4.1 Article

CNV analysis in 169 patients with bladder exstrophy-epispadias complex

期刊

BMC MEDICAL GENETICS
卷 17, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12881-016-0299-x

关键词

Bladder exstrophy-epispadias complex; Copy number variation; Genetic testing; EFNB1

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) [RE 1723/1-1]
  2. Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach-Stiftung
  3. DFG

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The bladder exstrophy-epispadias complex (BEEC) represents the severe end of the congenital uro-rectal malformation spectrum. Initial studies have implicated rare copy number variations (CNVs), including recurrent duplications of chromosomal region 22q11.21, in BEEC etiology. Methods: To detect further CNVs, array analysis was performed in 169 BEEC patients. Prior to inclusion, 22q11.21 duplications were excluded using multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Results: Following the application of stringent filter criteria, seven rare CNVs were identified: n = 4, not present in 1307 in-house controls; n = 3, frequency of <0.002 in controls. These CNVs ranged from 1 to 6.08 Mb in size. To identify smaller CNVs, relaxed filter criteria used in the detection of previously reported BEEC associated chromosomal regions were applied. This resulted in the identification of six additional rare CNVs: n = 4, not present in 1307 in-house controls; n = 2, frequency <0.0008 in controls. These CNVs ranged from 0.03-0.08 Mb in size. For 10 of these 13 CNVs, confirmation and segregation analyses were performed (5 of maternal origin; 5 of paternal origin). Interestingly, one female with classic bladder extrophy carried a 1.18 Mb duplication of 22q11.1, a chromosomal region that is associated with cat eye syndrome. Conclusions: A number of rare CNVs were identified in BEEC patients, and these represent candidates for further evaluation. Rare inherited CNVs may constitute modifiers of, or contributors to, multifactorial BEEC phenotypes.

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

4.1
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