Search

Background: Pathogenic PAK1 variants were described to be causative of neurodevelopmental disorder with macrocephaly, seizures, and speech delay. Herein, we present a de novo PAK1 variant combine with a de novo terminal 1q microdeletion in a Chinese pediatric patient, aiming to provide more insights into the underlying genotype–phenotype relationship. Methods: Enrolled in this study was a 6-year-old girl with clinical features of global developmental delay, severe intellectual disability, speech delay, and seizures from Quanzhou region of China. Karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) were performed to detect chromosome abnormalities in this family. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was performed to investigate additional genetic variants in this family. Results: No chromosomal abnormalities were elicited from the entire family by karyotype analysis. Further familial CMA results revealed that the patient had a de novo 2.7-Mb microdeletion (arr[GRCh37] 1q44(246,454,321_249,224,684) × 1]) in 1q44 region, which contains 14 OMIM genes, but did not overlap the reported smallest region of overlap (SRO) responsible for the clinical features in 1q43q44 deletion syndrome. In addition, WES result demonstrated a de novo NM_002576: c.251C > G (p.T84R) variant in PAK1 gene in the patient, which was interpreted as a likely pathogenic variant. Conclusion: In this study, we identify a novel PAK1 variant associated with a terminal 1q microdeletion in a patient with neurodevelopmental disorder. In addition, we believe that the main clinical features may ascribe to the pathogenic variant in PAK1 gene in the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An increasing number of techniques have been used for prenatal diagnosis of genetic abnormalities. Our initial objective was to explore the value of the BACs-on-Beads (BoBs) assay for the prenatal diagnosis of aneuploidies and microdeletion/microduplication syndromes in Quanzhou, Southeast China.Methods: A total of 1409 pregnant women with high-risk factors for chromosomal abnormalities admitted to Quanzhou Women's and Children's Hospital were enrolled in this study. BoBs assays and karyotype analyses were conducted for all subjects. Subsequently, chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed to validate the findings.Results: In this study, karyotype analysis and BoBs assay failed in 4 cases, and 2 cases, respectively. A total of 1403 cases were successfully analyzed, with success rates of 99.72% (1405/1409) and 99.85% (1407/1409) for karyotype analysis and Bobs assay, respectively. BoBs assay rapidly detected chromosomal aneuploidies in line with the karyotyping data. Additionally, 23 cases of microdeletions/microduplications were detected by BoBs assay but missed by karyotyping, including 22q11.2 microdeletions/microduplications, 5p15.32p15.33 microdeletion, Xp22.31 microdeletions/microduplications, Xq27.3 microdeletion, and Yp11.2 and Yq11.22q11.222 microduplication. In comparison with karyotyping, fewer mosaicisms were identified by BoBs assay. A high detection rate of chromosomal abnormalities was observed in the high-risk group during noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) (41.72%) and the abnormal ultrasound group (13.43%).Conclusions: BoBs assay can be used for the rapid and efficient prenatal diagnosis of common aneuploidies and microdeletion/microduplication syndromes. Moreover, the combined use of BoBs assay and karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis may allow for a more effective detection of chromosomal abnormalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Copy number variations (CNVs) can contribute to human phenotype, phenotypic diversity and disease susceptibility, while others may benign. In the current study, an attempt to investigate the pathogenicity of CNVs in chromosome Xp22.31 was explored. Methods: G-banding and SNP-array techniques were used to analyze chromosome karyotypes and CNVs in fetuses. Parents associate with five different pedigrees possessing high risk factors in pregnancy were considered with such parameters as advanced age, high risk of serological screening and ultrasound abnormalities. Results: The fetuses' amniotic fluid karyotypes were 46, XX and those of their parents with the five pedigrees revealed no abnormalities. Here, we noticed a series of individuals with Xp22.31 duplications ranging from 534.6 kb to 1.6 Mb. It was detected through SNP array that the fetuses in Pedigree 1 and 2 had ~ 600 kb duplications in the Xp22.31 region of their X chromosomes which contained two OMIM genes, HDHD1 (OMIM: 306480) and part of STS (OMIM: 300747). The fetuses of Pedigrees 3, 4 and 5 had 1.6 Mb duplication in the same chromosome which contained four OMIM genes: HDHD1 (OMIM: 306480), STS (OMIM: 300747), PNPLA4 (OMIM: 300102) and VCX (OMIM: 300229). The duplications in the fetuses of Pedigrees 1 and 5 were inherited from the non-phenotypic parents. Pedigrees 3 and 4 refused to perform parental verification. Finally, four of the five pedigrees continue towards pregnancy with no abnormalities being observed during followed-ups. Conclusion: Our study first showed duplications of Xp22.31 in Chinese population. Clinical and genetic investigation on five different pedigrees, we consider the duplication of these fragments as likely benign copy number variants (CNVs). We suggest that the duplications of Xp22.31 with recurrent duplication as a benign CNVs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]