4.5 Article

Whole-exome sequencing is a powerful approach for establishing the etiological diagnosis in patients with intellectual disability and microcephaly

期刊

BMC MEDICAL GENOMICS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12920-016-0167-8

关键词

Autosomal recessive inheritance; ASPM; BRCA2; CASK; DYRK1A; ERCC8; KIF11; Microcephaly; RAB3GAP1 RNASEH2B; RTTN; Whole-exome sequencing

资金

  1. University Medical Centre Groningen (Doelmatigheidsfonds)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Clinical and genetic heterogeneity in monogenetic disorders represents a major diagnostic challenge. Although the presence of particular clinical features may aid in identifying a specific cause in some cases, the majority of patients remain undiagnosed. Here, we investigated the utility of whole-exome sequencing as a diagnostic approach for establishing a molecular diagnosis in a highly heterogeneous group of patients with varied intellectual disability and microcephaly. Methods: Whole-exome sequencing was performed in 38 patients, including three sib-pairs, in addition to or in parallel with genetic analyses that were performed during the diagnostic work-up of the study participants. Results: In ten out of these 35 families (29 %), we found mutations in genes already known to be related to a disorder in which microcephaly is a main feature. Two unrelated patients had mutations in the ASPM gene. In seven other patients we found mutations in RAB3GAP1, RNASEH2B, KIF11, ERCC8, CASK, DYRK1A and BRCA2. In one of the sib-pairs, mutations were found in the RTTN gene. Mutations were present in seven out of our ten families with an established etiological diagnosis with recessive inheritance. Conclusions: We demonstrate that whole-exome sequencing is a powerful tool for the diagnostic evaluation of patients with highly heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual disability with microcephaly. Our results confirm that autosomal recessive disorders are highly prevalent among patients with microcephaly.

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

4.5
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