Autism and chromosome abnormalities-A review.

The neuro-behavioral disorder of autism was first described in the 1940s and was predicted to have a biological basis. Since that time, with the growth of genetic investigations particularly in the area of pediatric development, an increasing number of children with autism and related disorders (autistic spectrum disorders, ASD) have been the subject of genetic studies both in the clinical setting and in the wider research environment. However, a full understanding of the biological basis of ASDs has yet to be achieved. Early observations of children with chromosomal abnormalities detected by G-banded chromosome analysis (karyotyping) and in situ hybridization revealed, in some cases, ASD associated with other features arising from such an abnormality. The introduction of higher resolution techniques for whole genome screening, such as array comparative genome hybridization (aCGH), allowed smaller imbalances to be detected, some of which are now considered to represent autism susceptibility loci. In this review, we describe some of the work underpinning the conclusion that ASDs have a genetic basis; a brief history of the developments in genetic analysis tools over the last 50 years; and the most common chromosome abnormalities found in association with ASDs. Introduction of next generation sequencing (NGS) into the clinical diagnostic setting is likely to provide further insights into this complex field but will not be covered in this review. Clin. Anat. 29:620-627, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Array CGH as a first line diagnostic test in place of karyotyping for postnatal referrals - results from four years' clinical application for over 8,700 patients.

BACKGROUND: Array CGH is widely used in cytogenetics centres for postnatal constitutional genome analysis, and is now recommended as a first line test in place of G-banded chromosome analysis. At our centre, first line testing by oligonucleotide array CGH for all constitutional referrals for genome imbalance has been in place since June 2008, using a patient vs patient hybridisation strategy to minimise costs. FINDINGS: Out of a total of 13,412 patients tested with array CGH, 8,794 (66%) had array CGH as the first line test. Referral indications for this first line group ranged from neonatal congenital anomalies through to adult neurodisabilities; 25% of these patients had CNVs either in known pathogenic regions or in other regions where imbalances have not been reported in the normal population. Of these CNVs, 46% were deletions or nullisomy, 53% were duplications or triplications, and mosaic imbalances made up the remainder; 87% were <5Mb and would likely not be detected by G-banded chromosome analysis. For cases with completed inheritance studies, 20% of imbalances were de novo. CONCLUSIONS: Array CGH is a robust and cost-effective alternative to traditional cytogenetic methodology; it provides a higher diagnostic detection rate than G-banded chromosome analysis, and adds to the sum of information and understanding of the role of genomic imbalance in disease. Use of novel hybridisation strategies can reduce costs, allowing more widespread testing.

Delineation of an estimated 6.7 MB candidate interval for an anophthalmia gene at 3q26.33-q28 and description of the syndrome associated with visible chromosome deletions of this region.

Anophthalmia or microphthalmia occur in approximately one in 10 children who have severe visual impairment. These eye malformations are often of unknown aetiology, but can be inherited in autosomal dominant, recessive or X-linked forms, and can also occur in association with specific chromosome abnormalities. Four children are described in the medical literature with microphthalmia or anophthalmia in association with chromosome rearrangements involving distal 3q, suggesting the presence of a micro/anophthalmia gene in this region. We have identified two further patients with micro/anophthalmia and chromosome rearrangements involving 3q26-->3q27 and identified a 6.7 MB common deleted region. Patient 1 had multiple abnormalities including bilateral anophthalmia, abnormalities of the first and second cranial nerves and partial absence of the corpus callosum. His karyotype was 46,XY,del(3)(q26.33q28). Patient 2 had right anophthalmia and left extreme microphthalmia. Her karyotype was 46,XX,del(3)(q26.33q28)t(3;7)(q28;q21.1). Both patients had intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) and strikingly similar dysmorphic facies consisting of bossed forehead, downward-slanting palpebral fissures, grooved bridge of the nose, prominent low-set ears, small down-turned mouth and small mandible. We identified BAC clones mapping to distal 3q from the ENSEMBL and NCBI Entrez databases. These BAC clones were used as fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) probes to identify the minimum deleted region common to both patients. This interval, between clones RPC11-134F2 and RPC11-132N15, was estimated to be 6.7 MB. We conclude that there is an anophthalmia locus within this interval. Candidate genes mapping to this region include Chordin and DVL3, a homologue of the Drosophila Dishevelled gene.