|
|
||
 |
|||
|
|||
DOI: 10.1369/jhc.4B6414.2005
Volume 53 (3): 367-370, 2005
Copyright ©The Histochemical Society, Inc.
BRIEF REPORT |
Another Small Supernumerary Marker Chromosome (sSMC) Derived from Chromosome 2 : Towards a Genotype/Phenotype Correlation
Institute of Human Genetics and Anthropology, Jena, Germany
Correspondence to: Dr. Thomas Liehr, Institut für Humangenetik und Anthroplogie, Kollegiengasse 10, D-07743 Jena, Germany. E-mail: i8lith{at}mti.uni-jena.de
 |
Summary |
|---|
 Top Summary Literature Cited |
|---|
Here we report a prenatally detected small supernumerary marker chromosome (sSMC) derived from chromosome 2 as demonstrated by cenM-FISH (centromere-specific multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization). By application of a recently described subcentromere-specific probe set (subcenM-FISH) for chromosome 2, the presence of a small partial trisomy due to a karyotype 47,XX,+r(2)(::p11.1->q11.2::) was demonstrated. Including this case, a total of 11 patients with sSMC(2) are described throughout the literature. Based on that data, a first genotype/phenotype correlation according to the size and structure of the marker is suggested. (J Histochem Cytochem 53:367–370, 2005)
Key Words: prenatal diagnosis • FISH • small supernumerary marker • chromosome • chromosome 2q • genotype/phenotype • correlation
A DEFINITION of small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMCs) was recently suggested as follows: "sSMC are structurally abnormal chromosomes that cannot be identified or characterized unambiguously by conventional banding cytogenetics alone, and are (in general) equal in size or smaller than a chromosome 20 of the same metaphase spread" (Liehr et al. 2004a
). Therefore, sSMCs can be characterized only by molecular cytogenetic methods, i.e., fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). We recently proposed a strategy for how to proceed if a sSMC is detected (Liehr et al. 2003,2004b). According to that, apart from microdissection and reverse painting, the most straightforward way to determine an sSMC's origin is the cenM-FISH approach (Nietzel et al. 2001). For characterization of the content and structure of the sSMC, the subcenM-FISH approach should be applied, as introduced and applied in 
30 cases with sSMCs in Starke et al. (2003).
We followed that scheme in the case of a pregnant woman whose fetus after GTG-banding was found to have the karyotype 45,X[5]/47,XX,+mar[43]/46,XX[2]. The fetus was prenatally studied (amniocytic fluid in week 21+6) because it was an ICSI-induced pregnancy and, according to ultrasound examination, had a double bubble sign (i.e., sonographic signs of two cystic structures in the abdomen) and a single umbilical cord artery. The parents did not want a chromosome analysis of their own. Therefore, it could not be determined if the sSMC was inherited or had arisen de novo. The result of cenM-FISH (Figure 1) indicated that the marker was a small ring derived from chromosome 2. This result was confirmed and refined by subcenM-FISH (Figure 2). Therefore, the sSMC could be characterized as 47,XX,+r(2)(::p11.1->q11.2::). The pregnancy was continued and a healthy child was born. No Turner syndrome stigmata were present, and because the parents refused a postnatal chromosome analysis it could not be clarified if a Turner mosaic, as detected prenatally, was also present in the newborn.
|
|
This is the eleventh case reported in the literature with an sSMC derived from chromosome 2. In all 11 cases the sSMC is reported to be a small supernumerary ring chromosome (sSRC). This is striking because for sSMCs derived from all other chromosomes apart from chromosome 2 there are always reports of sSMCs and sSRCs (for overview on sSMC see Liehr et al. 2004a
and http://mti-n.mti.uni-jena.de/huwww/MOL_ZYTO/ sSMC.htm). There is a high probability that this ring chromosome formation is due to low repetitive elements present in the pericentric region of chromosome 2 similar to that of chromosomes 10 and 12 (Jackson et al. 1999; Vermeesch et al. 2003). Five of the 11 cases reported in the literature and summarized in Table 1 are without clinical symptoms. However, only eight of those 11 cases were characterized in detail for their chromosomal content. Among those characterized comprehensively, there is a prominent correlation concerning presence of centromere-near sequences of 2p11.2 plus clinical abnormalities (cases 1 and 2) and absence of clinical signs plus presence of proximal sequences of 2q11.2 (cases 3, 4, and 5). Small partial trisomies of material derived distally from 2q11.2 already lead to clinical signs (cases 7 and 8). Case 6 has no clinical abnormalities and an sSMC similar to that of cases 7 and 8, but in case 6 there is no partial trisomy because a balanced karyotype 47,XY,del(2)(p10p12),+r(2)(::p10->q12::) was diagnosed. Therefore, we can speculate that case 9 consists of 2p centromeric and/or 2p11.2-derived material. Case 10 may include 2p11.2 or material distal from 2q11.2 and for case 11, for which the presence of 2q material is proven, the latter suggestion made for case 10 may also be true.
