Genetics of pubertal delay

Clinical presentation of congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in males with delayed puberty according to genetic etiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis after reclassification of gene variants

STUDY QUESTION

Which phenotypes can be confidently linked to a genetic etiology in males with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH) resulting in absent or arrested puberty?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In this systematic review and reclassification of the disease-causing potential of gene variants using the recommendations of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP), we found that absent or arrested puberty in males with CHH was linked to 93 genes, of which 29 were unequivocally disease-causing.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The number of genes and phenotype characterizations associated with CHH in males has rapidly increased since the advent of next-generation sequencing technologies; however, the quality of the evidence for the interpretation of the causal relationship of gene variants is limited due to the lack of systematic criteria applied to the assessment of the pathogenic potential of the variants.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We performed a systematic review of original articles indexed in PubMed until 5 October 2022 and using the search terms '(('hypogonadotropic hypogonadism' OR Kallmann) AND (sequencing OR mutation OR variant))' limited to 'Humans' and 'English'.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

After two investigators undertook the literature search independently, titles and abstracts of all records were reviewed by four of the authors to identify those articles to be included in the full-text review. Clinical data and the association with gene variants were extracted from males with delayed or arrested puberty due to CHH according to the article authors' criteria. Raw sequence variant information was used to reevaluate their pathogenic potential applying the ACMG/AMP guidelines for variant classification with InterVar. Subsequently, we considered the phenotype specificity criteria for sequence variant pathogenicity classification, based on curated genes associated with CHH, and classified patients into three categories: with monogenic disease-causing variants in genes associated with CHH, with variants in genes whose causality is unclear, and with variants that are not disease-causing.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

From a total of 1083 records, we included 245 publications with 775 male patients with CHH resulting in absent or arrested puberty, carrying 1001 variants in 93 genes. Gene variants were detected by Sanger sequencing in 61.8% of the cases and by next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies in the rest. After variant reclassification of causality, 278 individuals were not considered to have a bona fide disease-causing gene variant, and 497 patients were reclassified as carrying at least one disease-causing variant associated with CHH. They carried 503 different disease-causing variants in 29 genes. Spontaneous puberty was absent in 85.5% and arrested in 14.5% of the 497 individuals with CHH carrying bona fide disease-causing variants. In males with absent puberty (complete hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism), FGFR1 and ANOS1 were the most frequently affected genes, accounting for 53.5% of the disease-causing variants. In males with incomplete spontaneous puberty (partial hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism), variants in FGFR1, NR0B1, and GNRHR were found in 70.3% of the cases. Micropenis, cryptorchidism and/or low testicular volume, considered 'red flags' for the diagnosis of CHH, were found in less than 30% of males, with cryptorchidism being more frequently observed in association with variants in FGFR1, ANOS1, KISS1R, SOX10, and GNRH1, and micropenis being more prevalent in patients with variants in TACR3, KISS1R, or GNRH1. Clinical manifestations in non-reproductive organs were found in 39.8% of the patients with bona fide disease-causing variants.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Because we included studies going back to the initial genetic reports of patients with CHH, results obtained by Sanger sequencing represent a significant proportion of the whole sample, which may be biased by the use of a candidate gene strategy. A subanalysis of cases studied by NGS modified the results only slightly.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This comprehensive synthesis will help clinicians in the guidance of reverse phenotyping once the precise genetic diagnosis is established, and researchers in the design of functional studies to clarify the role of specific sequence variants in the etiology of male CHH. A genetic etiology of CHH in males with absent or arrested puberty should be considered even in the absence of micropenis, cryptorchidism, and/or low testicular volume.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was partially funded by grants PICT I-A-2018-02972 of Fondo de Promoción Científica y Técnica (FONCYT), PICT A-CAT III2021-73 of Fondo Argentino Sectorial (FONARSEC) and Proyectos de Redes Federales de Alto Impacto 2023 #3 of Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Argentina. Competing interests: None declared.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

None declared.

Hypogonadotropic Hypogonadism

Delayed puberty is defined as absent testicular enlargement in boys or breast development in girls at an age that is 2 to 2.5 SDS later than the mean age at which these events occur in the population (traditionally, 14 years in boys and 13 years in girls). One cause of delayed/absent puberty is hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH), which refers to inadequate hypothalamic/pituitary function leading to deficient production of sex steroids in males and females. Individuals with HH typically have normal gonads, and thus HH differs from hypergonadotropic hypogonadism, which is associated with primary gonadal insufficiency.

