Toader DO, Ursu R, Bacalbasa N, Cretoiu D, Pop LG, Balescu I, Gherghiceanu F, Furtunescu F, Radavoi D, Radoi V. Identification of a New Variant of PUF60 Gene: Case Presentation and Literature Review.
Cancer Diagn Progn 2021;
1:213-219. [PMID:
35399315 PMCID:
PMC8962785 DOI:
10.21873/cdp.10029]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2021] [Accepted: 07/11/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM
The aim of the study was to report the case of a 5-month-old boy with a complex prenatal and neonatal symptomatology diagnosed with a "de novo" pathogenic variant of PUF60 gene.
CASE REPORT
Our hospital, undertook the antenatal and postnatal care of a 27-year-old pregnant lady. This was her second baby with a previously healthy boy. During her routine first-trimester anomaly scan, increased nuchal translucency was noticed. Multiple anomalies were seen throughout her subsequent antenatal visits. This triggered a sequence of tests, examinations and differential diagnosis. The final diagnosis was made at 5 months postpartum following the result of the whole exome sequence, which described a variant of unknown clinical significance (VUS, class 3 variant) in the PUF60 gene. We are mindful that changing the classification of a variant of unknown significance is challenging and requires supporting and robust criteria. Considering clinical symptomatology produced by the pathogenic mutation in the PUF gene, the identified c.1640A>G variant may be categorized as likely pathogenic.
CONCLUSION
Our case adds new insights on the pathology and the underlying process involved in the PUF60 variant spectrum disorders. It also highlights the limits of current prenatal tests.
Collapse