4.6 Article

Comorbidity landscape of the Danish patient population affected by chromosome abnormalities

期刊

GENETICS IN MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 11, 页码 2485-2495

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41436-019-0519-9

关键词

comorbidity; inverse comorbidity; chromosome abnormality; Down syndrome; mosaicism

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk Foundation [NNF14CC0001]
  2. MedBioinformatics EU Horizon 2020 grant [634143]
  3. BioMedBridges EU FP7 Capacities Specific Programme grant [284209]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Most chromosome abnormality patients require long-term clinical care. Awareness of mosaicism and comorbidities can potentially guide such health care. Here we present a populationwide analysis of direct and inverse comorbidities affecting patients with chromosome abnormalities. Methods: We extracted direct and inverse comorbidities for the 11 most prevalent chromosome abnormalities from the Danish National Patient Registry (covering 6.9 million patients hospitalized between 1994 and 2015): trisomy 13, 18, and 21, Klinefelter (47, XXY), triple X, XYY, Turner (45,X), Wolf-Hirschhorn, Cri-duchat, Angelman, and Fragile X syndromes (FXS). We also performed four sub-analyses for male/female Down syndrome (DS) and FXS and non-mosaic/mosaic DS and Turner syndrome. Results: Our data cover 9,003 patients diagnosed with at least one chromosome abnormality. Each abnormality showed a unique comorbidity signature, but clustering of their profiles underlined common risk profiles for chromosome abnormalities with similar genetic backgrounds. We found that DS had a decreased risk for three inverse cancer comorbidities (lung, breast, and skin) and that male FXS and non-mosaic patients have a much more severe phenotype than female FXS and mosaic patients, respectively. Conclusion: Our study underlines the importance of considering mosaicism, sex, and the associated comorbidity profiles of chromosome abnormalities to guide long-term health care of affected patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据