2012
DOI: 10.1111/cge.12064
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Whole exome sequencing in a patient with uniparental disomy of chromosome 2 and a complex phenotype

Abstract: Whole exome sequencing and chromosomal microarrays are two powerful technologies that have transformed the ability of researchers to search for potentially causal variants in human disease. This study combines these tools to search for causal variants in a patient found to have maternal uniparental isodisomy of chromosome 2. This subject has a complex phenotype including skeletal and renal dysplasia, immune deficiencies, growth failure, retinal degeneration, and ovarian insufficiency. Eighteen nonsynonymous, r… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, a female child, also with UPDmaternal of chromosome 2 and complex phenotype, distinct from our patient, had been exome sequenced and many (18) candidate variants were identified on the UPD chromosome, none definitively pathogenic (Carmichael et al 2012). None of that girl's phenotypes are coincident with our patient, suggesting that an imprinting disease is not the likely cause of the diseases in these children.…”
Section: Identifying Plausibly Pathogenic Genetic Variation In the Ddmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Recently, a female child, also with UPDmaternal of chromosome 2 and complex phenotype, distinct from our patient, had been exome sequenced and many (18) candidate variants were identified on the UPD chromosome, none definitively pathogenic (Carmichael et al 2012). None of that girl's phenotypes are coincident with our patient, suggesting that an imprinting disease is not the likely cause of the diseases in these children.…”
Section: Identifying Plausibly Pathogenic Genetic Variation In the Ddmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…DNA samples from patients and unaffected family members were analyzed using Agilent SurePrint G3 custom 4×180K comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and SNP microarray (Agilent Technologies) as previously described [13]. Candidate CNVs were filtered using standard clinical practices in the DNA diagnostic laboratory at Boston Children’s Hospital.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…UPD can cause clinical consequences by disrupting genomic imprinting, or by unmasking harmful recessive alleles in large blocks of homozygosity on the affected chromosome. Detecting UPD is a useful diagnostic tool for specific imprinting disorders and for rare Mendelian diseases caused by homozygosity 12,[16][17][18][19] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%