Chromosomal microarray analysis in the genetic evaluation of 279 patients with syndromic obesity.

BACKGROUND: Syndromic obesity is an umbrella term used to describe cases where obesity occurs with additional phenotypes. It often arises as part of a distinct genetic syndrome with Prader-Willi syndrome being a classical example. These rare forms of obesity provide a unique source for identifying obesity-related genetic changes. Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has allowed the characterization of new genetic forms of syndromic obesity, which are due to copy number variants (CNVs); however, CMA in large cohorts requires more study. The aim of this study was to characterize the CNVs detected by CMA in 279 patients with a syndromic obesity phenotype. RESULTS: Pathogenic CNVs were detected in 61 patients (22%) and, among them, 35 had overlapping/recurrent CNVs. Genomic imbalance disorders known to cause syndromic obesity were found in 8.2% of cases, most commonly deletions of 1p36, 2q37 and 17p11.2 (5.4%), and we also detected deletions at 1p21.3, 2p25.3, 6q16, 9q34, 16p11.2 distal and proximal, as well as an unbalanced translocation resulting in duplication of the GNB3 gene responsible for a syndromic for of childhood obesity. Deletions of 9p terminal and 22q11.2 proximal/distal were found in 1% and 3% of cases, respectively. They thus emerge as being new putative obesity-susceptibility loci. We found additional CNVs in our study that overlapped with CNVs previously reported in cases of syndromic obesity, including a new case of 13q34 deletion (CHAMP1), bringing to 7 the number of patients in whom such defects have been described in association with obesity. Our findings implicate many genes previously associated with obesity (e.g. PTBP2, TMEM18, MYT1L, POU3F2, SIM1, SH2B1), and also identified other potentially relevant candidates including TAS1R3, ALOX5AP, and GAS6. CONCLUSION: Understanding the genetics of obesity has proven difficult, and considerable insight has been obtained from the study of genomic disorders with obesity associated as part of the phenotype. In our study, CNVs known to be causal for syndromic obesity were detected in 8.2% of patients, but we provide evidence for a genetic basis of obesity in as many as 14% of cases. Overall, our results underscore the genetic heterogeneity in syndromic forms of obesity, which imposes a substantial challenge for diagnosis.

Obesity with associated developmental delay and/or learning disability in patients exhibiting additional features: report of novel pathogenic copy number variants.

Obesity is a major threat to public health worldwide, and there is now mounting evidence favoring a role for the central nervous system (CNS) in weight control. A causal relationship has been recognized in both monogenic (e.g., BDNF, TRKB, and SIM1 deficiencies) and syndromic forms of obesity [e.g., Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS)]. Syndromic obesity arising from chromosomal abnormalities, that typically also affect learning and development, are often associated with congenital malformations and behavioral characteristics. We report on nine unrelated patients with a diagnosis of learning disability and/or developmental delay (DD) in addition to obesity that were found to have copy number variants (CNVs) by single nucleotide polymorphism array-based analysis. Each patient also had a distinct and complex phenotype, and most had hypotonia and other neuroendocrine issues, such as hyperphagia and hypogonadism. Molecular and clinical characterization of these patients enabled us to determine with confidence that the CNVs we observed were pathogenic or likely to be pathogenic. Overall, the CNVs reported here encompassed a candidate gene or region (e.g., SIM1) that has been reported in patients associating obesity and DD and/or intellectual disability (ID) and novel candidate genes and regions.

Angelman syndrome caused by deletion: a genotype-phenotype correlation determined by breakpoint.

