Genetic genealogy reveals true Y haplogroup of House of Bourbon contradicting recent identification of the presumed remains of two French Kings.

Genetic analysis strongly increases the opportunity to identify skeletal remains or other biological samples from historical figures. However, validation of this identification is essential and should be done by DNA typing of living relatives. Based on the similarity of a limited set of Y-STRs, a blood sample and a head were recently identified as those belonging respectively to King Louis XVI and his paternal ancestor King Henry IV. Here, we collected DNA samples from three living males of the House of Bourbon to validate the since then controversial identification of these remains. The three living relatives revealed the Bourbon's Y-chromosomal variant on a high phylogenetic resolution for several members of the lineage between Henry IV and Louis XVI. This 'true' Bourbon's variant is different from the published Y-STR profiles of the blood as well as of the head. The earlier identifications of these samples can therefore not be validated. Moreover, matrilineal genealogical data revealed that the published mtDNA sequence of the head was also different from the one of a series of relatives. This therefore leads to the conclusion that the analyzed samples were not from the French kings. Our study once again demonstrated that in order to realize an accurate genetic identification of historical remains DNA typing of living persons, who are paternally or maternally related with the presumed donor of the samples, is required.

Controversial identification in a historical case is illustrative of the complexity of DNA typing in forensic research. Response to Charlier et al.

The previously published genetic identification of presumptive samples attributed to two French kings, Henri IV and Louis XVI, by Charlier et al., was recently refuted by a genetic genealogic approach. This (provisional) refutation illustrates the difficulties in confirming the identification of historical DNA samples using limited genetic data. Therefore, we want to stress the necessity of including the genetic genealogic approach--which relies on DNA typing of living relatives of the presumptive donor as a confirmed reference--to validate genetic results in historical cases. Moreover, the popularity and broad media coverage of such studies are useful in bringing awareness to the general public, non-DNA forensic experts and lawyers about the complexity of DNA typing in forensic cases.

Chimeric beta-defensin analogs, including the novel 3NI analog, display salt-resistant antimicrobial activity and lack toxicity in human epithelial cell lines.

Human beta-defensins (hBDs) are crucial peptides for the innate immune response and are thus prime candidates as therapeutic agents directed against infective diseases. Based on the properties of wild-type hBD1 and hBD3 and of previously synthesized analogs (1C, 3I, and 3N), we have designed a new analog, 3NI, and investigated its potential as an antimicrobial drug. Specifically, we evaluated the antimicrobial activities of 3NI versus those of hBD1, hBD3, 1C, 3I, and 3N. Our results show that 3NI exerted greater antibacterial activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Enterococcus faecalis than did hBD1 and hBD3, even with elevated salt concentrations. Moreover, its antiviral activity against herpes simplex virus 1 was greater than that of hBD1 and similar to that of hBD3. Subsequently, we investigated the cytotoxic effects of all peptides in three human epithelial carcinoma cell lines: A549 from lung, CaCo-2 from colon, and Capan-1 from pancreas. None of the analogs significantly reduced cell viability versus wild-type hBD1 and hBD3. They did not induce genotoxicity or cause an increase in the number of apoptotic cells. Using confocal microscopy, we also investigated the localization of the peptides during their incubation with epithelial cells and found that they were distributed on the cell surface, from which they were internalized. Finally, we show that hBD1 and hBD3 are characterized by high resistance to serum degradation. In conclusion, the new analog 3NI seems to be a promising anti-infective agent, particularly given its high salt resistance--a feature that is relevant in diseases such as cystic fibrosis.

The wide variation of definitions of genetic testing in international recommendations, guidelines and reports.