SEMA6A drives GnRH neuron-dependent puberty onset by tuning median eminence vascular permeability

Innervation of the hypothalamic median eminence by Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone (GnRH) neurons is vital to ensure puberty onset and successful reproduction. However, the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying median eminence development and pubertal timing are incompletely understood. Here we show that Semaphorin-6A is strongly expressed by median eminence-resident oligodendrocytes positioned adjacent to GnRH neuron projections and fenestrated capillaries, and that Semaphorin-6A is required for GnRH neuron innervation and puberty onset. In vitro and in vivo experiments reveal an unexpected function for Semaphorin-6A, via its receptor Plexin-A2, in the control of median eminence vascular permeability to maintain neuroendocrine homeostasis. To support the significance of these findings in humans, we identify patients with delayed puberty carrying a novel pathogenic variant of SEMA6A. In all, our data reveal a role for Semaphorin-6A in regulating GnRH neuron patterning by tuning the median eminence vascular barrier and thereby controlling puberty onset.

Key features of puberty onset and progression can help distinguish self-limited delayed puberty from congenital hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism

Introduction

Delayed puberty (DP) is a frequent concern for adolescents. The most common underlying aetiology is self-limited DP (SLDP). However, this can be difficult to differentiate from the more severe condition congenital hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (HH), especially on first presentation of an adolescent patient with DP. This study sought to elucidate phenotypic differences between the two diagnoses, in order to optimise patient management and pubertal development.

Methods

This was a study of a UK DP cohort managed 2015-2023, identified through the NIHR clinical research network. Patients were followed longitudinally until adulthood, with a definite diagnosis made: SLDP if they had spontaneously completed puberty by age 18 years; HH if they had not commenced (complete, cHH), or had commenced but not completed puberty (partial, pHH), by this stage. Phenotypic data pertaining to auxology, Tanner staging, biochemistry, bone age and hormonal treatment at presentation and during puberty were retrospectively analysed.

Results

78 patients were included. 52 (66.7%) patients had SLDP and 26 (33.3%) patients had HH, comprising 17 (65.4%) pHH and 9 (34.6%) cHH patients. Probands were predominantly male (90.4%). Male SLDP patients presented with significantly lower height and weight standard deviation scores than HH patients (height p=0.004, weight p=0.021). 15.4% of SLDP compared to 38.5% of HH patients had classical associated features of HH (micropenis, cryptorchidism, anosmia, etc. p=0.023). 73.1% of patients with SLDP and 43.3% with HH had a family history of DP (p=0.007). Mean first recorded luteinizing hormone (LH) and inhibin B were lower in male patients with HH, particularly in cHH patients, but not discriminatory. There were no significant differences identified in blood concentrations of FSH, testosterone or AMH at presentation, or in bone age delay.

Discussion

Key clinical markers of auxology, associated signs including micropenis, and serum inhibin B may help distinguish between SLDP and HH in patients presenting with pubertal delay, and can be incorporated into clinical assessment to improve diagnostic accuracy for adolescents. However, the distinction between HH, particularly partial HH, and SLDP remains problematic. Further research into an integrated framework or scoring system would be useful in aiding clinician decision-making and optimization of treatment.  .

An Approach to the Patient With Delayed Puberty

Pediatric endocrinologists often evaluate and treat youth with delayed puberty. Stereotypically, these patients are 14-year-old young men who present due to lack of pubertal development. Concerns about stature are often present, arising from gradual shifts to lower height percentiles on the population-based, cross-sectional curves. Fathers and/or mothers may have also experienced later than average pubertal onset. In this review, we will discuss a practical clinical approach to the evaluation and management of youth with delayed puberty, including the differential diagnosis and key aspects of evaluation and management informed by recent review of the existing literature. We will also discuss scenarios that pose additional clinical challenges, including: (1) the young woman whose case poses questions regarding how presentation and approach differs for females vs males; (2) the 14-year-old female or 16-year-old young man who highlight the need to reconsider the most likely diagnoses, including whether idiopathic delayed puberty can still be considered constitutional delay of growth and puberty at such late ages; and finally (3) the 12- to 13-year-old whose presentation raises questions about whether age cutoffs for the diagnosis and treatment of delayed puberty should be adjusted downward to coincide with the earlier onset of puberty in the general population.