OBJECTIVES: Deletion of the chromosome 15q11-q13, the most common genetic mechanism associated with Angelman syndrome (AS), is highly associated with a severe phenotype. However, deletion is not a genetically homogeneous group as it is composed by two main groups: Class I with breakpoints at BP1 (proximal) and BP3 (distal) and Class II present breakpoints at BP2 (proximal) and BP3 (distal). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the breakpoint on the electroclinical profile. METHODS: We evaluated 16 patients with AS caused by 15q11-13 deletion (6 were Class I; 10 were Class II). We characterized epilepsy features by clinical history obtained from parents and caretakers with a pre-standard questionnaire. These data were corroborated by medical records, contact with previous physicians, and video-EEG monitoring. Suggestive EEG patterns for AS were classified according to the classical description of Boyd et al. (1988). RESULTS: AS patients with BP1-BP3 deletion had significantly more daily and disabling seizures than AS patients with BP1-BP2 deletion. They also presented a significant higher frequency of status epilepticus and epilepsy aggravated by fever. Need for polytherapy was significantly more frequent in BP1-BP3 patients. EEG features were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: This study shows a significant correlation between the two deletion classes and AS clinical, but not the electrographic phenotype. Epilepsy is more severe and refractory to treatment in patients with larger deletions. Deletion is not a homogeneous group and knowledge on the breakpoint may have a clinical implication and represent an important factor in parental counseling.

A clinical follow-up of 35 Brazilian patients with Prader-Willi syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Prader-Willi Syndrome is a common etiology of syndromic obesity that is typically caused by either a paternal microdeletion of a region in chromosome 15 (microdeletions) or a maternal uniparental disomy of this chromosome. The purpose of this study was to describe the most significant clinical features of 35 Brazilian patients with molecularly confirmed Prader-Willi syndrome and to determine the effects of growth hormone treatment on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed based on the medical records of a cohort of 35 patients diagnosed with Prader-Willi syndrome. The main clinical characteristics were compared between the group of patients presenting with microdeletions and the group presenting with maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 15. Curves for height/length, weight and body mass index were constructed and compared between Prader-Willi syndrome patients treated with and without growth hormone to determine how growth hormone treatment affected body composition. The curves for these patient groups were also compared with curves for the normal population. RESULTS: No significant differences were identified between patients with microdeletions and patients with maternal uniparental disomy for any of the clinical parameters measured. Growth hormone treatment considerably improved the control of weight gain and body mass index for female patients but had no effect on either parameter in male patients. Growth hormone treatment did not affect height/length in either gender. CONCLUSION: The prevalence rates of several clinical features in this study are in agreement with the rates reported in the literature. Additionally, we found modest benefits of growth hormone treatment but failed to demonstrate differences between patients with microdeletions and those with maternal uniparental disomy. The control of weight gain in patients with Prader-Willi syndrome is complex and does not depend exclusively on growth hormone treatment.

A clinical follow-up of 35 Brazilian patients with Prader-Willi Syndrome

OBJECTIVE: Prader-Willi Syndrome is a common etiology of syndromic obesity that is typically caused by either a paternal microdeletion of a region in chromosome 15 (microdeletions) or a maternal uniparental disomy of this chromosome. The purpose of this study was to describe the most significant clinical features of 35 Brazilian patients with molecularly confirmed Prader-Willi syndrome and to determine the effects of growth hormone treatment on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed based on the medical records of a cohort of 35 patients diagnosed with Prader-Willi syndrome. The main clinical characteristics were compared between the group of patients presenting with microdeletions and the group presenting with maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 15. Curves for height/length, weight and body mass index were constructed and compared between Prader-Willi syndrome patients treated with and without growth hormone to determine how growth hormone treatment affected body composition. The curves for these patient groups were also compared with curves for the normal population. RESULTS: No significant differences were identified between patients with microdeletions and patients with maternal uniparental disomy for any of the clinical parameters measured. Growth hormone treatment considerably improved the control of weight gain and body mass index for female patients but had no effect on either parameter in male patients. Growth hormone treatment did not affect height/length in either gender. CONCLUSION: The prevalence rates of several clinical features in this study are in agreement with the rates reported in the literature. Additionally, we found modest benefits of growth hormone treatment but failed to demonstrate differences between patients with microdeletions and those with maternal uniparental disomy. The control of weight gain in patients with Prader-Willi syndrome is complex and does not depend exclusively on growth hormone treatment.

Extending the phenotype of monosomy 1p36 syndrome and mapping of a critical region for obesity and hyperphagia.

