Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a prevalent and extremely heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD) with a strong genetic component. In recent years, the clinical relevance of de novo mutations to the aetiology of ASD has been demonstrated. Current guidelines recommend chromosomal microarray (CMA) and a FMR1 testing as first-tier tests, but there is increasing evidence that support the use of NGS for the diagnosis of NDDs. Specifically in ASD, it has not been extensively evaluated and, thus, we performed and compared the clinical utility of CMA, FMR1 testing, and/or whole exome sequencing (WES) in a cohort of 343 ASD patients. We achieved a global diagnostic rate of 12.8% (44/343), the majority of them being characterised by WES (33/44; 75%) compared to CMA (9/44; 20.4%) or FMR1 testing (2/44; 4.5%). Taking into account the age at which genetic testing was carried out, we identified a causal genetic alteration in 22.5% (37/164) of patients over 5 years old, but only in 3.9% (7/179) of patients under this age. Our data evidence the higher diagnostic power of WES compared to CMA in the study of ASD and support the implementation of WES as a first-tier test for the genetic diagnosis of this disorder, when there is no suspicion of fragile X syndrome.
A subset of families with co-dominant or recessive inheritance has been described in several genes previously associated with dominant inheritance. Those recessive families displayed similar, more severe, or even completely different phenotypes to their dominant counterparts. We report the first patients harboring homozygous disease-related variants in three genes that were previously associated with dominant inheritance: a loss-of-function variant in the CACNA1A gene and two missense variants in the RET and SLC20A2 genes, respectively. All patients presented with a more severe clinical phenotype than the corresponding typical dominant form. We suggest that co-dominant or recessive inheritance for these three genes could explain the phenotypic differences from those documented in their cognate dominant phenotypes. Our results reinforce that geneticists should be aware of the possible different forms of inheritance in genes when WES variant interpretation is performed. We also evidence the need to refine phenotypes and inheritance patterns associated with genes in order to avoid failures during WES analysis and thus, raising the WES diagnostic capacity in the benefit of patients.
Neurofibromatosis type I (NF1) is one of the most common genetic disorders in humans. NF1, a tumor predisposition syndrome, is caused by heterozygous pathogenic variants in the NF1 gene. Molecular genetic testing of NF1 is complex, especially because of the presence of a high number of partial pseudogenes, some of them with a high percentage of sequence identity. In this study, we have analyzed the largest cohort of NF1 Spanish patients (150 unrelated individuals suspected of having NF1 and 53 relatives, making a total of 203 individuals). Mutation analysis of the entire coding region was performed in all unrelated index patients. Additionally, the Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) test of the NF1 gene and SPRED1 gene analysis (sequencing and MLPA test) was performed in some of the negative patients for NF1 point mutations. When fulfilling the National Institutes of Health (NIH) criterion for the clinical diagnosis of NF1, the detection rate was 79%. Among the 80 genetically confirmed NF1 probands, we detected 69 different pathogenic variants. Two mutations (3%) were gross deletions of the whole gene, the remaining 78 mutations (97%) were small changes spread among all NF1 exons. Among these 69 different mutations detected, 42 mutations were described elsewhere, and 27 mutations were novel mutations. When segregation was studied, 67% of mutations resulted de novo variants. No genetic mosaicism was detected on patients' parents.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.