4.2 Article

Microcephaly, Microtia, Preauricular Tags, Choanal Atresia and Developmental Delay in Three Unrelated Patients: A Mandibulofacial Dysostosis Distinct From Treacher Collins Syndrome

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A
卷 149A, 期 5, 页码 837-843

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.32747

关键词

mandibulo-facial dysostosis; microcephaly; developmental delay; microtia; choanal atresia

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Wil440/6-4]
  2. Bundesiministerium fur Bildung und Forschung, CRANIRARE [01GM0802]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Treacher Collins syndrome (TCS, OMIM 154500) is a well-defined mandibulofacial dysostosis characterized by symmetric facial anomalies consisting of malar hypoplasia, coloboma of the lower eyelid, dysplastic cars, micrognathia, cleft palate and deafness. Other mandibulofacial dysostoses (MDs) such as Toriello (OMIM 301950), Bauru (OMIM 604830), Hedera-Toriello-Petty (OMIM 608257), and Guion-Almeida (OMIM 610536) syndromes are less well characterized and much rarer. Here we describe three unrelated patients showing clinical features overlapping with TCS, but who in addition have developmental delay, microcephaly and a distinct facial gestalt. Because of the distinct ear anomalies and the hearing loss a HOXA2 mutation was taken into account. CHARGE syndrome was discussed because of ear anomalies, choanal atresia, and developmental delay in our patients. But mutational analyses including sequencing of the TCOF1, the HOXA2, and the CHD7 genies, deletion screening of the TCOF1 gene as well as genomewide array analyses revealed normal results. We suggest that these three patients have a new type of mandibulofacial dysostosis. As all three cases are sporadic and both sexes are affected the pattern of inheritance might be autosomal dominant or autosomal recessive. Identification of additional patients will allow to further delineate the phenotype, to assign the inheritance pattern and to identify the molecular basis. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据