Prenatal identification of de novo marker chromosomes using micro-FISH approach

Mosaic small supernumerary marker chromosome 1 at amniocentesis: prenatal diagnosis, molecular genetic analysis and literature review

We present prenatal diagnosis and molecular cytogenetic analysis of mosaic small supernumerary marker chromosome 1 [sSMC(1)]. We review the literature of sSMC(1) at amniocentesis and chromosome 1p21.1-p12 duplication syndrome. We discuss the genotype-phenotype correlation of the involved genes of ALX3, RBM15, NTNG1, SLC25A24, GPSM2, TBX15 and NOTCH2 in this case.

Three new cases with a supernumerary ring chromosome 1

We report on three cases with a cytogenetically identical ring chromosome containing euchromatin from the long arm of chromosome 1 (r[1][::p11.1-->q21.1::]). Two cases were newborn males (Cases 1 and 2) and the third one was prenatally identified as female (Case 3). Mosaicism was present in all three cases in different degrees, i.e. 48%, 25% and 14% of the cells, respectively. Clinical signs and symptoms vary between the three cases. The results of our three cases are compared with those from the literature.

Small supernumerary marker chromosomes – progress towards a genotype-phenotype correlation

Small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMC) are still a major problem in clinical cytogenetics as they are too small to be characterized for their chromosomal origin by traditional banding techniques, but require molecular cytogenetic techniques for their identification. Apart from the correlation of about one third of the sSMC cases with a specific clinical picture, i.e. the i(18p), der(22), i(12p) (Pallister Killian syndrome) and inv dup(22) (cat-eye) syndromes, most of the remaining sSMC have not yet been correlated with clinical syndromes. Recently, we reviewed the available >1600 sSMC cases (Liehr T, sSMC homepage: http://mti-n.mti.uni-jena.de/~huwww/MOL_ZYTO/sSMC.htm). A total of 387 cases (including the 45 new cases reported here) have been molecularly cytogenetically characterized with regard to their chromosomal origin, the presence of euchromatin, heterochromatin and satellite material. Based on analysis of these cases we present the first draft of a basic genotype-phenotype correlation for sSMC for all human chromosomes apart from the chromosomes Y, 10, 11 and 13.

Supernumerary der(1) marker chromosome derived from a ring chromosome 1 which has retained the original centromere and euchromatin from 1q21.1 --> q21.3 with substantial loss of 1q12 heterochromatin in a female with dysmorphic features and psychomotoric developmental delay

We report on a 5.5-year-old girl with dysmorphic features and psychomotoric developmental delay with a mitotically stable supernumerary marker chromosome. The origin of the marker was identified by microdissection and reverse painting of marker DNA as the pericentromeric region of chromosome 1. Fine mapping by FISH with selected YAC or BAC clones identified no p-arm material on the marker. The marker has retained its original centromere and euchromatin from 1q21.1-q21.3 but only small remnants of the 1q12 heterochromatin. Furthermore, some FISH clones presented single signals on the marker and others presented double signals indicating a partial duplication within the marker. These observations suggest a multi-step origin of the marker most probably with ring formation as the first step.

Prenatal diagnosis of minute supernumerary marker chromosomes

The identification of supernumerary marker chromosomes (SMC) at prenatal diagnosis is problematic, particularly for the prediction of phenotype. The assessment of phenotypic risk is based on the size, morphology and origin of the SMC. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) characterization and family studies are also employed to aid in determining the significance of a prenatally ascertained SMC. Generally, SMC containing euchromatin are more likely to be associated with abnormal phenotypes and SMC without euchromatin are more likely to result in normal phenotypes. The smallest of SMC, minute SMC (minSMC) appear as dot-like or centric fragments and are particularly difficult to identify and characterize. Previous empirical observations suggested that the risk of phenotypic abnormality in prenatally ascertained minSMC was < or = 5%. We identified minSMC in chorionic villus samples (CVS) or amniocytes from 11 unrelated pregnancies. The chromosomal origin of each minSMC was identified by sequential FISH analysis with chromosome-specific centromere probes. Further FISH analysis with whole chromosome paint probes was undertaken to assess each minSMC for the presence or absence of euchromatin, since the presence of euchromatin may be associated with a higher risk of abnormality. Two minSMC were shown to have euchromatin. The first, a minSMC(12) was found in CVS but not confirmed in amniocytes, indicating confined placental mosaicism. The second, a minSMC derived from chromosome 19, was associated with ultrasound abnormalities. Apart from a case with mild speech delay, the remaining minSMC cases without detectable euchromatin had a normal outcome at birth and/or on longer term follow-up. Additional FISH analyses with a telomeric repeat probe showed no signal on any of the minSMC tested, suggesting that they were ring chromosomes in structure. These data further support the concept that minSMC containing euchromatin are more likely to be associated with an abnormal phenotype, although as more data are collected, this may vary by chromosome of origin. The absence of detectable euchromatin, while not guaranteeing a normal result, is most likely to have a normal outcome. The present report and previous studies do not yet allow any significant adjustment of the empirical < or = 5% risk estimate for minSMC identified at prenatal diagnosis. However, reporting of additional cases with characterization of the minSMC and particularly with long-term follow-up will, in time, allow for more accurate risk estimates and provide prognostic information.

