Dyskeratosis congenita is a rare inherited bone marrow-failure syndrome characterized by abnormal skin pigmentation, nail dystrophy, and mucosal leukoplakia. More than 80% of patients develop bone-marrow failure, and this is the major cause of premature death. The X-linked form of the disease (MIM 305000) has been shown to be caused by mutations in the DKC1 gene. The gene encodes a 514-amino-acid protein, dyskerin, that is homologous to Saccharomyces cerevisiae Cbf5p and rat Nap57 proteins. By analogy to the homologues in other species, dyskerin is predicted to be a nucleolar protein with a role in both the biogenesis of ribosomes and, in particular, the pseudouridylation of rRNA precursors. We have determined the genomic structure of the DKC1 gene; it consists of 15 exons spanning a region of 15 kb. This has enabled us to screen for mutations in the genomic DNA, by using SSCP analysis. Mutations were detected in 21 of 37 additional families with dyskeratosis congenita that were analyzed. These mutations consisted of 11 different single-nucleotide substitutions, which resulted in 10 missense mutations and 1 putative splicing mutation within an intron. The missense change A353V was observed in 10 different families and was shown to be a recurring de novo event. Two polymorphisms were also detected, one of which resulted in the insertion of an additional lysine in the carboxy-terminal polylysine domain. It is apparent that X-linked dyskeratosis congenita is predominantly caused by missense mutations; the precise effect on the function of dyskerin remains to be determined.

Purpose: To identify germ line CDH1 mutations in hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) families and develop guidelines for management of at risk individuals. Experimental Design: We ascertained 31 HDGC previously unreported families, including 10 isolated early-onset diffuse gastric cancer (DGC) cases. Screening for CDH1 germ line mutations was done by denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography and automated DNA sequencing. Results: We identified eight inactivating and one missense CDH1 germ line mutation. The missense mutation conferred in vitro loss of protein function. Two families had the previously described 1003C>T nonsense mutation. Haplotype analysis revealed this to be a recurrent and not a founder mutation. Thirty-six percent (5 of 14) of the families with a documented DGC diagnosed before the age of 50 and other cases of gastric cancer carried CDH1 germ line mutations. Two of10 isolated cases of DGC in individuals ages <35 years harbored CDH1germ line mutations. One mutation positive family was ascertained through a family history of lobular breast cancer (LBC) and another through an individual with both DGC and LBC. Occult DGC was identified in five of six prophylactic gastrectomies done on asymptomatic, endoscopically negative 1003C>T mutation carriers. Conclusions: In addition to families with a strong history of early-onset DGC, CDH1 mutation screening should be offered to isolated cases of DGC in individuals ages <35 years and for families with multiple cases of LBC, with any history of DGC or unspecified GI malignancies. Prophylactic gastrectomy is potentially a lifesaving procedure and clinical breast screening is recommended for asymptomatic mutation carriers.Gastric cancer is one of the three leading causes of cancer death worldwide (1). Although the incidence of gastric cancer in older patients is decreasing, in younger patients as well as in cases with familial clustering it remains stable, suggesting that genetic predisposition is an increasingly important risk factor for gastric cancer (2). In this respect, as few as 1% to 3% of all

A complex chromosome rearrangement (CCR) involving chromosomes 7, 8, and 13 was detected in a phenotypically normal woman ascertained through her mentally retarded son with abnormal phenotype. He had a karyotype with 47 chromosomes including an extra der(13). In initial banding studies the CCR in the mother was interpreted as a three-way translocation. Fluorescence in situ hybridization with whole chromosome libraries and a telomere-specific probe was used to better characterize the rearrangement. Combined data allowed us to reinterpret the CCR as a translocation and an insertion. A review of 35 familial CCRs involving at least three chromosomes led to the following observations: 1) familial CCRs tend to have fewer chromosomes involved and fewer break-points than do de novo CCRs; 2) familial transmission is mainly observed through female carriers although the origin of de novo cases is paternal; 3) an apparent excess of balanced female carriers among the offspring of index carriers was noted; and 4) meiotic segregation resulting in malformed liveborn infants is most frequently due to adjacent-1 segregation, followed by 4:2 segregation; no adjacent-2 segregation was observed.

Williams syndrome is a genetic disorder linked to cognitive and behavioral patterns of varying consistency; this study was conducted to clarify further the strengths and weaknesses of children with Williams syndrome. Fifteen subjects with the characteristic features of Williams syndrome were evaluated using the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition; the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Interview Edition; and the Child Behavior Checklist. Cognitive skills ranged from the Moderate Range of Mental Retardation to the Low Average range, with relative strengths in nonverbal and quantitative reasoning. Adaptive skills were delayed, with strengths in communication and socialization. Behaviorally, clinically significant levels of attention problems, borderline-significant levels of social and thought problems, and significantly low levels of social contacts and structured activities were found. In contrast to the findings of many other studies of Williams syndrome, language skills and short-term memory skills were weak. Children with Williams syndrome may present a more evenly developed intellectual profile, with verbal and nonverbal skills being commensurate. In conclusion, a variety of cognitive, adaptive, and behavioral patterns have been shown to be possible in Williams syndrome; therefore, a single predictable cognitive or behavioral phenotype cannot be assumed.

No abstract