Karyotyping of Lymphocytes and Epithelial Cells of Distinct Embryonic Origin Does Not Help to Predict the Turner Syndrome Features

Background: In Turner syndrome (TS), fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) karyotyping offers an alternative to classical karyotyping. Objective: We tested the added value of FISH karyotyping from lymphocytes (mesodermal origin), buccal cells (ectodermal origin), and a rear-tongue smear (endodermal origin) to determine the 45,X cell line fraction and its impact on patient phenotype. Design and Patients: Classical karyotyping and three FISH assays were done in 153 girls and women previously diagnosed with TS in four university hospitals. The 45,X cell line fraction was determined for each method and correlated with the major phenotypic signs. Results: Classical karyotyping identified 45,X/46,XX mosaicism in 77/153 subjects (50%), 45,X monosomy in 52/153 (34%), and other karyotypes in 24/153 (16%). FISH from lymphocytes verified 45,X in 47/52 original cases, whereas 4/52 had 45,X/46,XX and 1/52 45,X/47,XYY mosaicism. The 45,X cell line fraction was higher in FISH from lymphocytes compared to classical karyotyping (median 86.4% vs. 70.0%; p < 0.001), while there was no difference for FISH from buccal or rear-tongue smear cells. The mean 45,X cell line fraction was more abundant in patients with several of the characteristic phenotypic signs compared to patients without them (p < 0.01), but the predictive power was insufficient. Conclusion: FISH analysis confirmed the findings of classical karyotyping; only a few 45,X monosomy cases were reclassified as mosaics. The 45,X cell line fraction did not show clinically meaningful prediction of the phenotype. FISH analysis of buccal or rear-tongue epithelial cells may be a non-inferior, less invasive alternative to classical karyotyping.

Automated summary

This study compared FISH karyotyping with classical karyotyping in Turner syndrome patients and found that FISH analysis can determine the fraction of 45,X cell line, but it lacks predictive power for the phenotype. Additionally, FISH analysis of buccal or rear-tongue epithelial cells may be a non-inferior, less invasive alternative to classical karyotyping.