Two mosaic terminal inverted duplications arising post-zygotically: Evidence for possible formation of neo-telomeres.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the structure of terminal inverted duplications and to investigate potential mechanisms of formation in two cases where there was mosaicism with cells of apparently normal karyotype. RESULTS: A karyotype [46,XY,inv dup(4)(p16.3p15.1)/46,XY] performed on blood lymphocytes from a patient referred for developmental delay (case 1) demonstrated a normal karyotype in 60% of cells with a terminal inverted duplication 4p in the remainder. In case 2, referred for multiple fetal anomalies on an ultrasound scan, 33% of amniocyte colonies were karyotypically normal, with a terminal inv dup 10p in the remainder [46,XX,inv dup(10)(p15.3p11)/46,XX]. Duplicated FISH signals for GATA3 and NEBL loci (in case 2), and for the Wolf-Hirschhorn locus (case 1) confirmed the inverted structure of both duplications. In the GTL banded normal cells from both cases, there was a cryptic deletion detected by FISH of one copy of the subtelomere 4p (case 1, probe GS-36P21), and subtelomere 10p (case 2, probe GS-306F7). At pter on both inv dup chromosomes there was no FISH signal present for the specific subtelomere probe. However, a positive pantelomeric probe signal was detected at 4 pter and 10 pter in both the cryptically-deleted chromosomes and the inv dup chromosomes in the respective cell lines of both cases. CONCLUSION: An inv dup structure was evident for both cases on GTL bands, and confirmed by the various FISH studies. The presence of telomere (TTAGGG repeat) sequences at pter on the inv dup chromosomes (where more proximal chromosome specific subtelomeric probes were negative) was indicated by the pantelomeric probe signals in both cases. We conclude the most likely mechanism of origin in both cases was by sub-telomeric breakage in the zygote at pter, and delayed repair/rearrangement until after one or more subsequent mitotic divisions. In these divisions, at least one breakage-fusion-bridge cycle occurred, to produce inverted duplications. It is proposed then that two differently "repaired" daughter cells proliferated in parallel. In one daughter cell line (with an overtly normal karyotype) there was deletion of the subtelomere and presumed repair through capping by a neo-telomere (i.e. "healing", as initially proposed by McClintock). This occurred in both cases presented. In the other daughter cell of each case, it is proposed that chromosome stabilization was achieved (after replication) by sister chromatid reunion to form a dicentric, which broke at a subsequent anaphase, to form an inverted duplication (with loss of the reciprocal product, and the other daughter cell line). One inv dup was repaired without an interstitial specific subtelomere (case 1) and one was repaired with a duplicated specific interstitial subtelomere (case 2). After repair TTAGGG repeats were detected by FISH at each respective new pter.

An innocuous duplication of 11.2 Mb at 13q21 is gene poor: sub-bands of gene paucity and pervasive CNV characterize the chromosome anomalies.

A boy with autistic spectrum disorder without dysmorphisms was found to have a chromosome duplication of part of band 13q21. His mother and grandfather both of normal intellect had the same chromosomal duplication. Comparison was made with the Chromosome anomaly database www.som.soton.ac.uk/research/geneticsdiv/anomaly%20register which revealed similar cases. Mapping on DNA microarray for the proband and mother showed the duplication to be of length 11.2 Mb, encompassing the 13q21.1-13q21.32 region. The duplicated region is profoundly gene poor, with a mean gene density of 0.45 genes/Mb. We estimate, that the mean gene density in the sub-bands of the chromosome anomalies is 2.4-2.5 genes/Mb. In addition the percentages of the sub-bands reported as copy number variants (CNV) was estimated from the Database of Chromosome Genomic Variants (http://projects.tcag.ca/variation/). It was found that for some of these sub-bands, gene paucity was likely to be a major contributor to their innocuous phenotypic effect, for example, the gene densities were for: 1p31.2 (1.25 genes/Mb); 2p12 (1.7); 4p15.31 (1.3); 5p14.1 (0.22); 5p14.3 (0.8); 5q21.2 (0.6); 5q21.3 (1.2); 8p23.2 (0.25); 13q21.1 (0.9); 14q31.1 (1.4); 18q22.1 (1.4); 21q21.1 (1.2); and 21q21.2 (0.7). For other sub-bands the percentage of the band in which CNV have been reported was found to be markedly increased, for example, 8p23.2 (94.7% of the band is defined by reported CNV); 3p26.3 (81.6); 5p14.3 (59.3); 8p22 (48.8); 2p12 (44.0); 5q21.1 (43.6); 6q24.2 (41.4); 9p23 (38.8); 10q21.1 (36.5); 5q21.2 (35.4), and 11q14.3 (33.8). We argue that both gene paucity and pervasive CNV are major indicators of bands conforming to the Chromosome Anomaly phenomenon.