In spite of being very commonly used, the term genetic testing is debatable and used with several meanings. The diversity of existing definitions is confusing for scientists, clinicians and other professionals, health authorities, legislators and regulating agencies and the civil society in general, particularly when genetic testing is the object of guidelines or legal documents. This work compares definitions of genetic testing found in recommendations, guidelines and reports from international institutions, policy makers and professional organizations, but also in documents from other stakeholders in the field, as the pharmaceutical industry, insurers, ethics bodies, patient organizations or human-rights associations. A systematic review of these documents confirmed the extreme variability existing in the concepts and the ambiguous or equivocal use of the term. Some definitions (narrower) focus on methodologies or the material analysed, while others (broader) are information- or context-based. Its scope may range from being synonymous of just DNA analysis, to any test that yields genetic data. Genetic testing and genetic information, which may be derived from a range of medical exams or even family history, are often used interchangeably. Genetic testing and genetic screening are sometimes confused. Human molecular genetics (a discipline) is not always distinguished from molecular biology (a tool). Professional background, geographical context and purpose of the organizations may influence scope and usage. A common consensus definition does not exist. Nevertheless, a clear set of precise definitions may help creating a common language among geneticists and other health professionals. Moreover, a clear context-dependent, operative definition should always be given.

Definitions of genetic testing in European legal documents.

The definition of "genetic testing" is not a simple matter, and the term is often used with different meanings. The purpose of this work was the collection and analysis of European (and other) legislation and policy instruments regarding genetic testing, to scrutinise the definitions of genetic testing therewith contained the following: 60 legal documents were identified and examined-55 national and five international ones. Documents were analysed for the type (context) of testing and the material tested and compared by legal fields (privacy and confidentiality, data protection, biobanks, insurance and labour law, forensic medicine); some instruments are very complex and deal with various legal fields at the same time. There was no standard for the definitions used, and different approaches were identified (from wide general, to some very specific and technically based). Often, legal documents did not contain any definitions, and many did not distinguish between genetic testing and genetic information. Genetic testing was more often defined in non-binding legal documents than in binding ones. Definitions are core elements of legal documents, and their accuracy and harmonisation (particularly within a particular legal field) is critical, not to compromise their enforcement. We believe to have gathered now the evidence for adopting the much needed differentiation between (a) "clinical genetics testing", (b) "genetics laboratory-based genetic testing" and (c) "genetic information", as proposed before.

A fair share for the orphans: ethical guidelines for a fair distribution of resources within the bounds of the 10-year-old European Orphan Drug Regulation.

For a significant number of patients, there exists no, or only little, interest in developing a treatment for their disease or condition. Especially with regard to rare diseases, the lack of commercial interest in drug development is a burning issue. Several interventions have been made in the regulatory field in order to address the commercial disinterest in these conditions. However, existing regulations mainly focus on the provision of incentives to the sponsors of clinical trials of orphan drugs, and leave unanswered the overarching question about the rightful place of orphan drugs in resource allocation systems. In this article, we analyse the ethical aspects of funding research and development in the field of rare diseases. We then propose an ethical framework that can help health policy makers move forward in the difficult matter of fairly allocating resources for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of rare diseases.

Transcription factor Zic2 inhibits Wnt/ß-catenin protein signaling.

The Zic transcription factors play critical roles during embryonic development. Mutations in the ZIC2 gene are associated with human holoprosencephaly, but the etiology is still unclear. Here, we report a novel function for ZIC2 as a regulator of ß-catenin·TCF4-mediated transcription. We show that ZIC2 can bind directly to the DNA-binding high mobility group box of TCF4 via its zinc finger domain and inhibit the transcriptional activity of the ß-catenin·TCF4 complex. However, the binding of TCF4 to DNA was not affected by ZIC2. Zic2 RNA injection completely inhibited ß-catenin-induced axis duplication in Xenopus embryos and strongly blocked the ability of ß-catenin to induce expression of known Wnt targets in animal caps. Moreover, Zic2 knockdown in transgenic Xenopus Wnt reporter embryos led to ectopic Wnt signaling activity mainly at the midbrain-hindbrain boundary. Together, our results demonstrate a previously unknown role for ZIC2 as a transcriptional regulator of the ß-catenin·TCF4 complex.

