We report 281 individuals carrying a pathogenic recurrent NF1

SUMMARYBackgroundBilateral perisylvian polymicrogyria (BPP), the most common form of regional polymicrogyria, causes the congenital bilateral perisylvian syndrome, featuring oromotor dysfunction, cognitive impairment and epilepsy. BPP is etiologically heterogeneous, but only a few genetic causes have been reported. The aim of this study was to identify additional genetic etiologies of BPP and delineate their frequency in this patient population.MethodsWe performed child-parent (trio)-based whole exome sequencing (WES) on eight children with BPP. Following the identification of mosaic PIK3R2 mutations in two of these eight children, we performed targeted screening of PIK3R2 in a cohort of 118 children with BPP who were ascertained from 1980 until 2015 using two methods. First, we performed targeted sequencing of the entire PIK3R2 gene by single molecule molecular inversion probes (smMIPs) on 38 patients with BPP with normal-large head size. Second, we performed amplicon sequencing of the recurrent PIK3R2 mutation (p.Gly373Arg) on 80 children with various types of polymicrogyria including BPP. One additional patient underwent clinical WES independently, and was included in this study given the phenotypic similarity to our cohort. All patients included in this study were children (< 18 years of age) with polymicrogyria enrolled in our research program.FindingsUsing WES, we identified a mosaic mutation (p.Gly373Arg) in the regulatory subunit of the PI3K-AKT-MTOR pathway, PIK3R2, in two children with BPP. Of the 38 patients with BPP and normal-large head size who underwent targeted next generation sequencing by smMIPs, we identified constitutional and mosaic PIK3R2 mutations in 17 additional children. In parallel, one patient was found to have the recurrent PIK3R2 mutation by clinical WES. Seven patients had BPP alone, and 13 had BPP in association with features of the megalencephaly-polymicrogyria-polydactyly-hydrocephalus syndrome (MPPH). Nineteen patients had the same mutation (Gly373Arg), and one had a nearby missense mutation (p.Lys376Glu). Across the entire cohort, mutations were constitutional in 12 and mosaic in eight patients. Among mosaic patients, we observed substantial variation in alternate (mutant) allele levels ranging from 2·5% (10/377) to 36·7% (39/106) of reads, equivalent to 5–73·4% of cells analyzed. Levels of mosaicism varied from undetectable to 17·1% (37/216) of reads in blood-derived compared to 29·4% (2030/6889) to 43·3% (275/634) in saliva-derived DNA.InterpretationConstitutional and mosaic mutations in the PIK3R2 gene are associated with a spectrum of developmental brain disorders ranging from BPP with a normal head size to the megalencephaly-polymicrogyria-polydactyly-hydrocephalus syndrome. The phenotypic variability and low-level mosaicism challenging conventional molecular methods have important implications for genetic testing and counseling.

Background Disease severity is important when considering genes for inclusion on reproductive expanded carrier screening (ECS) panels. We applied a validated and previously published algorithm that classifies diseases into four severity categories (mild, moderate, severe, and profound) to 176 genes screened by ECS. Disease traits defining severity categories in the algorithm were then mapped to four severity‐related ECS panel design criteria cited by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Methods Eight genetic counselors (GCs) and four medical geneticists (MDs) applied the severity algorithm to subsets of 176 genes. MDs and GCs then determined by group consensus how each of these disease traits mapped to ACOG severity criteria, enabling determination of the number of ACOG severity criteria met by each gene. Results Upon consensus GC and MD application of the severity algorithm, 68 (39%) genes were classified as profound, 71 (40%) as severe, 36 (20%) as moderate, and one (1%) as mild. After mapping of disease traits to ACOG severity criteria, 170 out of 176 genes (96.6%) were found to meet at least one of the four criteria, 129 genes (73.3%) met at least two, 73 genes (41.5%) met at least three, and 17 genes (9.7%) met all four. Conclusion This study classified the severity of a large set of Mendelian genes by collaborative clinical expert application of a trait‐based algorithm. Further, it operationalized difficult to interpret ACOG severity criteria via mapping of disease traits, thereby promoting consistency of ACOG criteria interpretation.

