Disorders of Sex Development in Individuals Harbouring MAMLD1 Variants: WES and Interactome Evidence of Oligogenic Inheritance

Clinical characteristics and genetic expansion of 46,XY disorders of sex development children in a Chinese prospective study

Diagnosis and management strategy of disorders of sex development (DSD) are difficult and various due to heterogeneous phenotype and genotype. Under widespread use of genomic sequencing technologies, multiple genes and mechanisms have been identified and proposed as genetic causes of 46,XY DSD. In this study, 178 46,XY DSD patients were enrolled and underwent gene sequencing (either whole-exome sequencing or targeted panel gene sequencing). Detailed clinical phenotype and genotype information were summarized which showed that the most common clinical manifestations were micropenis (56.74%, 101/178), cryptorchidism (34.27%, 61/178), and hypospadias (17.42%, 31/178). Androgen synthesis/action disorders and idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism were the most frequent clinical diagnoses, accounting, respectively, for 40.90 and 21.59%. From all next-generation sequencing results, 103 candidate variants distributed across 32 genes were identified in 88 patients. The overall molecular detection rate was 49.44% (88/178), including 35.96% (64/178) pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants and 13.48% (24/178) variants of uncertain significance. Of all, 19.42% (20/103) variants were first reported in 46,XY DSD patients. Mutation c.680G>A (p.R227Q) on SRD5A2 (steroid 5-alpha-reductase 2) (36.67%, 11/30) was a hotspot mutation in the Chinese population. Novel candidate genes related to DSD (GHR (growth hormone receptor) and PHIP (pleckstrin homology domain-interacting protein)) were identified. Overall, this was a large cohort of 46,XY DSD patients with a common clinical classification and phenotype spectrum of Chinese patients. Targeted gene panel sequencing covered most of the genes contributing to DSD, whereas whole-exome sequencing detected more candidate genes.

Pathogenic variations in MAML2 and MAMLD1 contribute to congenital hypothyroidism due to dyshormonogenesis by regulating the Notch signalling pathway

BACKGROUND

In several countries, thyroid dyshormonogenesis is more common than thyroid dysgenesis in patients with congenital hypothyroidism (CH). However, known pathogenic genes are limited to those directly involved in hormone biosynthesis. The aetiology and pathogenesis of thyroid dyshormonogenesis remain unknown in many patients.

METHODS

To identify additional candidate pathogenetic genes, we performed next-generation sequencing in 538 patients with CH and then confirmed the functions of the identified genes in vitro using HEK293T and Nthy-ori 3.1 cells, and in vivo using zebrafish and mouse model organisms.

RESULTS

We identified one pathogenic MAML2 variant and two pathogenic MAMLD1 variants that downregulated canonical Notch signalling in three patients with CH. Zebrafish and mice treated with N-[N-(3,5-difluorophenacetyl)-l-alanyl]-S-phenylglycine t-butylester, a γ-secretase inhibitor exhibited clinical manifestations of hypothyroidism and thyroid dyshormonogenesis. Through organoid culture of primary mouse thyroid cells and transcriptome sequencing, we demonstrated that Notch signalling within thyroid cells directly affects thyroid hormone biosynthesis rather than follicular formation. Additionally, these three variants blocked the expression of genes associated with thyroid hormone biosynthesis, which was restored by HES1 expression. The MAML2 variant exerted a dominant-negative effect on both the canonical pathway and thyroid hormone biosynthesis. MAMLD1 also regulated hormone biosynthesis through the expression of HES3, the target gene of the non-canonical pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified three mastermind-like family gene variants in CH and revealed that both canonical and non-canonical Notch signalling affected thyroid hormone biosynthesis.

