4.2 Article

Cognitive-Behavioral Features of Children With Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome: Preliminary Report of 12 Cases

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.c.30185

Keywords

genetics; Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome; subtelomeric deletions; mental retardation; adaptive behavior; ADHD; autism; learning impairment; cognitive-behavioral profiles

Funding

  1. Fondation Jerome Lejeune, Paris. France

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As a subset of genetic abnormalities, subtelomeric deletions have been found in 7-10% of individuals with mental retardation (MR). One subtelomeric deletion, Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS), causes mild to severe MR, but the cognitive-behavioral features of individuals with WHS have not been studied systematically. To that end, we administered a comprehensive cognitive-behavioral battery to 12 children with WHS, ages 4-17 years, who also had some expressive language. Using the Stanford-Binet (4th Edition), we found cognitive deficits ranged from mild to severe, with mean IQ = 44.1. Interviewing parents with the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, we found mean adaptive behavior score (DQ) = 37.3, with females exhibiting slightly higher scores than males. Cognitive profiles indicated relative strengths in Verbal and Quantitative Reasoning. Adaptive behavior profiles noted significant relative strengths in the Socialization Domain. These cognitive-behavioral profiles differed from children with other subtelomeric deletion syndromes, 2q37 or 8p23. Attention deficits and hyperactivity (ADHD) were observed in 7/12 (58%) of the children we tested. One child attained a score on the Child Autism Rating Scale (CARS) suggestive of mild autism. We conclude that different genetic disorders, which cause MR, produce diverse cognitive-behavioral profiles. Consequently, cognitive-behavioral profiles of children with MR need to be assessed more comprehensively. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available