[Microarray CGH: principle and use for constitutional disorders]

Neuronal migration genes and a familial translocation t (3;17): candidate genes implicated in the phenotype

BACKGROUND

While Miller-Dieker syndrome critical region deletions are well known delineated anomalies, submicroscopic duplications in this region have recently emerged as a new distinctive syndrome. So far, only few cases have been described overlapping 17p13.3 duplications.

METHODS

In this study, we report on clinical and cytogenetic characterization of two new cases involving 17p13.3 and 3p26 chromosomal regions in two sisters with familial history of lissencephaly. Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization and array Comparative Genomic Hybridization were performed.

RESULTS

A deletion including the critical region of the Miller-Dieker syndrome of at least 2,9 Mb and a duplication of at least 3,6 Mb on the short arm of chromosome 3 were highlighted in one case. The opposite rearrangements, 17p13.3 duplication and 3p deletion, were observed in the second case. This double chromosomal aberration is the result of an adjacent 1:1 meiotic segregation of a maternal reciprocal translocation t(3,17)(p26.2;p13.3).

CONCLUSIONS

17p13.3 and 3p26 deletions have a clear range of phenotypic features while duplications still have an uncertain clinical significance. However, we could suggest that regardless of the type of the rearrangement, the gene dosage and interactions of CNTN4, CNTN6 and CHL1 in the 3p26 and PAFAH1B1, YWHAE in 17p13.3 could result in different clinical spectrums.

[Contribution of chromosomal microarray analysis by a multidisciplinary prenatal diagnosis center]

OBJECTIVE

Chromosomal analysis by array CGH is a cytogenetic technique that has opened its application to prenatal diagnosis in recent years. The main objective of the study was to analyze the contribution for couples using chromosomal analysis by array CGH in a CPDPN.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2015 in a CPDPN. All the patients with array CGH analysis were included in the study. The analysis indications were CN≥3.5mm, ultrasound signs, intra-uterine growth retardation and fetal deaths. Data were collected in the prenatal diagnosis and genetic records.

RESULTS

In total, 155 patients underwent analysis by array CGH, which corresponds to 36% of patients with invasive sampling indication. Fifteen CGH analysis were positive which represents 9.6% of indications. None of those diagnoses was possible with standard karyotype. These positive results have changed the outcome of pregnancy and what to do for a future pregnancy in 54% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Array CGH enables a diagnostic gain despite a delicate interpretation and changes taking care of patients in future pregnancies. These results should be confirmed in a prospective multicenter study.

Phenotype and micro-array characterization of duplication 11q22.1-q25 and review of the literature

Partial duplication of 11q is related to several malformations like growth retardation, intellectual disability, hypoplasia of corpus callosum, short nose, palate defects, cardiac, urinary tract abnormalities and neural tube defects. We have studied the clinical and molecular characteristics of a patient with severe intellectual disabilities, dysmorphic features, congenital inguinal hernia and congenital cerebral malformation which is referred to as cytogenetic exploration. We have used FISH and array CGH analysis for a better understanding of the double chromosomic aberration involving a 7p microdeletion along with a partial duplication of 11q due to adjacent segregation of a paternal reciprocal translocation t(7;11)(p22;q21) revealed after banding analysis. The patient's karyotype formula was: 46,XY,der(7)t(7;11)(p22;q21)pat. FISH study confirmed these rearrangement and array CGH technique showed precisely the loss of at least 140 Kb on chromosome7p22.3pter and 33.4Mb on chromosome11q22.1q25. Dysmorphic features, severe intellectual disability and brain malformations could result from the 11q22.1q25 trisomy. Our study provides an additional case for better understanding and delineating the partial duplication 11q.