PRADER-WILLI AND ANGELMAN SYNDROMES IN THE GREEK POPULATION: A CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR STUDY
Salavoura K*, Sofocleous C, Mavrou A, Kalaitzidaki M, Frysira H, Kolialexi A, Zafiriou D, Yapijakis C, Metaxotou E
*Corresponding Author: : Katerina Salavoura, MD, PhD, Department of Immunology and Histocompatibility, “Aghia Sophia” Children’s Hospital, Thivon and Papadiamantopoulou, Athens, Greece; Tel.: +30-210-7467766; Fax: +30-210-7757401; E-mail: Salavoura_Katerina@hotmail.com
page: 27

RESULTS

 

Clinical findings
Based on published criteria [1,5], clinical examination classified 40/114 (35%) PWS and 32/57 (56%) AS patients as having typical phenotype of the syndrome. Typical PWS patients presented with hypotonia in the neonatal period (88%), obesity after the 3rd-5th year (84%), developmental delay (85%), characteristic face (78%) and small hands and feet (68%) (Table 1). The clinical presentation of AS was characterized by severe developmental delay (91%), lack of speech (84%), ataxic gait (69%), spasms (63%) and improper laughter (63%) (Table 2).
            In 5 of 15 children referred with hypotonia in the neonatal period, the diagnosis of PWS was confirmed, since DNRP analysis revealed deletion or uniparental disomy in the 15q11 region. The remaining ten children were re-examined 5 years later and the diagnoses were as follows: 1 Robinow syndrome, 1 Rett syndrome, 1 central core disease, 1 agenesis of corpus callosum, 1 tetraplegia due to birth injury, 1 developmental delay of unidentified reason. Four children had normal development.

Cytogenetic investigation
Cytogenetic analysis revealed a normal karyotype in 59 patients, a visible cytogenetic deletion in the region 15q11-13 in 3 cases and a Robertsonian translocation 45 XY, t (15; 15) in 1 case.

Molecular investigation and fluorescent in situ hybridisation analysis
Molecular investigation of patients using PCR analysis confirmed the diagnosis of PWS or AS with the detection of absent paternal or maternal alleles, respectively. Schematic presentations of molecular results are shown in Figures 1 and 2.  Diagnosis was confirmed in 39/114 of referrals for PWS (34%) and revealed 28 deletions (72%) and 11 cases with uniparental disomy (28%). Uniparental disomy was observed also in the patient with the 45XY, t (15; 15) karyotype. Most of the typical PWS patients (28/40) had a molecular alteration (70%), while molecular findings were also observed in 11% of atypical cases (7/62). 

Table 1. Laboratory findings in Prader Willi and Angelman syndrome patients.

 

 

PWS Patients

 

%

 

AS Patients

 

%

 

Referred cases

 

114

 

 

57

 

 

Males

 

79

 

 

22

 

 

Females

 

35

 

 

35

 

 

Mean age (years)

 

5.5

 

 

7.6

 

 

Karyotype abnormalities

 

4

 

3.5

 

0

 

0.0

 

FISH analysis

 

23

 

20.0

 

11

 

19.0

 

Abnormalities detected by FISH

 

1

 

0.8

 

0

 

0.0

 

Molecular analysis

 

114

 

 

57

 

 

Molecular changes

 

39

 

34.0

 

18

 

32.0

 

Confirmed diagnosis

 

40

 

35.0

 

18

 

32.0

 

Table 2. Clinical characteristics of 40 patients with a typical Prader Willi syndrome (PWS) phenotype and 32 patients with a typical Angelman syndrome (AS) phenotype.

 

Clinical Characteristics

 

PWS Patients
(n = 40)

 

%

 

AS Patients
(n = 32)

 

%

 

Gestation period

 

Normal 35

 

88.0

 

Normal 23

 

72.0

 

Delivery

 

Cesarian 12

 

35.0

 

Cesarian 5

 

16.0

 

Mean birth weight

 

2.940 gr

 

 

3.110 gr

 

 

Hypotonia in the neonatal period

 

35

 

88.0

 

10

 

31.0

 

Feeding problems

 

26

 

65.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

Obesity after the 3rd-5th year

 

27/32

 

84.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

Characteristic face

 

31

 

78.0

 

18

 

56.0

 

Developmental delay

 

34

 

85.0

 

32

 

100.0

 

Short stature

 

13

 

33.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

Small hands and feet

 

27

 

68.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

Hypognadism

 

15

 

35.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

Ataxic gait

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

22

 

69.0

 

Improper laughter

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

20

 

63.0

 

Lack of speech

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

27

 

84.0

 

Spasms

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

20

 

63.0

 

Microcephaly

 

N.E.

