4.1 Article

12q21 Microdeletion in a fetus with Meckel syndrome involving CEP290/MKS4

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS
卷 56, 期 10, 页码 580-583

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2013.08.002

关键词

Ciliopathy; Gene deletion; CEP290; Meckel syndrome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report on a fetus with Meckel syndrome diagnosed during the 21st gestational week, hydrocephalus and bilateral hyperechogenic kidneys were then detected on ultrasonography. Fetal pathological examination showed facial dysmorphism, occipital meningoencephalocele, characteristic renal cysts, mild hepatic ductal dysplasia, hydrocephalus in association with extreme cerebellar vermis hypoplasia and brainstem anomalies. Molecular and cytogenetic analysis identified a paternally inherited CEP290/MKS4 (MIM611134) (12q21) nonsense mutation and a maternal 12q21 microdeletion. Two cases with such a mechanism have previously been described in the literature, one of them involves an inherited microdeletion. The observation of such cases highlights the existence of a pathogenic mechanism which involves deletion and point mutation, and illustrates how homozygosity can hide hemizygosity when usual sequencing methods are used. The identification of hemizygosity enables to determine precisely the molecular mechanism and to understand some phenotypic variations. As they act as complete loss of function allele, deletions might give indication on the severity of the associated point mutation. This clinical report highlights the importance of fetal pathology following termination of pregnancies in order to guide molecular analysis and the potential role of cytogenetic cryptic disorders in autosomal recessive disease. The use of polymorphic marker analysis in association with FISH or arrayCGH provided an accurate identification of molecular mechanisms, accurate genetic counseling and optimized strategy for next pregnancies or preimplantation diagnosis. (C) 2013 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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