Molecular distinction between true centric fission and pericentric duplication-fission.

Centromere (centric) fission, also known as transverse or lateral centric misdivision, has been defined as the splitting of one functional centromere of a metacentric or submetacentric chromosome to produce two derivative centric chromosomes. It has been observed in a range of organisms and has been ascribed an important role in karyotype evolution; however, the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. We have investigated four cases of apparent centric fission in humans. Two cases show a missing chromosome 22 or 18 that is replaced by two centric ring products, a third case shows two chromosome-10-derived telocentric chromosomes, whereas a fourth case involves the formation of two chromosome-18-derived isochromosomes. In all four cases, results of gross cytogenetic and fluorescence in situ hybridisation analyses were consistent with a simple centric fission event. However, detailed molecular analyses provided evidence in support of centromere duplication as a predisposing mechanism for the observed chromosomal breakage in two of the cases. Results for the third case are consistent with direct centric fission not involving centromere pre-duplication as the likely mechanism. Insufficient material has precluded the further study of the fourth case. The data provide the first molecular evidence for centromere pre-duplication as a possible mechanism to explain the classically assumed simple "centric fission" events in clinical cytogenetics, karyotype evolution and speciation.

Chromosome loops arising from intrachromosomal tethering of telomeres occur at high frequency in G1 (non-cycling) mitotic cells: Implications for telomere capture.

BACKGROUND: To investigate potential mechanisms for telomere capture the spatial arrangement of telomeres and chromosomes was examined in G1 (non-cycling) mitotic cells with diploid or triploid genomes. This was examined firstly by directly labelling the respective short arm (p) and long arm subtelomeres (q) with different fluorophores and probing cell preparations using a number of subtelomere probe pairs, those for chromosomes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, and 20. In addition some interstitial probes (CEN15, PML and SNRPN on chromosome 15) and whole chromosome paint probes (e.g. WCP12) were jointly hybridised to investigate the co-localization of interphase chromosome domains and tethered subtelomeres. Cells were prepared by omitting exposure to colcemid and hypotonic treatments. RESULTS: In these cells a specific interphase chromosome topology was detected. It was shown that the p and q telomeres of the each chromosome associate frequently (80% pairing) in an intrachromosomal manner, i.e. looped chromosomes with homologues usually widely spaced within the nucleus. This p-q tethering of the telomeres from the one chromosome was observed with large (chromosomes 3, 4, 5), medium sized (6, 7, 9, 10, 12), or small chromosomes (17, 18, 20). When triploid nuclei were probed there were three tetherings of p-q subtelomere signals representing the three widely separated looped chromosome homologues. The separate subtelomere pairings were shown to coincide with separate chromosome domains as defined by the WCP and interstitial probes. The 20% of apparently unpaired subtelomeric signals in diploid nuclei were partially documented to be pairings with the telomeres of other chromosomes. CONCLUSIONS: A topology for telomeres was detected where looped chromosome homologues were present at G1 interphase. These homologues were spatially arranged with respect to one-another independently of other chromosomes, i.e. there was no chromosome order on different sides of the cell nuclei and no segregation into haploid sets was detected. The normal function of this high frequency of intrachromosomal loops is unknown but a potential role is likely in the genesis of telomere captures whether of the intrachromosomal type or between non-homologues. This intrachromosomal tethering of telomeres cannot be related to telomeric or subtelomeric sequences since these are shared in varying degree with other chromosomes. In our view, these intrachromosomal telomeric tetherings with the resulting looped chromosomes arranged in a regular topology must be important to normal cell function since non-cycling cells in G1 are far from quiescent, are in fact metabolically active, and these cells represent the majority status since only a small proportion of cells are normally dividing.

