Cargando…

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Microdeletion syndromes are characterized by small (<5 Mb) chromosomal deletions in which one or more genes are involved. These are frequently associated with multiple congenital anomalies. The phenotype is the result of haploinsufficiency of genes in the critical int...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Halder, Ashutosh, Jain, Manish, Chaudhary, Isha, Gupta, Neerja, Kabra, Madhulika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24056568
_version_ 1782283642449428480
author Halder, Ashutosh
Jain, Manish
Chaudhary, Isha
Gupta, Neerja
Kabra, Madhulika
author_facet Halder, Ashutosh
Jain, Manish
Chaudhary, Isha
Gupta, Neerja
Kabra, Madhulika
author_sort Halder, Ashutosh
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Microdeletion syndromes are characterized by small (<5 Mb) chromosomal deletions in which one or more genes are involved. These are frequently associated with multiple congenital anomalies. The phenotype is the result of haploinsufficiency of genes in the critical interval. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique is commonly used for precise genetic diagnosis of microdeletion syndromes. This study was conducted to assess the role of FISH in the diagnosis of suspected microdeletion syndrome. METHODS: FISH was carried out on 301 clinically suspected microdeletion syndrome cases for the confirmation of clinical diagnosis using non-commercial probes. Of these, 177 cases were referred for 22q11.2 microdeletion, 42 cases were referred for William syndrome, 38 cases were referred for Prader Willi/Angelman and 44 cases were referred for other suspected microdeletion syndromes. RESULTS: FISH was confirmatory in 23 cases only (7.6%). There were 17 cases of 22q11.2 microdeletion, four cases of Prader Willi syndrome and two cases of William syndrome. INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSION: We conclude that FISH should not be the method of choice for clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes. We propose to follow strict clinical criteria for FISH testing or preferably to follow better methods (genotype first approach). Whole genome screening may be used as first line of test and FISH may be used for confirmation of screening result, screening of family members and prenatal diagnosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3767260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37672602013-09-18 Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes Halder, Ashutosh Jain, Manish Chaudhary, Isha Gupta, Neerja Kabra, Madhulika Indian J Med Res Original Article BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Microdeletion syndromes are characterized by small (<5 Mb) chromosomal deletions in which one or more genes are involved. These are frequently associated with multiple congenital anomalies. The phenotype is the result of haploinsufficiency of genes in the critical interval. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique is commonly used for precise genetic diagnosis of microdeletion syndromes. This study was conducted to assess the role of FISH in the diagnosis of suspected microdeletion syndrome. METHODS: FISH was carried out on 301 clinically suspected microdeletion syndrome cases for the confirmation of clinical diagnosis using non-commercial probes. Of these, 177 cases were referred for 22q11.2 microdeletion, 42 cases were referred for William syndrome, 38 cases were referred for Prader Willi/Angelman and 44 cases were referred for other suspected microdeletion syndromes. RESULTS: FISH was confirmatory in 23 cases only (7.6%). There were 17 cases of 22q11.2 microdeletion, four cases of Prader Willi syndrome and two cases of William syndrome. INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSION: We conclude that FISH should not be the method of choice for clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes. We propose to follow strict clinical criteria for FISH testing or preferably to follow better methods (genotype first approach). Whole genome screening may be used as first line of test and FISH may be used for confirmation of screening result, screening of family members and prenatal diagnosis. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3767260/ /pubmed/24056568 Text en Copyright: © The Indian Journal of Medical Research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Halder, Ashutosh
Jain, Manish
Chaudhary, Isha
Gupta, Neerja
Kabra, Madhulika
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title_full Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title_fullStr Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title_full_unstemmed Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title_short Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
title_sort fluorescence in situ hybridization (fish) using non-commercial probes in the diagnosis of clinically suspected microdeletion syndromes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24056568
work_keys_str_mv AT halderashutosh fluorescenceinsituhybridizationfishusingnoncommercialprobesinthediagnosisofclinicallysuspectedmicrodeletionsyndromes
AT jainmanish fluorescenceinsituhybridizationfishusingnoncommercialprobesinthediagnosisofclinicallysuspectedmicrodeletionsyndromes
AT chaudharyisha fluorescenceinsituhybridizationfishusingnoncommercialprobesinthediagnosisofclinicallysuspectedmicrodeletionsyndromes
AT guptaneerja fluorescenceinsituhybridizationfishusingnoncommercialprobesinthediagnosisofclinicallysuspectedmicrodeletionsyndromes
AT kabramadhulika fluorescenceinsituhybridizationfishusingnoncommercialprobesinthediagnosisofclinicallysuspectedmicrodeletionsyndromes