Wolfram Syndrome Type I Case Report and Review-Focus on Early Diagnosis and Genetic Variants.

Background and Objectives: Wolfram syndrome type 1 (OMIM# 222300; ORPHAcode 3463) is an extremely rare autosomal recessive syndrome with a 25% recurrence risk in children. It is characterized by the presence of juvenile-onset diabetes mellitus (DM), progressive optic atrophy (OA), diabetes insipidus (DI), and sensorineural deafness (D), often referred to by the acronym DIDMOAD. It is a severe neurodegenerative disease with a life expectancy of 39 years, with death occurring due to cerebral atrophy. For a positive diagnosis, the presence of diabetes mellitus and optic nerve atrophy is sufficient. The disease occurs because of pathogenic variants in the WFS1 gene. The aim of this article is to present a case report of Wolfram Syndrome Type I, alongside a review of genetic variants, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, therapy, and long-term management. Emphasizing the importance of early diagnosis and a multidisciplinary approach, the study aims to enhance understanding and improve outcomes for patients with this complex syndrome. Materials and Methods: A case of a 28-year-old patient diagnosed with DM at the age of 6 and with progressive optic atrophy at 26 years old is presented. Molecular diagnosis revealed the presence of a heterozygous nonsense variant WFS1 c.1943G>A (p.Trp648*), and a heterozygous missense variant WFS1 c.1675G>C (p.Ala559Pro). Results: The molecular diagnosis of the patient confirmed the presence of a heterozygous nonsense variant and a heterozygous missense variant in the WFS1 gene, correlating with the clinical presentation of Wolfram syndrome type 1. Both allelic variants found in our patient have been previously described in other patients, whilst this combination has not been described before. Conclusions: This case report and review underscores the critical role of early recognition and diagnosis in Wolfram syndrome, facilitated by genetic testing. By identifying pathogenic variants in the WFS1 gene, genetic testing not only confirms diagnosis but also guides clinical management and informs genetic counseling for affected families. Timely intervention based on genetic insights can potentially reduce the progressive multisystem manifestations of the syndrome, thereby improving the quality of life and outcomes for patients.

Genetics of congenital solid tumors.

When we discuss the genetics of tumors, we cannot fail to remember that in the second decade of the twentieth century, more precisely in 1914, Theodore Boveri defined for the first time the chromosomal bases of cancer. In the last 30 years, progresses in genetics have only confirmed Boveri's remarkable predictions made more than 80 years ago. Before the cloning of the retinoblastoma 1 (RB1) gene, the existence of a genetic component in most, if not all, solid childhood tumors were well known. The existence of familial tumor aggregations has been found much more frequently than researchers expected to find at random. Sometimes, the demonstration of this family predisposition was very difficult, because the survival of children diagnosed as having a certain tumor, up to an age at which reproduction and procreation is possible, was very rare. In recent years, advances in the diagnosis and treatment of these diseases have made it possible for these children to survive until the age when they were able to start their own families, including the ability to procreate. Four distinct groups of so-called cancer genes have been identified: oncogenes, which promote tumor cell proliferation; tumor suppressor genes, which inhibit this growth/proliferation; anti-mutational genes, with a role in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) stability; and micro-ribonucleic acid (miRNA) genes, with a role in the posttranscriptional process.

Congenital anomalies of digits - a clinical-epidemiological study of 301 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Congenital anomalies of digits (CAD) can occur as isolated malformations, in combination with other malformation of the limbs, or as part of a genetic syndrome. The purpose of this work is to provide an overview of CAD, on morphological, genetic and epidemiological basis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 301 patients with CAD. Following the Swanson classification, the list of anomalies under study included: adactyly and oligodactyly, syndactyly and symphalangism, polydactyly, macrodactyly, amniotic bands syndrome, and generalized skeletal anomalies. RESULTS: In Bihor County, Romania, the Department of Medical Genetics recorded 4916 patients with congenital anomalies (2.03% out of 241 601 live newborns) between 1984 and 2018. Of these, 301 (6.1%) patients had CAD. The prevalence of CAD was 1:800 living newborns. The most common CAD were polydactyly, followed by syndactyly, brachydactyly, adactyly and oligodactyly. Upper extremities were four times more frequently affected than lower extremities, while both upper and lower extremities were affected in a quarter of all cases. CAD were isolated in 64% of patients, while 14% were associated with other anomalies of the extremities and 22% were associated with recognized genetic syndromes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study, by its size and the long period of clinical observation, provides opportunities to generalize and compare our data with similar studies, offering the possibility for improved knowledge of the epidemiology of CAD and potential improvements in genetic counseling.