Issues arising from the prenatal diagnosis of some rare trisomy mosaics--the importance of cryptic fetal mosaicism.

OBJECTIVES: To add to the knowledge of fetal mosaicism, confined placental mosaicism (CPM), and uniparental disomy (UPD), in rare trisomies detected at prenatal diagnosis. METHODS: The origin of rare trisomy mosaics, mostly (8/11) seen in amniocytes, was examined in 11 cases by follow-up karyotyping and the study of microsatellite inheritance. RESULTS: Of the rare trisomies presented, three were mosaic trisomy 16 (two of which were CPM), and the remainder comprised single cases of mosaic trisomies of 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 5 and 15--the last two being CPM. Cases varied in parental derivation and meiotic versus post-zygotic origin but no case involved UPD. There was evidence for cryptic fetal mosaicism in three cases (5, 7, 11)--involving chromosomes 11, 14 and 16. CONCLUSIONS: These cases contribute further data to phenotypes associated with rare trisomies and the relative influences on the phenotype of CPM, UPD and fetal mosaicism. From sparse published data, we estimate that approximately 10% of apparent CPM cases for a rare trisomy (i.e. aneuploid CVS, normal amniocytes) may actually be cryptic fetal mosaics undetected in cultured amniocytes. In many cases, this cryptic mosaicism may be of limited clinical significance, but in others, the associated phenotypic effects may be obvious. There is no general approach to resolve this issue; the finding of even a few similar aneuploid cells in different amniocyte culture vessels may be clinically significant. It may be useful to study such an amniocyte culture with FISH with the relevant centromeric probe. Careful follow-up is recommended, particularly for infants where apparent correction of autosomal trisomy has occurred.

Three different origins for apparent triploid/diploid mosaics.

Four apparent triploid/diploid mosaic cases were studied. Three of the cases were detected at prenatal diagnosis and the other was of an intellectually handicapped, dysmorphic boy. Karyotypes were performed in multiple tissues if possible, and the inheritance of microsatellites was studied with DNA from fetal tissues and parental blood. Non-mosaic triploids have a different origin from these mosaics with simple digyny or diandry documented in many cases. Three different mechanisms of origin for these apparent mosaics were detected: (1) chimaerism with karyotypes from two separate zygotes developing into a single individual, (2) delayed digyny, by incorporation of a pronucleus from a second polar body into one embryonic blastomere, and (3) delayed dispermy, similarly, by incorporation of a second sperm pronucleus into one embryonic blastomere. In three of the four cases, there was segregation within the embryos of triploid and diploid cell lines into different tissues from which DNA could be isolated. In case 2 originating by digyny, the same sperm allele at each locus could be detected in both triploid and diploid tissues, which is supportive evidence for the involvement of a single sperm and for true mosaicism rather than chimaerism. Similarly, in case 4 originating by dispermy, the same single ovum allele at each locus could be detected in diploid and triploid tissues, confirming mosaicism. In the chimaeric case (case 3), the diploid line had the karyotype 47,XY,+16 while the triploid line was 69,XXY. This suggests a chimaera, since, in a true mosaic, the triploid line should also contain the additional chromosome 16. Supporting the interpretation of a chimaeric origin for this case, the DNA data showed that the triploidy was consistent with MII non-disjunction (i.e. involving a diploid ovum). In the mosaic cases (1, 2, 4), there was no evidence of the involvement of a diploid sperm or a diploid ova, and in triploid/diploid mosaicism, an origin from a diploid gamete is excluded, since all such conceptuses would be simple triploids. In one of these triploid/diploid mosaics detected at prenatal diagnosis by CVS, the triploid line seemed to be sequestered into the extra-fetal tissues (confined placental mosaicism). This fetus developed normally and a normal infant was born with no evidence of triploidy in newborn blood or cord blood at three months of age.

