-
Am. J. Med. Genet. A · Feb 2014
Changing interpretation of chromosomal microarray over time in a community cohort with intellectual disability.
- Emma Palmer, Helen Speirs, Peter J Taylor, Glenda Mullan, Gill Turner, Stewart Einfeld, Bruce Tonge, and David Mowat.
- Department of Medical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospital, NSW, Australia; School of Women's and Children's Health, The University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- Am. J. Med. Genet. A. 2014 Feb 1; 164A (2): 377-85.
AbstractChromosomal microarray (CMA) is the first-line diagnostic test for individuals with intellectual disability, autism, or multiple congenital anomalies, with a 10-20% diagnostic yield. An ongoing challenge for the clinician and laboratory scientist is the interpretation of variants of uncertain significance (VOUS)-usually rare, unreported genetic variants. Laboratories differ in their threshold for reporting VOUS, and clinical practice varies in how this information is conveyed to the family and what follow-up is arranged. Workflows, websites, and databases are constantly being updated to aid the interpretation of VOUS. There is a growing literature reporting new microdeletion and duplication syndromes, susceptibility, and modifier copy number variants (CNVs). Diagnostic methods are also evolving with new array platforms and genome builds. In 2010, high-resolution arrays (Affymetrix 2.7 M Oligo and SNP, 50 kB resolution) were performed on a community cohort of 67 individuals with intellectual disability of unknown aetiology. Three hundred and one CNVs were detected and analyzed using contemporary resources and a simple scoring system. Thirteen (19%) of the arrays were assessed as potentially pathogenic, 4 (6%) as benign and 50 (75%) of uncertain clinical significance. The CNV data were re-analyzed in 2012 using the contemporary interpretative resources. There was a statistically significant difference in the assessment of individual CNVs (P < 0.0001). An additional eight patients were reassessed as having a potentially pathogenic array (n = 21, 31%) and several additional susceptibility or modifier CNVs were identified. This study highlights the complexity involved in the interpretation of CMA and uniquely demonstrates how, even on the same array platform, it can be subject to change over time.© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.