Genetic reanalysis of patients with a difference of sex development carrying the NR5A1/SF-1 variant p.Gly146Ala has discovered other likely disease-causing variations

NR5A1/SF-1 (Steroidogenic factor-1) variants may cause mild to severe differences of sex development (DSD) or may be found in healthy carriers. The NR5A1/SF-1 c.437G>C/p.Gly146Ala variant is common in individuals with a DSD and has been suggested to act as a susceptibility factor for adrenal disease or cryptorchidism. Since the allele frequency is high in the general population, and the functional testing of the p.Gly146Ala variant revealed inconclusive results, the disease-causing effect of this variant has been questioned. However, a role as a disease modifier is still possible given that oligogenic inheritance has been described in patients with NR5A1/SF-1 variants. Therefore, we performed next generation sequencing (NGS) in 13 DSD individuals harboring the NR5A1/SF-1 p.Gly146Ala variant to search for other DSD-causing variants and clarify the function of this variant for the phenotype of the carriers. Panel and whole-exome sequencing was performed, and data were analyzed with a filtering algorithm for detecting variants in NR5A1- and DSD-related genes. The phenotype of the studied individuals ranged from scrotal hypospadias and ambiguous genitalia in 46,XY DSD to opposite sex in both 46,XY and 46,XX. In nine subjects we identified either a clearly pathogenic DSD gene variant (e.g. in AR) or one to four potentially deleterious variants that likely explain the observed phenotype alone (e.g. in FGFR3, CHD7). Our study shows that most individuals carrying the NR5A1/SF-1 p.Gly146Ala variant, harbor at least one other deleterious gene variant which can explain the DSD phenotype. This finding confirms that the NR5A1/SF-1 p.Gly146Ala variant may not contribute to the pathogenesis of DSD and qualifies as a benign polymorphism. Thus, individuals, in whom the NR5A1/SF-1 p.Gly146Ala gene variant has been identified as the underlying genetic cause for their DSD in the past, should be re-evaluated with a NGS method to reveal the real genetic diagnosis.

Diagnostic approach in 46, XY DSD: an endocrine society of bengal (ESB) consensus statement

OBJECTIVES

46, XY difference/disorder of sex development (DSD) is a relatively uncommon group of heterogeneous disorders with varying degree of underandrogenization of male genitalia. Such patients should be approached systematically to reach an aetiological diagnosis. However, we lack, at present, a clinical practice guideline on diagnostic approach in 46, XY DSD from this part of the globe. Moreover, debate persists regarding the timing and cut-offs of different hormonal tests, performed in these cases. The consensus committee consisting of 34 highly experienced endocrinologists with interest and experience in managing DSD discussed and drafted a consensus statement on the diagnostic approach to 46, XY DSD focussing on relevant history, clinical examination, biochemical evaluation, imaging and genetic analysis.

CONTENT

The consensus was guided by systematic reviews of existing literature followed by discussion. An initial draft was prepared and distributed among the members. The members provided their scientific inputs, and all the relevant suggestions were incorporated. The final draft was approved by the committee members.

SUMMARY

The diagnostic approach in 46, XY DSD should be multidisciplinary although coordinated by an experienced endocrinologist. We recommend formal Karyotyping, even if Y chromosome material has been detected by other methods. Meticulous history taking and thorough head-to-toe examination should initially be performed with focus on external genitalia, including location of gonads. Decision regarding hormonal and other biochemical investigations should be made according to the age and interpreted according to age-appropriate norms Although LC-MS/MS is the preferred mode of steroid hormone measurements, immunoassays, which are widely available and less expensive, are acceptable alternatives. All patients with 46, XY DSD should undergo abdominopelvic ultrasonography by a trained radiologist. MRI of the abdomen and/or laparoscopy may be used to demonstrate the Mullerian structure and/or to localize the gonads. Genetic studies, which include copy number variation (CNV) or molecular testing of a candidate gene or next generation sequencing then should be ordered in a stepwise manner depending on the clinical, biochemical, hormonal, and radiological findings.

OUTLOOK

The members of the committee believe that patients with 46, XY DSD need to be approached systematically. The proposed diagnostic algorithm, provided in the consensus statement, is cost effective and when supplemented with appropriate genetic studies, may help to reach an aetiological diagnosis in majority of such cases.

