4.7 Article

Characterization of a 8q21.11 Microdeletion Syndrome Associated with Intellectual Disability and a Recognizable Phenotype

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 89, 期 2, 页码 295-301

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.06.012

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias of the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion of Spain [PI081187]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report eight unrelated individuals with intellectual disability and overlapping submicroscopic deletions of 8q21.11 (0.66-13.55 Mb in size). The deletion was familial in one and simplex in seven individuals. The phenotype was remarkably similar and consisted of a round face with full cheeks, a high forehead, ptosis, cornea opacities, an underdeveloped alae, a short philtrum, a cupid's bow of the upper lip, down-turned corners of the mouth, micrognathia, low-set and prominent ears, and mild finger and toe anomalies (camptodactyly, syndactyly, and broadening of the first rays). Intellectual disability, hypotonia, decreased balance, sensorineural hearing loss, and unusual behavior were frequently observed. A high-resolution oligonucleotide array showed different proximal and distal breakpoints in all of the individuals. Sequencing studies in three of the individuals revealed that proximal and distal breakpoints were located in unique sequences with no apparent homology. The smallest region of overlap was a 539.7 kb interval encompassing three genes: a Zinc Finger Homeobox 4 (ZFHX4), one microRNA of unknown function, and one nonfunctional pseudogen. ZFHX4 encodes a transcription factor expressed in the adult human brain, skeletal muscle, and liver. It has been suggested as a candidate gene for congenital bilateral isolated ptosis. Our results suggest that the 8q21.11 submicroscopic deletion represents a clinically recognizable entity and that a haploinsufficient gene or genes within the minimal deletion region could underlie this syndrome.

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

4.7
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