 

N.E.

 

20

 

56.0

 

Behavioral problems

 

23

 

58.0

 

N.E.

 

N.E.


Table 3. Correlation between phenotype and genotype in Prader Willi (PWS) and Angelman syndrome (AS) patients.

 

 

n

 

Molecular
Confirmationa

 

%

 

Uninformative
or Normal

 

%

 

PWS Patients

  1. Typical presentation
  2. Non typical presentation

 

114
40
74

 

28/40
11/74

 

70.0
15.0

 

12/40
63/74

 

30.0
85.0

 

AS Patients

  1. Typical presentation
  2. Non typical presentation

 

57
32
25

 

18/32
0/25

 

56.0
0.0

 

14/32
25/25

 

44.0
100
.0

a Includes deletions, UPD.


Diagnosis was confirmed in 18/57 of referrals for AS examination (32%) and all patients had deletions. Deletions were observed in 56% of the patients with typical AS presentation. No deletions were found in patients with atypical presentation.

Figure 1. Schematic presentation of deletions in PWS patients.

 

 

Figure 2. Schematic presentation of deletions in AS patients.


PWS patients No 118 and No 119, identical twins with typical clinical presentation, had a large deletion encompassing the whole 15q11-13 region except the S543 locus. Patients No 77 and No 78 were also identical twins with typical AS and deletions limited to the S543 locus.
FISH analysis using the SNRPN probe revealed two hybridization signals in 33 cases, which were not informative by PCR analysis, including the case of 45XY, t (15; 15). In 1 patient in whom molecular investigation was not informative, only one signal was observed, indicating a deletion for the SNRPN gene.




Number 27
VOL. 27 (2), 2024
Number 27
VOL. 27 (1), 2024
Number 26
Number 26 VOL. 26(2), 2023 All in one
Number 26
VOL. 26(2), 2023
Number 26
VOL. 26, 2023 Supplement
Number 26
VOL. 26(1), 2023
Number 25
VOL. 25(2), 2022
Number 25
VOL. 25 (1), 2022
Number 24
VOL. 24(2), 2021
Number 24
VOL. 24(1), 2021
Number 23
VOL. 23(2), 2020
Number 22
VOL. 22(2), 2019
Number 22
VOL. 22(1), 2019
Number 22
VOL. 22, 2019 Supplement
Number 21
VOL. 21(2), 2018
Number 21
VOL. 21 (1), 2018
Number 21
VOL. 21, 2018 Supplement
Number 20
VOL. 20 (2), 2017
Number 20
VOL. 20 (1), 2017
Number 19
VOL. 19 (2), 2016
Number 19
VOL. 19 (1), 2016
Number 18
VOL. 18 (2), 2015
Number 18
VOL. 18 (1), 2015
Number 17
VOL. 17 (2), 2014
Number 17
VOL. 17 (1), 2014
Number 16
VOL. 16 (2), 2013
Number 16
VOL. 16 (1), 2013
Number 15
VOL. 15 (2), 2012
Number 15
VOL. 15, 2012 Supplement
Number 15
Vol. 15 (1), 2012
Number 14
14 - Vol. 14 (2), 2011
Number 14
The 9th Balkan Congress of Medical Genetics
Number 14
14 - Vol. 14 (1), 2011
Number 13
Vol. 13 (2), 2010
Number 13
Vol.13 (1), 2010
Number 12
Vol.12 (2), 2009
Number 12
Vol.12 (1), 2009
Number 11
Vol.11 (2),2008
Number 11
Vol.11 (1),2008
Number 10
Vol.10 (2), 2007
Number 10
10 (1),2007
Number 9
1&2, 2006
Number 9
3&4, 2006
Number 8
1&2, 2005
Number 8
3&4, 2004
Number 7
1&2, 2004
Number 6
3&4, 2003
Number 6
1&2, 2003
Number 5
3&4, 2002
Number 5
1&2, 2002
Number 4
Vol.3 (4), 2000
Number 4
Vol.2 (4), 1999
Number 4
Vol.1 (4), 1998
Number 4
3&4, 2001
Number 4
1&2, 2001
Number 3
Vol.3 (3), 2000
Number 3
Vol.2 (3), 1999
Number 3
Vol.1 (3), 1998
Number 2
Vol.3(2), 2000
Number 2
Vol.1 (2), 1998
Number 2
Vol.2 (2), 1999
Number 1
Vol.3 (1), 2000
Number 1
Vol.2 (1), 1999
Number 1
Vol.1 (1), 1998

 

 


 About the journal ::: Editorial ::: Subscription ::: Information for authors ::: Contact
 Copyright © Balkan Journal of Medical Genetics 2006