Ana Rodríguez-Muñoz1,2,3, Belén García-Bohórquez1,2, Patricia Udaondo4, Ana Hervás-Ontiveros4, David Salom1,3,5, Elena Aller1,2,3,6, Teresa Jaijo1,2,3,6, Gema García-García1,2,3, José Millán1,2,3. 1. Molecular, Cellular and Genomics Biomedicine, Health Research Institute La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 2. Joint Unit of Rare Diseases IIS La Fe-CIPF, Valencia, Spain. 3. Biomedical Research Network of Rare Diseases (CIBERER), Spain. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 5. Department of Ophthalmology Hospital de Manises, Valencia, Spain; and. 6. Unit of Genetics, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To highlight the challenge of correct reproductive and therapeutic counseling in complex pedigrees with different inherited retinal dystrophies (IRD). METHODS: Two hundred eight patients diagnosed with nonsyndromic IRD underwent full ophthalmologic examination and molecular analysis using targeted next-generation sequencing. RESULTS: Five families (4%) carried mutations in more than one gene that contribute to different IRD. Family fRPN-NB had a dominant mutation in SNRNP200, which was present in nine affected individuals and four unaffected, and a mutation in RP2 among 11 family members. Family fRPN-142 carried a mutation in RPGR that cosegregated with the disease in all affected individuals. In addition, the proband also harbored two disease-causing mutations in the genes BEST1 and SNRNP200. Family fRPN-169 beared compound heterozygous mutations in USH2A and a dominant mutation in RP1. Genetic testing of fRPN-194 determined compound heterozygous mutations in CNGA3 and a dominant mutation in PRPF8 only in the proband. Finally, fRPN-219 carried compound heterozygous mutations in the genes ABCA4 and TYR. CONCLUSION: These findings reinforce the complexity of IRD and underscore the need for the combination of high-throughput genetic testing and clinical characterization. Because of these features, the reproductive and therapeutic counseling for IRD must be approached with caution.
PURPOSE: To highlight the challenge of correct reproductive and therapeutic counseling in complex pedigrees with different inherited retinal dystrophies (IRD). METHODS: Two hundred eight patients diagnosed with nonsyndromic IRD underwent full ophthalmologic examination and molecular analysis using targeted next-generation sequencing. RESULTS: Five families (4%) carried mutations in more than one gene that contribute to different IRD. Family fRPN-NB had a dominant mutation in SNRNP200, which was present in nine affected individuals and four unaffected, and a mutation in RP2 among 11 family members. Family fRPN-142 carried a mutation in RPGR that cosegregated with the disease in all affected individuals. In addition, the proband also harbored two disease-causing mutations in the genes BEST1 and SNRNP200. Family fRPN-169 beared compound heterozygous mutations in USH2A and a dominant mutation in RP1. Genetic testing of fRPN-194 determined compound heterozygous mutations in CNGA3 and a dominant mutation in PRPF8 only in the proband. Finally, fRPN-219 carried compound heterozygous mutations in the genes ABCA4 and TYR. CONCLUSION: These findings reinforce the complexity of IRD and underscore the need for the combination of high-throughput genetic testing and clinical characterization. Because of these features, the reproductive and therapeutic counseling for IRD must be approached with caution.