A New MAMLD1 Variant in an Infant With Microphallus and Hypospadias With Hormonal Pattern Suggesting Partial Hypogonadotropic Hypogonadism-Case Report

MAMLD1 (X chromosome) is one of the recognized genes related to different sex development. It is expressed in testis and ovaries and seems to be involved in fetal sex development and in adult reproductive function, including testosterone biosynthesis. However, its exact role remains unclear. Over 40 genetic variants have been described, mainly in male individuals and mostly associated with hypospadias. Although MAMLD1 has been shown to regulate the expression of the steroidogenic pathway, patients with MAMLD1 variants mostly show normal gonadal function and normal testosterone levels. Here we describe a patient (46,XY) with hypospadias and microphallus, with low testosterone and dihydrotestosterone (DHT) levels, and with inappropriately low values of luteinizing hormone (LH) during minipuberty. This hormonal pattern was suggestive of partial hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. A stimulation test with hCG (4 months) showed no significant increase in both testosterone and dihydrotestosterone concentrations. At 5 months of age, he was treated with intramuscular testosterone, and the penis length increased to 3.5 cm. The treatment was stopped at 6 months of age. Our gonadal function massive-sequencing panel detected a previously unreported nonsense variant in the MAMLD1 gene (c.1738C>T:p.Gln580Ter), which was classified as pathogenic. This MAMLD1 variant, predicting a truncated protein, could explain his genital phenotype. His hormonal profile (low testosterone, dihydrotestosterone, and LH concentrations) together with no significant increase of testosterone and DHT plasma concentrations (hCG test) highlight the potential role of this gene in the biosynthesis of testosterone during the fetal stage and minipuberty of the infant. Besides this, the LH values may suggest an involvement of MAMLD1 in the LH axis or a possible oligogenesis. It is the first time that a decrease in DHT has been described in a patient with an abnormal MAMLD1.

A systematic review of the validated monogenic causes of human male infertility: 2020 update and a discussion of emerging gene-disease relationships

BACKGROUND

Human male infertility has a notable genetic component, including well-established diagnoses such as Klinefelter syndrome, Y-chromosome microdeletions and monogenic causes. Approximately 4% of all infertile men are now diagnosed with a genetic cause, but a majority (60-70%) remain without a clear diagnosis and are classified as unexplained. This is likely in large part due to a delay in the field adopting next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, and the absence of clear statements from field leaders as to what constitutes a validated cause of human male infertility (the current paper aims to address this). Fortunately, there has been a significant increase in the number of male infertility NGS studies. These have revealed a considerable number of novel gene-disease relationships (GDRs), which each require stringent assessment to validate the strength of genotype-phenotype associations. To definitively assess which of these GDRs are clinically relevant, the International Male Infertility Genomics Consortium (IMIGC) has identified the need for a systematic review and a comprehensive overview of known male infertility genes and an assessment of the evidence for reported GDRs.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