Rearrangements of 1p36 are the most frequently detected abnormalities in diagnostic testing for chromosomal cryptic imbalances and include variably sized simple terminal deletions, derivative chromosomes, interstitial deletions, and complex rearrangements. These rearrangements result in the specific pattern of malformation and neurodevelopmental disabilities that characterizes monosomy 1p36 syndrome. Thus far, no individual gene within this region has been conclusively determined to be causative of any component of the phenotype. Nor is it known if the rearrangements convey phenotypes via a haploinsufficiency mechanism or through a position effect. We have used multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification to screen for deletions of 1p36 in a group of 154 hyperphagic and overweight/obese, PWS negative individuals, and in a separate group of 83 patients initially sent to investigate a variety of other conditions. The strategy allowed the identification and delineation of rearrangements in nine subjects with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations. Our work reinforces the association of monosomy 1p36 and obesity and hyperphagia, and further suggests that these features may be associated with non-classical manifestations of this disorder in addition to a submicroscopic deletion of approximately 2-3 Mb in size. Multiplex ligation probe amplification using the monosomy 1p36 syndrome-specific kit coupled to the subtelomeric kit is an effective approach to identify and delineate rearrangements at 1p36.

Phenotypic variability in Angelman syndrome: comparison among different deletion classes and between deletion and UPD subjects.

Angelman syndrome (AS) can result from either a 15q11-q13 deletion (del), paternal uniparental disomy (UPD), imprinting, or UBE3A mutations. Here, we describe the phenotypic and behavioral variability detected in 49 patients with different classes of deletions and nine patients with UPD. Diagnosis was made by methylation pattern analysis of exon 1 of the SNRPN-SNURF gene and by microsatellite profiling of loci within and outside the 15q11-q13 region. There were no major phenotypic differences between the two main classes (BP1-BP3; BP2-BP3) of AS deletion patients, except for the absence of vocalization, more prevalent in patients with BP1-BP3 deletions, and for the age of sitting without support, which was lower in patients with BP2-BP3 deletions. Our data suggest that gene deletions (NIPA1, NIPA2, CYF1P1, GCP5) mapped to the region between breakpoints BP1 and BP2 may be involved in the severity of speech impairment, since all BP1-BP3 deletion patients showed complete absence of vocalization, while 38.1% of the BP2-BP3 deletion patients were able to pronounce syllabic sounds, with doubtful meaning. Compared to UPD patients, deletion patients presented a higher incidence of swallowing disorders (73.9% del x 22.2% UPD) and hypotonia (73.3% del x 28.57% UPD). In addition, children with UPD showed better physical growth, fewer or no seizures, a lower incidence of microcephaly, less ataxia and higher cognitive skills. As a consequence of their milder or less typical phenotype, AS may remain undiagnosed, leading to an overall underdiagnosis of the disease.

Diagnosis of patients with Prader-Willi and Angelman Syndromes: the importance of an overall investigation

Seventy-two patients with clinical diagnoses of Prader-Willi (PWS; n = 28 patients) or Angelman syndromes (AS; n = 44 patients) were submitted to chromosome analysis, SNRPN-SNURF exon 1 methylation assay, and microsatellite genotyping. Analysis of the methylation pattern confirmed the PWS diagnosis in 18 out of 28 patients and the AS diagnosis in 20 out of 44 patients. FISH and microsatellite analysis detected a deletion in 30 patients (14 PWS and 16 AS). Eight patients had normal FISH results (4 PWS and 4 AS); microsatellite markers showed that these patients had a uniparental disomy (UPD). Based on this study, we propose a strategy for the routine diagnosis of these syndromes that consists of the following steps: 1) methylation analysis, which does not require parental samples; 2) microsatellite genotyping of patient and parents to differentiate deletions, UPD and imprinting mutations; and 3) FISH for otherwise uninformative cases, and whenever parental samples are not available. Of the 34 patients whose PWS or AS diagnoses were not confirmed by laboratory tests, five presented a small extra marker chromosome, identified in three of them as an inv dup(15). One AS patient carried a balanced t(15;15) translocation associated with paternal UPD. Therefore G-banded chromosome analysis should be performed on all such patients, to detect possible structural rearrangements