The goal of this practice resource is to provide genetic counselors and other healthcare professionals with a resource to reference when providing genetic counseling services to individuals and families undergoing evaluation for neurofibromatosis (NF) or who have received a diagnosis of NF, including neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2), and schwannomatosis (SWN). Currently, there is no known standard approach to genetic counseling in NF. This resource may be useful in a number of different healthcare settings. 1.1.1 | Pediatric or adult genetic counseling session (general genetics or specialty clinic) These sessions may occur in conjunction with a diagnosing provider, such as a physician or nurse practitioner. • Diagnostic evaluation based on clinical features and/or family history.

Study Objective: Girls with Turner syndrome with Y-chromosome material (TS + Y) are assumed to have nonfunctional gonads with increased tumor risk, therefore prophylactic gonadectomy is recommended at diagnosis. In this study we aimed to determine rates of spontaneous thelarche (ST) and spontaneous menarche (SM), and prevalence of gonadal tumor and malignancy in girls with TS + Y, to further inform discussions about gonadectomy. Design: Retrospective review of clinical and pathology data. Setting: Multicenter study involving 4 United States children's hospitals. Participants: Patients included those with a genetically proven diagnosis of TS + Y and phenotypically female genitourinary exam.

Objective: Discrepancies between cfDNA and ultrasound predicted fetal sex occur, possibly indicating disorders/differences of sex development (DSDs). Among expectant/recent parents, this study assessed cfDNA knowledge/use, fetal sex determination attitudes/behaviors, general knowledge of DSD, and possible psychological impact of discrepancy between fetal sex on cfDNA and ultrasound. Method: Parents were surveyed about fetal sex determination methods, knowledge of cfDNA and DSD, distress related to possible cfDNA inaccuracy. Results: Of 916 respondents, 44% were aware of possible discrepancy between cfDNA and ultrasound, 22% were aware of DSD. 78% and 75% would be upset and worried, respectively, with results showing fetal sex discrepancy. Most (67%) revealed predicted fetal sex before delivery. 38% were offered cfDNA. Of those revealing fetal sex, 24% used cfDNA results, 71% ultrasound, and 7% both. cfDNA users were more frequently aware of possible discrepancy between cfDNA and ultrasound (76% vs 41%, P < .0001), but not of DSD (29% vs 23%, P = .29). Conclusion: Fetal sex determination is favored, and cfDNA is frequently used for predicting fetal chromosomal sex. Many parents are unaware of possible discrepancies between cfDNA and ultrasound, and potential for DSD. Most would be

No abstract

Genetic counselors believe fertility preservation and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) discussions to be a part of their role when counseling BRCA1/2 mutation-positive patients. This study is the first to explore reproductive endocrinologists’ (REI) practices and attitudes regarding involvement of genetic counselors in the care of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers seeking fertility preservation and PGD. A survey was mailed to 1000 REIs from Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility (SREI), an American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) affiliate group. A 14.5 % response rate was achieved; data was analyzed using SPSS software. The majority of participating REIs were found to recommend genetic counseling to cancer patients considering fertility preservation (82 %) and consult with a genetic counselor regarding PGD for hereditary cancer syndromes (92 %). Additionally, REIs consult genetic counselors regarding PGD patient counseling (88 %), genetic testing (78 %), and general genetics questions (66 %). Two areas genetic counselors may further aid REIs are: elicitation of family history, which is useful to determine fertility preservation and PGD intervention timing (32 % of REIs utilize a cancer family history to determine intervention timing); and, interpretation of variants of uncertain significance (VOUS) as cancer panel genetic testing becomes more common (36 % of REIs are unfamiliar with VOUS). Given our findings, the Oncofertility Consortium® created an online resource for genetic counselors focused on fertility preservation education and communication strategies.