Schluth C, Cossée M, Girard-Lemaire F, Carelle N, Dollfus H, Jeandidier E, Flori E. Phenotype in X chromosome rearrangements: pitfalls of X inactivation study.
ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2006;
55:29-36. [PMID:
16690229 DOI:
10.1016/j.patbio.2006.04.003]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2006] [Accepted: 04/05/2006] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
X inactivation pattern in X chromosome rearrangements usually favor the less unbalanced cells. It is correlated to a normal phenotype, small size or infertility. We studied the correlation between phenotype and X inactivation ratio in patients with X structural anomalies.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
During the 1999-2005 period, 12 X chromosome rearrangements, including three prenatal cases, were diagnosed in the Laboratoire de Cytogénétique of Strasbourg. In seven cases, X inactivation ratio could be assessed by late replication or methylation assay.
RESULTS
In three of seven cases (del Xp, dup Xp, t(X;A)), X inactivation ratio and phenotype were consistent. The four other cases showed discrepancies between phenotype and X inactivation pattern: mental retardation and dysmorphism in a case of balanced X-autosome translocation, schizophrenia and autism in two cases of XX maleness and MLS syndrome (microphthalmia with linear skin defects) in a case of Xp(21.3-pter) deletion.
CONCLUSION
Discrepancies between X inactivation ratio and phenotype are not rare and can be due to gene disruption, position effect, complex microrearrangements, variable pattern of X inactivation in different tissues or fortuitous association. In this context, the prognostic value of X inactivation study in prenatal diagnosis will be discussed.
Collapse