Even though uniparental disomy (UPD) must always be considered in case of an sSMC (Liehr et al. 2004a) and UPD 2 was excluded only for cases 5 and 8 in Table 1, we provide evidence for a first genotype/phenotype correlation of one small subgroup of sSMCs, those derived from chromosome 2 (Figure 3). It must be checked whether such a relatively simple correlation can be confirmed by further cases, e.g., for sSMC derived from chromosome 3 the situation seems to be more complex and is not yet resolved (Liehr et al. 2004c).
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Supported in part by Dr Robert Pfleger Stiftung and the EU (ICA2-CT-2000-10012).
The case was kindly provided by Drs M. Kosskiewicz and H. Tittelbach (Nürnberg, Germany).
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Presented in part at the 14th Workshop on Fetal Cells and Fetal DNA: Recent Progress in Molecular Genetic and Cytogenetic Investigations for Early Prenatal and Postnatal Diagnosis, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany, April 17–18, 2004.
Received for publication May 19, 2004; accepted August 30, 2004
|
Literature Cited |
|---|
|
TopSummaryLiterature Cited |
|---|
Daniel A, Malafiej P, Preece K, Chia N, Nelson J, Smith M (1994) Identification of marker chromosomes in thirteen patients using FISH probing. Am J Med Genet 53:8–18[CrossRef][Medline]
Giardino D, Finelli P, Russo S, Gottardi G, Rodeschini O, Atza MG, Natacci F, et al. (2002) Small familial supernumerary ring chromosome 2: FISH characterization and genotype-phenotype correlation. Am J Med Genet 111:319–323[Medline]
Guanciali-Franchi P, Calabrese G, Morizio E, Fantasia D, Colosimo A, Rinaldi MM, Cristini L, et al. (2004) Identification of 14 rare marker chromosomes and derivatives by spectral karyotyping in prenatal and postnatal diagnosis. Am J Med Genet 127A:144–148[CrossRef]
Jackson MS, Rocchi M, Thompson G, Hearn T, Crosier M, Guy J, Kirk D, et al. (1999) Sequences flanking the centromere of human chromosome 10 are a complex patchwork of arm-specific sequences, stable duplications and unstable sequences with homologies to telomeric and other centromeric locations. Hum Mol Genet 8:205–215
Lasan Trcic R, Hitrec V, Letica L, Cuk M, Begovic D (2003) Small supernumerary marker chromosome derived from proximal p-arm of chromosome 2: identification by fluorescent in situ hybridization. Croat Med J 44:477–479[Medline]
Liehr T, Claussen U, Starke H (2004a) Small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMC) in humans. Cytogenet Genome Res (in press)
Liehr T, Hickmann G, Kozlowski P, Claussen U, Starke H (2004c) Molecular-cytogenetic characterization of the origin and the presence of pericentromeric euchromatin on minute supernumerary marker chromosomes (SMCs). Chromosome Res 12:239–244[Medline]
Liehr T, Mrasek K, Weise A, Kuechler A, von Eggeling F, Claussen U, Starke H (2004b) Characterization of small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMC) in human. Current Genomics 5:279–286
Liehr T, Nietzel A, Weise A, Mrasek K, von Eggeling F, Claussen U, Starke H (2003) A strategy for the characterization of small supernumerary marker chromosomes (SMC). Balk J Med Genet 6:69–72
Nietzel A, Rocchi M, Starke H, Heller A, Fiedler W, Wlodarska I, Loncarevic IF, et al. (2001) A new multicolor-FISH approach for the characterization of marker chromosomes: centromere-specific multicolor-FISH (cenM-FISH). Hum Genet 108:199–204[CrossRef][Medline]
Ostroverkhova NV, Nazarenko SA, Rubtsov NB, Nazarenko LP, Bunina EN (1999) Characterization of a small supernumerary ring marker derived from chromosome 2 by forward and reverse chromosome painting. Am J Med Genet 87:217–220[Medline]
Plattner R, Heerema NA, Howard-Peebles PN, Miles JH, Soukup S, Palmer CG (1993) Clinical findings in patients with marker chromosomes identified by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Hum Genet 91:589–598[Medline]
Starke H, Nietzel A, Weise A, Heller A, Mrasek K, Belitz B, Kelbova C, et al. (2003) Small supernumerary marker chromosomes (SMCs): genotype-phenotype correlation and classification. Hum Genet 114:51–67[CrossRef][Medline]
Vermeesch JR, Duhamel H, Raeymaekers P, Van Zand K, Verhasselt P, Fryns JP, Marynen P (2003) A physical map of the chromosome 12 centromere. Cytogenet Genome Res 103:63–73[CrossRef][Medline]
Villa N, Riva P, Colombo D, Sala E, Mariani S, Zorloni C, Crosti F, et al. (2001) Identification of a small supernumerary marker chromosome, r(2)(p10q11.2), and the problem of determining prognosis. Prenat Diagn 21:801–805[CrossRef][Medline]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Guidelines | Subscriptions | About | exPRESS - Current - Archive | Business Information | Contact |