Journals / Turkish Journal of Pediatrics / 2018 / Cilt: 60 - Sayı: 1

Clinical and molecular evaluation of 16 patients with Rett syndrome

Pages
1–9
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, the diagnosticcriteria revised in 2010 are more comprehensive as compared to the 2002criteria; however, further revision may increase diagnostic sensitivity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:SUMMARY: Zengin-Akkuş P, Taşkıran EZ, Kabaçam S, Şimşek-Kiper PÖ,Haliloğlu G, Boduroğlu K, Utine GE.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Clinical and molecular evaluation of 16patients with Rett syndrome.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, the diagnosticcriteria revised in 2010 are more comprehensive as compared to the 2002criteria; however, further revision may increase diagnostic sensitivity.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

SUMMARY: Zengin-Akkuş P, Taşkıran EZ, Kabaçam S, Şimşek-Kiper PÖ,Haliloğlu G, Boduroğlu K, Utine GE. Clinical and molecular evaluation of 16patients with Rett syndrome. Turk J Pediatr 2018; 60: 1-9.Rett syndrome is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by mutations inMECP2. The disease is characterized by early neurological regression followinga normal initial development. The diagnosis is a clinical one, based on majorand minor diagnostic criteria. This study, in a group of patients from asingle tertiary center, aimed to evaluate the efficiency of clinical diagnosisand to see if there was a diagnostic delay. A second aim was to investigategenotype-phenotype correlations, based on Pineda scores. In this study, sixteenpatients with a median age of 6.5 years (2.5-22 years) were included, followingmolecular confirmation of clinical diagnosis. The median age at the onset ofsymptoms and the median age at clinical diagnosis was 1.5 years and 2.5years, respectively, the difference being statistically significant. Consideringthe Rett syndrome diagnostic criteria, initially regulated in 2002 and revisedin 2010, seven and two patients in our group, respectively, did not meet themain criteria. Pineda scores among mutation groups were statistically notdifferent. To conclude, the present study revealed presence of a diagnosticdelay. The challenge may be that the patients do not exhibit full-blownclinical picture initially. No genotype-phenotype correlations were detectedin clinical severity, as measured by Pineda scores. Moreover, the diagnosticcriteria revised in 2010 are more comprehensive as compared to the 2002criteria; however, further revision may increase diagnostic sensitivity.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kiper, P. Ö. Ş., Utine, G. E., Akkuş, P. Z., Kabaçam, S., Haliloğlu, G., Taşkıran, E. Z., Boduroğlu, K. (2022). Clinical and molecular evaluation of 16 patients with Rett syndrome. Turkish Journal of Pediatrics, Cilt: 60 - Sayı: 1, 1–9. https://ajindex.com/articles/613157

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Hagberg B. Rett’s syndrome: prevalence and impact on progressive severe mental retardation in girls. Acta Paediatr Scand 1985; 74: 405-408
  2. Dolce A, Ben-Zeev B, Naidu S, Kossoff EH. Rett syndrome and epilepsy: an update for child neurologists. Pediatr Neurol 2013; 48: 337-345
  3. Neul JL, Kaufmann WE, Glaze DG, et al. Rett syndrome: revised diagnostic criteria and nomenclature. Ann Neurol 2010; 68: 944-950
  4. Hagberg B, Hanefeld F, Percy A, Skjeldal O. An update on clinically applicable diagnostic criteria in Rett syndrome. Comments to Rett Syndrome Clinical Criteria Consensus Panel Satellite to European Paediatric Neurology Society Meeting, Baden Baden, Germany, 11 September 2001. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2002; 6: 293-297
  5. Kerr AM, Nomura Y, Armstrong D, et al. Guidelines for reporting clinical features in cases with MECP2 mutations. Brain Dev 2001; 23: 208-211
  6. Amir RE, Van den Veyver IB, Schultz R, et al. Influence of mutation type and X chromosome inactivation on Rett syndrome phenotypes. Ann Neurol 2000; 47: 670-679
  7. Cuddapah VA, Pillai RB, Shekar KV, et al. MethylCpG-binding protein 2 (MECP2) mutation type is associated with disease severity in Rett syndrome. J Med Genet 2014; 51: 152-158
  8. Monros E, Armstrong J, Aibar E, Poo P, Canos I, Pineda M. Rett syndrome in Spain: mutation analysis and clinical correlations. Brain Dev 2001; 23: 251-253
  9. Amir RE, Van den Veyver IB, Wan M, Tran CQ, Francke U, Zoghbi HY. Rett syndrome is caused by mutations in X-linked MECP2, encoding methyl-CpG-binding protein 2. Nat Genet 1999; 23: 185-188
  10. Adegbola AA, Gonzales ML, Chess A, LaSalle JM, Cox GF. A novel hypomorphic MECP2 point mutation is associated with a neuropsychiatric phenotype. Hum Genet 2009; 124: 615-623
  11. Neul JL, Fang P, Barrish J, et al. Specific mutations in methyl-CpG-binding protein 2 confer different severity in Rett syndrome. Neurology 2008; 70: 1313-1321
  12. Christodoulou J, Ho G. MECP2-Related Disorders. In: Pagon RA, Adam MP, Ardinger HH, et al. (Eds). GeneReviews® (Updated 2012 Jun 28). Seattle: University of Washington, 2012: 1993-2017
  13. Christodoulou J, Grimm A, Maher T, Bennetts B. RettBASE: The IRSA MECP2 variation database-a new mutation database in evolution. Hum Mutat 2003; 21: 466-472
  14. Gillberg C. Autism and Rett syndrome: some notes on differential diagnosis. Am J Med Genet 1986; 1: 127-131
  15. Marangi G, Zollino M. Pitt-Hopkins syndrome and differential diagnosis: a molecular and clinical challenge.