Cytogenetically detected inversions are generally assumed to be copy number and phenotypically neutral events. While nonallelic homologous recombination is thought to play a major role, recent data suggest the involvement of other molecular mechanisms in inversion formation. Using a combination of short-read whole-genome sequencing (WGS), 10X Genomics Chromium WGS, droplet digital polymerase chain reaction and array comparative genomic hybridization we investigated the genomic structure of 18 large unique cytogenetically detected chromosomal inversions and achieved nucleotide resolution of at least one chromosomal inversion junction for 13/18 (72%). Surprisingly, we observed that seemingly copy number neutral inversions can be accompanied by a copynumber gain of up to 350 kb and local genomic complexities (3/18, 17%). In the resolved

Aguiar et al. Somatic Mutation Burden of Hepatoblastomas mutational signature presented an unspecific pattern with an increase of C>A mutations. Overall, we present here novel candidate genes for hepatoblastoma, with evidence that CX3CL1/CX3CR1 chemokine signaling pathway is likely involved with progression, besides reporting specific mutational signatures.

No abstract

Primary liver cancers are rare in children, and the most common type is hepatoblastoma (HB), an embryonal tumor with histological features that resemble different stages of liver cell differentiation. However, mainly because of its rarity, molecular data on HB tumorigenesis remain scarce. This article reviews the current knowledge regarding genetic and epigenetic alterations reported in HB cases, with emphasis on the recent findings of next-generation sequencing studies.

STUDY QUESTION Is there an (epi)genetic basis in patients with central precocious puberty (CPP) associated with multiple anomalies that unmasks underlying mechanisms or reveals novel genetic findings related to human pubertal control? SUMMARY ANSWER In a group of 36 patients with CPP associated with multiple phenotypes, pathogenic or likely pathogenic (epi)genetic defects were identified in 12 (33%) patients, providing insights into the genetics of human pubertal control. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY A few studies have described patients with CPP associated with multiple anomalies, but without making inferences on causalities of CPP. Genetic-molecular studies of syndromic cases may reveal disease genes or mechanisms, as the presentation of such patients likely indicates a genetic disorder. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This translational study was based on a genetic-molecular analysis, including genome-wide high throughput methodologies, for searching structural or sequence variants implicated in CPP and DNA methylation analysis of candidate regions. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS A cohort of 197 patients (188 girls) with CPP without structural brain lesions was submitted to a detailed clinical evaluation, allowing the selection of 36 unrelated patients (32 girls) with CPP associated with multiple anomalies. Pathogenic allelic variants of genes known to cause monogenic CPP (KISS1R, KISS1, MKRN3 and DLK1) had been excluded in the entire cohort (197 patients). All selected patients with CPP associated with multiple anomalies (n = 36) underwent methylation analysis of candidate regions and chromosomal microarray analysis. A subset (n = 9) underwent whole-exome sequencing, due to presenting familial CPP and/or severe congenital malformations and neurocognitive abnormalities. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Among the 36 selected patients with CPP, the more prevalent associated anomalies were metabolic, growth and neurocognitive conditions. In 12 (33%) of them, rare genetic abnormalities were identified: six patients presented genetic defects in loci known to be involved with CPP (14q32.2 and 7q11.23), whereas the other six presented defects in candidate genes or regions. In detail, three patients presented hypomethylation of DLK1/MEG3:IG-DMR (14q32.2 disruption or Temple syndrome), resulting from epimutation (n = 1) or maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 (n = 2). Seven patients presented pathogenic copy number variants: three with de novo 7q11.23 deletions (Williams–Beuren syndrome), three with inherited Xp22.33 deletions, and one with de novo 1p31.3 duplication. Exome sequencing revealed potential pathogenic variants in two patients: a sporadic female case with frameshift variants in TNRC6B and AREL1 and a familial male case with a missense substitution in UGT2B4 and a frameshift deletion in MKKS. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The selection of patients was based on a retrospective clinical characterization, lacking a longitudinal inclusion of consecutive patients. In addition, future studies are needed, showing the long-term (mainly reproductive) outcomes in the included patients, as most of them are not in adult life yet. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The results highlighted the relevance of an integrative clinical-genetic approach in the elucidation of mechanisms and factors involved in pubertal control. Chromosome 14q32.2 disruption indicated the loss of imprinting of DLK1 as a probable mechanism of CPP. Two other chromosomal regions (7q11.23 and Xp22.33) represented new candidate loci potentially involved in this disorder of pubertal timing. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported by grant number 2018/03198-0 (to A.P.M.C.) and grant number 2013/08028-1 (to A.C.V.K) from the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), and grant number 403525/2016-0 (to A.C.L.) and grant number 302849/2015-7 (to A.C.L.) and grant number 141625/2016-3 (to A.C.V.K) from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). The authors have nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.

No abstract

Summary Current studies estimate that 1–3% of females with unexplained intellectual disability (ID) present de novo splice site, nonsense, frameshift, or missense mutations in the DDX3X protein (DEAD-Box Helicase 3 X-Linked). However, the cellular and molecular mechanisms by which DDX3X mutations impair brain development are not fully comprehended. Here, we show that the ID-linked missense mutation L556S renders DDX3X prone to aggregation. By using a combination of biophysical assays and imaging approaches, we demonstrate that this mutant assembles solid-like condensates and amyloid-like fibrils. Although we observed greatly reduced expression of the mutant allele in a patient who exhibits skewed X inactivation, this appears to be enough to sequestrate healthy proteins into solid-like ectopic granules, compromising cell function. Therefore, our data suggest ID-linked DDX3X L556S mutation as a disorder arising from protein misfolding and aggregation.

Chromoanagenesis is a descriptive term that encompasses classes of catastrophic mutagenic processes that generate localized and complex chromosome rearrangements in both somatic and germline genomes. Herein, we describe a 5-year-old female presenting with a constellation of clinical features consistent with a clinical diagnosis of Coffin–Siris syndrome 1 (CSS1). Initial G-banded karyotyping detected a 90-Mb pericentric and a 47-Mb paracentric inversion on a single chromosome. Subsequent analysis of short-read whole-genome sequencing data and genomic optical mapping revealed additional inversions, all clustered on chromosome 6, one of them disrupting ARID1B for which haploinsufficiency leads to the CSS1 disease trait (MIM:135900). The aggregate structural variant data show that the resolved, the resolved derivative chromosome architecture presents four de novo inversions, one pericentric and three paracentric, involving six breakpoint junctions in what appears to be a shuffling of genomic material on this chromosome. Each junction was resolved to nucleotide-level resolution with mutational signatures suggestive of non-homologous end joining. The disruption of the gene ARID1B is shown to occur between the fourth and fifth exon of the canonical transcript with subsequent qPCR studies confirming a decrease in ARID1B expression in the patient versus healthy controls. Deciphering the underlying genomic architecture of chromosomal rearrangements and complex structural variants may require multiple technologies and can be critical to elucidating the molecular etiology of a patient’s clinical phenotype or resolving unsolved Mendelian disease cases.