M A Spitz1, F Severac2,3, C Obringer4, S Baer1, N Le May4, N Calmels5, V Laugel6,7. 1. Service de Pédiatrie Spécialisée et Générale, Unité de Neurologie Pédiatrique, Hôpital de Hautepierre, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 2. Groupe Méthode en Recherche Clinique, Service de Santé Publique, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 3. Laboratoire de Biostatistique et d'Informatique Médicale, ICube, UMR 7357, Faculté de Médecine, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 4. Laboratoire de Génétique Médicale, Institut de Génétique Médicale d'Alsace, Faculté de Médecine de Strasbourg, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 5. Laboratoire de Diagnostic Génétique, Institut de Génétique Médicale d'Alsace, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 6. Service de Pédiatrie Spécialisée et Générale, Unité de Neurologie Pédiatrique, Hôpital de Hautepierre, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. vincent.laugel@chru-strasbourg.fr. 7. Laboratoire de Génétique Médicale, Institut de Génétique Médicale d'Alsace, Faculté de Médecine de Strasbourg, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. vincent.laugel@chru-strasbourg.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cockayne syndrome is a progressive multisystem genetic disorder linked to defective DNA repair and transcription. This rare condition encompasses a very wide spectrum of clinical severity levels ranging from severe prenatal onset to mild adult-onset subtypes. The rarity, complexity and variability of the disease make early diagnosis and severity assessment difficult. Based on similar approaches in other neurodegenerative disorders, we propose to validate diagnostic and severity scores for Cockayne syndrome. METHODS: Clinical, imaging and genetic data were retrospectively collected from 69 molecularly confirmed CS patients. A clinical diagnostic score and a clinical-radiological diagnostic score for CS were built using a multivariable logistic regression model with a stepwise variable selection procedure. A severity score for CS was designed on five items (head circumference, growth failure, neurosensorial signs, motor autonomy, communication skills) and validated by comparison with classical predefined severity subtypes of CS. RESULTS: Short stature, enophtalmos, hearing loss, cataracts, cutaneous photosensitivity, frequent dental caries, enamel hypoplasia, morphological abnormalities of the teeth, areflexia and spasticity were included in the clinical diagnostic score as being the most statistically relevant criteria. Appropriate weights and thresholds were assigned to obtain optimal sensitivity and specificity (95.7% and 86.4% respectively). The severity score was shown to be able to quantitatively differentiate classical predefined subtypes of CS and confirmed the continuous distribution of the clinical presentations in CS. Longitudinal follow-up of the severity score was able to reflect the natural course of the disease. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic and severity scores for CS will facilitate early diagnosis and longitudinal evaluation of future therapeutic interventions. Prospective studies will be needed to confirm these findings.
BACKGROUND:Cockayne syndrome is a progressive multisystem genetic disorder linked to defective DNA repair and transcription. This rare condition encompasses a very wide spectrum of clinical severity levels ranging from severe prenatal onset to mild adult-onset subtypes. The rarity, complexity and variability of the disease make early diagnosis and severity assessment difficult. Based on similar approaches in other neurodegenerative disorders, we propose to validate diagnostic and severity scores for Cockayne syndrome. METHODS: Clinical, imaging and genetic data were retrospectively collected from 69 molecularly confirmed CSpatients. A clinical diagnostic score and a clinical-radiological diagnostic score for CS were built using a multivariable logistic regression model with a stepwise variable selection procedure. A severity score for CS was designed on five items (head circumference, growth failure, neurosensorial signs, motor autonomy, communication skills) and validated by comparison with classical predefined severity subtypes of CS. RESULTS: Short stature, enophtalmos, hearing loss, cataracts, cutaneous photosensitivity, frequent dental caries, enamel hypoplasia, morphological abnormalities of the teeth, areflexia and spasticity were included in the clinical diagnostic score as being the most statistically relevant criteria. Appropriate weights and thresholds were assigned to obtain optimal sensitivity and specificity (95.7% and 86.4% respectively). The severity score was shown to be able to quantitatively differentiate classical predefined subtypes of CS and confirmed the continuous distribution of the clinical presentations in CS. Longitudinal follow-up of the severity score was able to reflect the natural course of the disease. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic and severity scores for CS will facilitate early diagnosis and longitudinal evaluation of future therapeutic interventions. Prospective studies will be needed to confirm these findings.
Authors: F J Marshall; E A de Blieck; J W Mink; L Dure; H Adams; S Messing; P G Rothberg; E Levy; T McDonough; J DeYoung; M Wang; D Ramirez-Montealegre; J M Kwon; D A Pearce Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-07-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: K A Henning; L Li; N Iyer; L D McDaniel; M S Reagan; R Legerski; R A Schultz; M Stefanini; A R Lehmann; L V Mayne; E C Friedberg Journal: Cell Date: 1995-08-25 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Angela Schulz; Temitayo Ajayi; Nicola Specchio; Emily de Los Reyes; Paul Gissen; Douglas Ballon; Jonathan P Dyke; Heather Cahan; Peter Slasor; David Jacoby; Alfried Kohlschütter Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marc C Patterson; Christian J Hendriksz; Mark Walterfang; Frederic Sedel; Marie T Vanier; Frits Wijburg Journal: Mol Genet Metab Date: 2012-05-08 Impact factor: 4.797
Authors: Brian T Wilson; Zornitza Stark; Ruth E Sutton; Sumita Danda; Alka V Ekbote; Solaf M Elsayed; Louise Gibson; Judith A Goodship; Andrew P Jackson; Wee Teik Keng; Mary D King; Emma McCann; Toshino Motojima; Jennifer E Murray; Taku Omata; Daniela Pilz; Kate Pope; Katsuo Sugita; Susan M White; Ian J Wilson Journal: Genet Med Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Francesco Muntoni; Joana Domingos; Adnan Y Manzur; Anna Mayhew; Michela Guglieri; Gautam Sajeev; James Signorovitch; Susan J Ward Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jerry R Mendell; Zarife Sahenk; Kelly Lehman; Carrie Nease; Linda P Lowes; Natalie F Miller; Megan A Iammarino; Lindsay N Alfano; Amanda Nicholl; Samiah Al-Zaidy; Sarah Lewis; Kathleen Church; Richard Shell; Linda H Cripe; Rachael A Potter; Danielle A Griffin; Eric Pozsgai; Ashish Dugar; Mark Hogan; Louise R Rodino-Klapac Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Rayanne Damaj-Fourcade; Nicolas Meyer; Cathy Obringer; Nicolas Le May; Nadège Calmels; Vincent Laugel Journal: Front Genet Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: Nguyen Thuy Duong; Tran Huu Dinh; Britta S Möhl; Stefan Hintze; Do Hai Quynh; Duong Thi Thu Ha; Ngo Diem Ngoc; Vu Chi Dung; Noriko Miyake; Nong Van Hai; Naomichi Matsumoto; Peter Meinke Journal: Aging (Albany NY) Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 5.955