Prospective ranking of the sonographic markers for aneuploidy: data of 2143 prenatal cytogenetic diagnoses referred for abnormalities on ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: To design a scheme to rank sonographic anomalies as indicators of aneuploidy and record the distribution of data from 2143 prenatal amniotic fluid/chorionic villous sample diagnoses referred for karyotyping because of fetal anomalies detected with ultrasound. METHODS: In all cases the records of sonographic anomalies were obtained prior to karyotyping. A cascade of seven prospective categories of ultrasound anomalies was chosen and the data were included in the highest compatible sonography category. The categories were in descending order: (I) combined central nervous system (CNS)/cranial shape and cardiac anomalies (excluding spina bifida and anencephaly); (II) key anomaly present (exomphalos/ intrauterine growth restriction/duodenal atresia/cystic hygroma/fetal hydrops/talipes--with other multiple anomalies); (III) CNS +/- other abnormality (excluding choroid plexus cyst, spina bifida, anencephaly); (IVa) increased nuchal translucency--first trimester +/- other abnormality; (IVb) increased nuchal thickening--second trimester +/- other abnormality; (V) cardiac anomaly +/- other abnormality; (VI) other markers of aneuploidy (pyelectasis/two vessel cord/echogenic bowel/short femur); and (VII) other (mostly isolated) malformations. RESULTS: There were 412/2143 (19.2%) chromosome abnormalities detected in this sonographically abnormal group. Overall, the prevalence of aneuploidy significantly ranged from 51 to 3% according to the above I-VII ultrasound categories and from approximately 1-80% for individual ultrasound anomalies. Likelihood ratios were derived for many ultrasound anomalies for several aneuploidy groups: trisomies of 13; 18; and 21; 45,X and 45,X mosaics; triploidy; other autosomal duplications and/or deletions; and other (than 45,X) sex chromosomal aneuploidies. CONCLUSION: It is suggested this data could be used to assist pre-procedural counselling of patients after the ultrasound scan in tertiary referral centres for prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis.

A series of supernumerary small ring marker autosomes identified by FISH with chromosome probe arrays and literature review excluding chromosome 15.

Seven supernumerary small ring marker autosomes were studied. The pantelomere probe (Oncor) in conjunction with scoring for dicentric rings was used to confirm ring morphology. The small rings were identified mainly by FISH with chromosome probe arrays (Cytocell) containing representations from all 24 chromosomes and the rings were derived from chromosomes 7, 8 (three cases), 11, 12, and 14. The effectiveness of the array methodology in identifying markers was tested. Microsatellite DNA data showed biparental disomy (BPD) was present for the rings from chromosomes 7 and 14 thereby excluding UPD, both were de novo but the ring 14 was of paternal origin. The literature on supernumerary small ring autosomes was reviewed excluding chromosome 15. The grade and distribution of mosaicism was invoked as the major determinant of the differences in phenotype and, in addition, variation was attributed to the possibility of different contributions from each chromosome arm. There are 88 published supernumerary small ring cases in total, with phenotypic data attributable to the respective rings in 77 cases and all chromosomes being represented except chromosome 17. Of the prenatally ascertained cases, where there was adequate phenotypic data, 30% had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the ring, and there were 44% familial cases in this group. Of the postnatally ascertained small rings, 75% had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the ring and there were 13% familial cases. This higher abnormality rate is concordant with the considerable ascertainment bias of this latter group and the prenatal data are recommended for genetic counseling. Although data are small there were some differences between the rings derived from different chromosomes. Chromosomes 3 and 8 demonstrate the extremes. Of the supernumerary small r(8) cases reviewed including the three presently described, 8/11 had an abnormal phenotype attributable to the marker but of the small r(3) cases, only 1/6 had an abnormal phenotype. Two of the present r(8) were studied with the GATA4 probe at 8p23.1. The r(8) in case 2 (patient moderately retarded) was comprised mostly of an intact 8p whereas the larger r(8) in case 3 (normal phenotype) was missing 8p23.1 --> pter and had more of 8q contributing to the ring. In other supernumerary rings postnatally ascertained, there is mostly insufficient data but there is an abnormal phenotype in 8/11 cases with multiple small rings, in 5/6 cases with r(20), and in 5/10 with r(1). A novel origin for supernumerary small rings is proposed: that they may originate from incompletely digested superfluous (haploid) pronuclei. The small rings presumptively so formed may occasionally be transfected into the zygote nucleus. The high proportion ( approximately 12.5%) of cases with multiple supernumerary small rings almost always of different centromeric origin is consistent with this concept.

