Four small supernumerary marker chromosomes derived from chromosomes 6, 8, 11 and 12 in a patient with minimal clinical abnormalities: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Small supernumerary marker chromosomes are still a problem in cytogenetic diagnostic and genetic counseling. This holds especially true for the rare cases with multiple small supernumerary marker chromosomes. Most such cases are reported to be clinically severely affected due to the chromosomal imbalances induced by the presence of small supernumerary marker chromosomes. Here we report the first case of a patient having four different small supernumerary marker chromosomes which, apart from slight developmental retardation in youth and non-malignant hyperpigmentation, presented no other clinical signs.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>Our patient was a 30-year-old Caucasian man, delivered by caesarean section because of macrosomy. At birth he presented with bilateral cryptorchidism but no other birth defects. At age of around two years he showed psychomotor delay and a bilateral convergent strabismus. Later he had slight learning difficulties, with normal social behavior and now lives an independent life as an adult. Apart from hypogenitalism, he has multiple hyperpigmented nevi all over his body, short feet with pes cavus and claw toes. At age of 30 years, cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic analysis revealed a karyotype of 50,XY,+min(6)(:p11.1-> q11.1:),+min(8)(:p11.1->q11.1:),+min(11)(:p11.11->q11:),+min(12)(:p11.2~12->q10:), leading overall to a small partial trisomy in 12p11.1~12.1.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Including this case, four single case reports are available in the literature with a karyotype 50,XN,+4mar. For prenatally detected multiple small supernumerary marker chromosomes in particular we learn from this case that such a cytogenetic condition may be correlated with a positive clinical outcome.</p

The inv dup (15) or idic (15) syndrome (Tetrasomy 15q)

The inv dup(15) or idic(15) syndrome displays distinctive clinical findings represented by early central hypotonia, developmental delay and intellectual disability, epilepsy, and autistic behaviour. Incidence at birth is estimated at 1 in 30,000 with a sex ratio of almost 1:1. Developmental delay and intellectual disability affect all individuals with inv dup(15) and are usually moderate to profound. Expressive language is absent or very poor and often echolalic. Comprehension is very limited and contextual. Intention to communicate is absent or very limited. The distinct behavioral disorder shown by children and adolescents has been widely described as autistic or autistic-like. Epilepsy with a wide variety of seizure types can occur in these individuals, with onset between 6 months and 9 years. Various EEG abnormalities have been described. Muscle hypotonia is observed in almost all individuals, associated, in most of them, with joint hyperextensibility and drooling. Facial dysmorphic features are absent or subtle, and major malformations are rare. Feeding difficulties are reported in the newborn period

Introduction to the Special Issue on Disinhibitory Disorders in Childhood

This article introduces a special series of manuscripts that survey and discuss five important issues involved in understanding problematic inhibition as a contributor to childhood mental disorders. The five areas are (a) the need for a unifying neurobehavioral theory of disinhibition, (b) coordination of theory with a technology of assessment of disinhibitory problems, (c) identification of the longitudinal course of disinhibitory problems, (d) understanding familial influences and outcomes associated with disinhibition disorders, and (e) the evaluation of interventions tailored specifically to disinhibition

Introduction to the Special Issue on Disinhibitory Disorders in Childhood

This article introduces a special series of manuscripts that survey and discuss five important issues involved in understanding problematic inhibition as a contributor to childhood mental disorders. The five areas are (a) the need for a unifying neurobehavioral theory of disinhibition, (b) coordination of theory with a technology of assessment of disinhibitory problems, (c) identification of the longitudinal course of disinhibitory problems, (d) understanding familial influences and outcomes associated with disinhibition disorders, and (e) the evaluation of interventions tailored specifically to disinhibition