Reverse painting highlights the origin of chromosome aberrations

Reverse chromosome painting, as the opposite of forward chromosome painting, means that an abnormal chromosome of interest is recovered by flow sorting or by chromosome microdissection, amplified and labelled by DOP-PCR and hybridized onto normal metaphases of optimal quality. This provides rapid and unequivocal information about the chromosomal origin on the aberrant chromosome in one hybridization. Not only will the specific chromosome(s) involved be identified, but also the subchromosomal origin, including the breakpoints. The method has been used for over 10 years and has proven to be very useful for resolving complex chromosome rearrangements in a variety of different applications, both as a research tool and for clinical purposes in pre- and postnatal diagnosis.

Characterization of a supernumerary ring chromosome 1 mosaicism in two cell systems by molecular cytogenetic techniques and review of the literature

We report on a 4-year-old boy with developmental delay and microcephaly with an additional small marker chromosome derived from chromosome 1 and detected in 14% of T-lymphocytes by conventional cytogenetics and in 9% of buccal smear cells by interphase FISH. Using molecular cytogenetic techniques, the marker chromosome was characterized as an extra ring chromosome consisting of euchromatic material from the proximal short arm of chromosome 1. We compare the cytogenetic data and the phenotype of our patient to those previously described cases with marker chromosome 1 mosaicism. We conclude that in addition to the straightforward molecular cytogenetic characterization of the euchromatic content of the ring chromosome, the investigation of a second cell system gives additional information about the tissue specific distribution of the supernumerary marker chromosome (SMC) and provides more reliable data for further karyotype/phenotype correlations and the prediction of the phenotypic outcome in prenatal cases.

A series of supernumerary small ring marker autosomes identified by FISH with chromosome probe arrays and literature review excluding chromosome 15

Seven supernumerary small ring marker autosomes were studied. The pantelomere probe (Oncor) in conjunction with scoring for dicentric rings was used to confirm ring morphology. The small rings were identified mainly by FISH with chromosome probe arrays (Cytocell) containing representations from all 24 chromosomes and the rings were derived from chromosomes 7, 8 (three cases), 11, 12, and 14. The effectiveness of the array methodology in identifying markers was tested. Microsatellite DNA data showed biparental disomy (BPD) was present for the rings from chromosomes 7 and 14 thereby excluding UPD, both were de novo but the ring 14 was of paternal origin. The literature on supernumerary small ring autosomes was reviewed excluding chromosome 15. The grade and distribution of mosaicism was invoked as the major determinant of the differences in phenotype and, in addition, variation was attributed to the possibility of different contributions from each chromosome arm. There are 88 published supernumerary small ring cases in total, with phenotypic data attributable to the respective rings in 77 cases and all chromosomes being represented except chromosome 17. Of the prenatally ascertained cases, where there was adequate phenotypic data, 30% had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the ring, and there were 44% familial cases in this group. Of the postnatally ascertained small rings, 75% had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the ring and there were 13% familial cases. This higher abnormality rate is concordant with the considerable ascertainment bias of this latter group and the prenatal data are recommended for genetic counseling. Although data are small there were some differences between the rings derived from different chromosomes. Chromosomes 3 and 8 demonstrate the extremes. Of the supernumerary small r(8) cases reviewed including the three presently described, 8/11 had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the marker but of the small r(3) cases, only 1/6 had an abnormal phenotype. Two of the present r(8) were studied with the GATA4 probe at 8p23.1. The r(8) in case 2 (patient moderately retarded) was comprised mostly of an intact 8p whereas the larger r(8) in case 3 (normal phenotype) was missing 8p23.1 --> pter and had more of 8q contributing to the ring. In other supernumerary rings postnatally ascertained, there is mostly insufficient data but there is an abnormal phenotype in 8/11 cases with multiple small rings, in 5/6 cases with r(20), and in 5/10 with r(1). A novel origin for supernumerary small rings is proposed: that they may originate from incompletely digested superfluous (haploid) pronuclei. The small rings presumptively so formed may occasionally be transfected into the zygote nucleus. The high proportion ( approximately 12.5%) of cases with multiple supernumerary small rings almost always of different centromeric origin is consistent with this concept.

Methodologies in cancer cytogenetics and molecular cytogenetics

Various types of cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic approaches, including conventional banding, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), fiber-FISH, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), matrix array CGH, chromosome microdissection, and microcell-mediated chromosome transfer are summarized. The rationale, advantage, and limitations of each approach are discussed with respect to research and clinical applications in human neoplasia.

Prenatal diagnosis: molecular genetics and cytogenetics

The technologies developed for the Human Genome Project, the recent surge of available DNA sequences resulting from it and the increasing pace of gene discoveries and characterization have all contributed to new technical platforms that have enhanced the spectrum of disorders that can be diagnosed prenatally. The importance of determining the disease-causing mutation or the informativeness of linked genetic markers before embarking upon a DNA-based prenatal diagnosis is, however, still emphasized. Different fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technologies provide increased resolution for the elucidation of structural chromosome abnormalities that cannot be resolved by more conventional cytogenetic analyses, including microdeletion syndromes, cryptic or subtle duplications and translocations, complex rearrangements involving many chromosomes, and marker chromosomes. Interphase FISH and the quantitative fluorescence polymerase chain reaction are efficient tools for the rapid prenatal diagnosis of selected aneuploidies, the latter being considered to be most cost-effective if analyses are performed on a large scale. There is some debate surrounding whether this approach should be employed as an adjunct to karyotyping or whether it should be used as a stand-alone test in selected groups of women.