Recombinants of intrachromosomal transposition of subtelomeres in chromosomes 1 and 2: a cause of minute terminal chromosomal imbalances.

Two cases of submicroscopic recombinants of intrachromosomal transposition of telomeres, one each from chromosome 1 and 2 are described. Meiotic crossing-over would generate the recombinants from these reciprocal rearrangements. In both cases, which were detected by FISH with subtelomeric probes, there is a minute deletion of the qter region and a second presence of the pter subtelomeric region on the respective qter, i.e., a duplication of 1pter or 2pter respectively. The deletion on 2qter (case 2) was confirmed by microsatellite inheritance and was of paternal origin, but in case 1 there was no detectable 1q deletion other than of the subtelomeric probe, and parental origin could not be determined. The present case 2 with del(2qter)/dup(2pter) shares many features with reported cases of simple deletion (2qter) but did not have features of Albright hereditary osteodystrophy, which are seen in half of such deletion patients. The clinical features present in case 1 were similar to those of the previously reported case of a submicroscopic 1qter deletion but also to cases with microscopically visible 1qter deletions, presumably because of gene enrichment in subtelomeric regions. Recombinants of such intrachromosomal subtelomere transpositions detected by subtelomeric probes may comprise up to 10% of submicroscopic pter or qter deletion cases. Other cases of this unusual mechanism may be detected with more common use of subtelomeric probes. It is suggested the bouquet associations of telomeres in early meiosis may facilitate such unusual rearrangements.

Isochromosome 5p mosaicism at prenatal diagnosis: observations and outcomes in six cases at chorionic villus sampling and one at amniocentesis.

We present six cases of 47,+i(5p)/46 mosaicism diagnosed at chorionic villus sampling (CVS), this being the first prospective series to be reported. The clinical indication in each was advanced maternal age. Further prenatal studies in four (amniocentesis, plus fetal blood sampling in one) did not show the isochromosome. In one case, subsequent amniocentesis showed 1/48 in situ colonies with the isochromosome, but fetal blood was karyotypically normal. These five pregnancies resulted in phenotypically normal livebirths; further normal follow-up reports (from age 4 months through 4 years) are noted in four of these. Analysis of placental tissue in one case confirmed the presence of the i(5p) mosaicism. In the remaining case, in which 100% of CVS cultured cells had the i(5p), the pregnancy was terminated. Fetal skin fibroblasts did not show the i(5p). Thus, in none of these six cases was true fetal mosaicism detected, nor an abnormal phenotype noted. We suggest that a 47,+i(5p)/46 karyotype, detected at CVS, may frequently reflect confined placental mosaicism. In addition, we report a case of the primary diagnosis of 47,+i(5p)/46 mosaicism at amniocentesis. The infant appeared normal at birth, but a brain malformation was subsequently identified.

Chromosome 13q neocentromeres: molecular cytogenetic characterization of three additional cases and clinical spectrum.

We report three new cases of chromosome 13 derived marker chromosomes, found in unrelated patients with dysmorphisms and/or developmental delay. Molecular cytogenetic analysis was performed using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with chromosome-specific painting probes, alpha satellite probes, and physically mapped probes from chromosome 13q, as well as comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). This analysis demonstrated that these markers consisted of inversion duplications of distal portions of chromosome 13q that have separated from the endogenous chromosome 13 centromere and contain no detectable alpha satellite DNA. The presence of a functional neocentromere on these marker chromosomes was confirmed by immunofluorescence with antibodies to centromere protein-C (CENP-C). The cytogenetic location of a neocentromere in band 13q32 was confirmed by simultaneous FISH with physically mapped YACs from 13q32 and immunofluorescence with anti-CENP-C. The addition of these three new cases brings the total number of described inv dup 13q neocentic chromosomes to 11, representing 21% (11/52) of the current overall total of 52 described cases of human neocentric chromosomes. This higher than expected frequency suggests that chromosome 13q may have an increased propensity for neocentromere formation. The clinical spectrum of all 11 cases is presented, representing a unique collection of polysomy for different portions of chromosome 13q without aneuploidies for additional chromosomal regions. The complexity and variability of the phenotypes seen in these patients does not support a simple reductionist view of phenotype/genotype correlation with polysomy for certain chromosomal regions.