Children, biobanks and the scope of parental consent.

The use of stored tissue samples from children for genetic research raises specific ethical questions that are not all analogous to those raised when adult participants are concerned. These include issues with regard to consent, as it is typically a parent who consents to the use of samples from children. In this paper, we discuss the scope of parental consent. This scope has a temporal dimension and one related to the content of consent. It is not questioned that the temporal scope of parental consent is limited and that young adults have the right to decide on the fate of their samples when they reach the age of maturity. With regard to the content of consent, the question remains whether parents are allowed to give full broad consent to any possible future research on the samples of their children. We argue that they should not be allowed to do so, based on two premises. First, it is generally acknowledged that children have a right to express their own values and that they should be given the opportunity to develop their own autonomy as they grow older. Second, research and science are not completely value-free and some types of research may be more sensitive than other types. Children should be given the opportunity to express their values also in this respect.

The return of individual research findings in paediatric genetic research.

The combination of the issue of return of individual genetic results/incidental findings and paediatric biobanks is not much discussed in ethical literature. The traditional arguments pro and con return of such findings focus on principles such as respect for persons, autonomy and solidarity. Two dimensions have been distilled from the discussion on return of individual results in a genetic research context: the respect for a participant's autonomy and the duty of the researcher. Concepts such as autonomy and solidarity do not fit easily in the discussion when paediatric biobanks are concerned. Although parents may be allowed to enrol children in minimal risk genetic research on stored tissue samples, they should not be given the option to opt out of receiving important health information. Also, children have a right to an open future: parents do not have the right to access any genetic data that a biobank holds on their children. In this respect, the guidelines on genetic testing of minors are applicable. With regard to the duty of the researcher the question of whether researchers have a more stringent duty to return important health information when their research subjects are children is more difficult to answer. A researcher's primary duty is to perform useful research, a policy to return individual results must not hamper this task. The fact that vulnerable children are concerned, is an additional factor that should be considered when a policy of returning results is laid down for a specific collection or research project.

Genes that determine immunology and inflammation modify the basic defect of impaired ion conductance in cystic fibrosis epithelia.

BACKGROUND: The cystic fibrosis (CF) basic defect, caused by dysfunction of the apical chloride channel CFTR in the gastrointestinal and respiratory tract epithelia, has not been employed so far to support the role of CF modifier genes. METHODS: Patients were selected from 101 families with a total of 171 F508del-CFTR homozygous CF patients to identify CF modifying genes. A candidate gene based association study of 52 genes on 16 different chromosomes with a total of 182 genetic markers was performed. Differences in haplotype and/or diplotype distribution between case and reference CF subpopulations were analysed. RESULTS: Variants at immunologically relevant genes were associated with the manifestation of the CF basic defect (0.01

The use of diagnostic collections of DNA for research: interviews at the eight Belgian centers for human genetics.

The attitudes towards the reuse for research of biological samples that were gathered in a diagnostics context have changed over the last years. A few decades ago, people would not hesitate to use such samples without explicit consent. Then, in conjunction with a move towards a stress to personal autonomy in bioethics, many would argue that written consent for such secondary use is necessary. Not much is known about the actual practices with regard to this subject. We have interviewed spokes-persons of all eight Belgian centers for medical genetics, and have found that they would all adhere to the latter stream of thought. As such, they would not use diagnostic DNA for research purposes without written consent. Recently, however, international guidelines have moved towards the concept of presumed consent for diagnostic samples. There is agreement that patients and donors should be informed about possible research uses, and should be given the opportunity to opt out, but there is no need for explicitly written consent to be able to use these samples. Extracted DNA may fall under the same regime as other tissue that is gathered in a diagnostic or surgical context in university hospitals. Such policy satisfies both the requirement of respect for donor's autonomy as well as the requirement of using research resources sensibly and is backed by international guidelines and opinions.