
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Chromothripsis and Duplications as Underappreciated Genomic Gremlins.

Authors:  Martin Poot
Journal:  Mol Syndromol       Date:  2020-12-07

3.  Large genomic insertion at the Shh locus results in hammer toes through enhancer adoption.

Authors:  Christina Paliou; Guillaume Andrey
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  De Novo Duplication of 7p21.1p22.2 in a Child with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Craniofacial Dysmorphism.

Authors:  Achandira M Udayakumar; Watfa Al-Mamari; Abeer Al-Sayegh; Adila Al-Kindy
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2015-08-24

Review 5.  Human Structural Variation: Mechanisms of Chromosome Rearrangements.

Authors:  Brooke Weckselblatt; M Katharine Rudd
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 11.639

Review 6.  Aniridia.

Authors:  Melanie Hingorani; Isabel Hanson; Veronica van Heyningen
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Balanced at First Sight, but in Reality out of Balance.

Authors:  Martin Poot
Journal:  Mol Syndromol       Date:  2021-09-13

8.  A Boy with an LCR3/4-Flanked 10q22.3q23.2 Microdeletion and Uncommon Phenotypic Features.

Authors:  E Petrova; C Neuner; T Haaf; M Schmid; J Wirbelauer; A Jurkutat; K Wermke; I Nanda; E Kunstmann
Journal:  Mol Syndromol       Date:  2013-11-02

Review 9.  Classical, Molecular, and Genomic Cytogenetics of the Pig, a Clinical Perspective.

Authors:  Brendan Donaldson; Daniel A F Villagomez; W Allan King
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 2.752

10.  An Apparently Balanced Complex Chromosome Rearrangement Involving Seven Breaks and Four Chromosomes in a Healthy Female and Segregation/Recombination in Her Affected Son.

Authors:  Ana Eduarda Campos; Carla Rosenberg; Ana Krepischi; Marina França; Vanessa Lopes; Viviane Nakano; Tânia Vertemati; Marcos Cochak; Michele Migliavacca; Fernanda Milanezi; Ana Cristina Sousa; Juliana Silva; Lígia Vieira; Priscilla Monfredini; Ana Carolina Palumbo; Jonathas Fernandes; Eduardo Perrone
Journal:  Mol Syndromol       Date:  2021-07-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.