In 2019, the first standardised clinical validity assessment of monogenic causes of male infertility was published. Here, we provide a comprehensive update of the subsequent 1.5 years, employing the joint expertise of the IMIGC to systematically evaluate all available evidence (as of 1 July 2020) for monogenic causes of isolated or syndromic male infertility, endocrine disorders or reproductive system abnormalities affecting the male sex organs. In addition, we systematically assessed the evidence for all previously reported possible monogenic causes of male infertility, using a framework designed for a more appropriate clinical interpretation of disease genes.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines up until 1 July 2020 for publications in English, using search terms related to 'male infertility' in combination with the word 'genetics' in PubMed. Next, the quality and the extent of all evidence supporting selected genes were assessed using an established and standardised scoring method. We assessed the experimental quality, patient phenotype assessment and functional evidence based on gene expression, mutant in-vitro cell and in-vivo animal model phenotypes. A final score was used to determine the clinical validity of each GDR, across the following five categories: no evidence, limited, moderate, strong or definitive. Variants were also reclassified according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics-Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines and were recorded in spreadsheets for each GDR, which are available at imigc.org.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome of this review was an overview of all known GDRs for monogenic causes of human male infertility and their clinical validity. We identified a total of 120 genes that were moderately, strongly or definitively linked to 104 infertility phenotypes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Our systematic review curates all currently available evidence to reveal the strength of GDRs in male infertility. The existing guidelines for genetic testing in male infertility cases are based on studies published 25 years ago, and an update is far overdue. The identification of 104 high-probability 'human male infertility genes' is a 33% increase from the number identified in 2019. The insights generated in the current review will provide the impetus for an update of existing guidelines, will inform novel evidence-based genetic testing strategies used in clinics, and will identify gaps in our knowledge of male infertility genetics. We discuss the relevant international guidelines regarding research related to gene discovery and provide specific recommendations to the field of male infertility. Based on our findings, the IMIGC consortium recommend several updates to the genetic testing standards currently employed in the field of human male infertility, most important being the adoption of exome sequencing, or at least sequencing of the genes validated in this study, and expanding the patient groups for which genetic testing is recommended.

MAMLD1 and Differences/Disorders of Sex Development: An Update

MAMLD1 (alias CXorf6) was first documented in 2006 as a causative gene of 46,XY differences/disorders of sex development (DSD). MAMLD1/Mamld1 is expressed in the fetal testis and is predicted to enhance the expression of several Leydig cell-specific genes. To date, hemizygous MAMLD1 variants have been identified in multiple 46,XY individuals with hypomasculinized external genitalia. Pathogenic MAMLD1 variants are likely to cause genital abnormalities at birth and are possibly associated with age-dependent deterioration of testicular function. In addition, some MAMLD1 variants have been identified in 46,XX individuals with ovarian dysfunction. However, recent studies have raised the possibility that MAMLD1 variants cause 46,XY DSD and ovarian dysfunction as oligogenic disorders. Unsolved issues regarding MAMLD1 include the association between MAMLD1 variants and 46,XX testicular DSD, gene-gene interactions in the development of MAMLD1-mediated DSD, and intracellular functions of MAMLD1.

Oligogenic Causes of Human Differences of Sex Development: Facing the Challenge of Genetic Complexity

BACKGROUND

Deviations of intrauterine sex determination and differentiation and postnatal sex development can result in a very heterogeneous group of differences of sex development (DSD) with a broad spectrum of phenotypes. Variants in genes involved in sexual development cause different types of DSD, but predicting the phenotype from an individual's genotype and vice versa remains challenging.

SUMMARY

Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) studies suggested that oligogenic inheritance contributes to the broad manifestation of DSD phenotypes. This review will focus on possible oligogenic inheritance in DSD identified by NGS studies with a special emphasis on NR5A1variants as an example of oligogenic origin associated with a broad range of DSD phenotypes. We thoroughly searched the literature for evidence regarding oligogenic inheritance in DSD diagnosis with NGS technology and describe the challenges to interpret contribution of these genes to DSD phenotypic variability and pathogenicity. Key Messages: Variants in common DSD genes like androgen receptor (AR), mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinase 1 (MAP3K1), Hydroxy-Delta-5-Steroid Dehydrogenase 3 Beta- And Steroid Delta-Isomerase 2 (HSD3B2), GATA Binding Protein 4 (GATA4), zinc finger protein friend of GATA family member 2 (ZFPM2), 17b-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 3 (HSD17B3), mastermind-like domain-containing protein 1 (MAMLD1), and nuclear receptor subfamily 5 group A member 1 (NR5A1) have been detected in combination with additional variants in related genes in DSD patients with a broad range of phenotypes, implying a role of oligogenic inheritance in DSD, while still awaiting proof. Use of NGS approach for genetic diagnosis of DSD patients can reveal more complex genetic traits supporting the concept of oligogenic cause of DSD. However, assessing the pathomechanistic contribution of multiple gene variants on a DSD phenotype remains an unsolved conundrum.