SC_DDD-G-5
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: EGAD00010001606 | EGA |
REPOSITORIES: EGA
Publications
B56δ-related protein phosphatase 2A dysfunction identified in patients with intellectual disability.
Houge Gunnar G Haesen Dorien D Vissers Lisenka E L M LE Mehta Sarju S Parker Michael J MJ Wright Michael M Vogt Julie J McKee Shane S Tolmie John L JL Cordeiro Nuno N Kleefstra Tjitske T Willemsen Marjolein H MH Reijnders Margot R F MR Berland Siren S Hayman Eli E Lahat Eli E Brilstra Eva H EH van Gassen Koen L I KL Zonneveld-Huijssoon Evelien E de Bie Charlotte I CI Hoischen Alexander A Eichler Evan E EE Holdhus Rita R Steen Vidar M VM Døskeland Stein Ove SO Hurles Matthew E ME FitzPatrick David R DR Janssens Veerle V
The Journal of clinical investigation 20150713 8
Here we report inherited dysregulation of protein phosphatase activity as a cause of intellectual disability (ID). De novo missense mutations in 2 subunits of serine/threonine (Ser/Thr) protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A) were identified in 16 individuals with mild to severe ID, long-lasting hypotonia, epileptic susceptibility, frontal bossing, mild hypertelorism, and downslanting palpebral fissures. PP2A comprises catalytic (C), scaffolding (A), and regulatory (B) subunits that determine subcellular ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Post-QC (pre-imputation) genotype data for N=6,983 DDD probands included in the neurodevelopmental disorder discovery GWAS (Niemi et al., Nature 2018). Consists of filtered set of samples and variants from EGAD00010001598 and EGAD00010001600. Includes patient HPO phenotype terms and GWAS summary statistics (including imputed variants). Samples were genotyped on the Illumina HumanCoreExome BeadChip and Illumina InfiniumCoreExome Beadchip
| EGAD00010001604 | EGA
Project description:Unfiltered genotype data for DDD Study trios (patient and parents) (N=2,166 samples), some of which were used for replication of neurodevelopmental disorder polygenic risk (Niemi et al., Nature 2018). Samples were genotyped on the Illumina HumanOmniExpress BeadChip
| EGAD00010001602 | EGA
Project description:Batch 2 of unfiltered genotype for DDD Study patients (N=8,286), some of which were used in the neurodevelopmental disorder discovery GWAS (Niemi et al., Nature 2018). Samples were genotyped on the Illumina InfiniumCoreExome Beadchip. QC'd data is available in release EGAD00010001604
| EGAD00010001600 | EGA
Project description:Batch 1 of unfiltered genotype data for DDD Study patients (N=2,997), some of which were used in the neurodevelopmental disorder discovery GWAS (Niemi et al., Nature 2018). Samples were genotyped on the Illumina HumanCoreExome BeadChip. QC'd data is available in release EGAD00010001604
| EGAD00010001598 | EGA
Project description:Clinical laboratories are adopting array comparative genomic hybridization (AGH) as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome AGH systems are available, but little is known about the comparative performance in a clinical context. We prospectively studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP array. The Affymetrix 500K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosome CNVs in 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs were de novo, but only 33 (22%) of the de novo CNVs were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 pathogenic and 4 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 11 of these CNVs were detected by both the Agilent and NimbleGen arrays, 9 by the Affymetrix 500K and Illumina beadchips, and 5 by the SMRT BAC array. Two of the 4 pathogenic or possibly pathogenic CNVs present in the trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 array were identified. Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different AGH platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different methodology. 45 trios were analysed consisting of child (proband) and both normal parents.
2011-02-17 | E-GEOD-27216 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Clinical laboratories are adopting array comparative genomic hybridization (AGH) as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome AGH systems are available, but little is known about the comparative performance in a clinical context. We prospectively studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP array. The Affymetrix 500K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosome CNVs in 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs were de novo, but only 33 (22%) of the de novo CNVs were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 pathogenic and 4 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 11 of these CNVs were detected by both the Agilent and NimbleGen arrays, 9 by the Affymetrix 500K and Illumina beadchips, and 5 by the SMRT BAC array. Two of the 4 pathogenic or possibly pathogenic CNVs present in the trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 array were identified. Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different AGH platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different methodology. 30 trios were analysed consisting of child (proband) and both normal parents.
2011-02-17 | E-GEOD-27251 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Clinical laboratories are adopting array comparative genomic hybridization (AGH) as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome AGH systems are available, but little is known about the comparative performance in a clinical context. We prospectively studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP array. The Affymetrix 500K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosome CNVs in 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs were de novo, but only 33 (22%) of the de novo CNVs were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 pathogenic and 4 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 11 of these CNVs were detected by both the Agilent and NimbleGen arrays, 9 by the Affymetrix 500K and Illumina beadchips, and 5 by the SMRT BAC array. Two of the 4 pathogenic or possibly pathogenic CNVs present in the trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 array were identified. Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different AGH platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different methodology. 30 trios were analysed consisting of child (proband) and both normal parents.
2011-02-17 | E-GEOD-27229 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Clinical laboratories are adopting array comparative genomic hybridization (AGH) as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome AGH systems are available, but little is known about the comparative performance in a clinical context. We prospectively studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP array. The Affymetrix 500K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosome CNVs in 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs were de novo, but only 33 (22%) of the de novo CNVs were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 pathogenic and 4 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 11 of these CNVs were detected by both the Agilent and NimbleGen arrays, 9 by the Affymetrix 500K and Illumina beadchips, and 5 by the SMRT BAC array. Two of the 4 pathogenic or possibly pathogenic CNVs present in the trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 array were identified. Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different AGH platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different methodology. 15 trios were analysed consisting of child (proband) and both normal parents. We performed separate hybridizations for the mother, father, and child and then performed pair-wise comparisons of the normalized hybridization intensities for the child to the mother and of the child to the father in silico.
2011-02-17 | E-GEOD-27145 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:We identified a novel homozygous 15q13.3 microdeletion in a young boy with a complex neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by severe cerebral visual impairment with additional signs of congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB), congenital hypotonia with areflexia, profound intellectual disability, and refractory epilepsy. The mechanisms by which the genes in the deleted region exert their effect are unclear. In this paper we probed the role of downstream effects of the deletions as a contributing mechanism to the molecular basis of the observed phenotype. We analyzed gene expression of lymphoblastoid cells derived from peripheral blood of the proband and his relatives to ascertain the relative effects of the homozygous and heterozygous deletions. The proband with 15q13.3 homozygous deletion and his parents with 15q13.3 heterozygous deletions described in our previous report 15 were evaluated using Affymetrix aCGH-244K arrays (build hg18). The aCGH data were validated by qPCR using primers specific to CHRNA7 as previously described. 15 The extended family and comparison subjects were also screened using the CHRNA7 primers. Immortalized lymphoblastoid lines were created from the proband, his mother, father, a paternal half sister, a paternal half brother, a paternal grandmother and two paternal great uncles. Three lymphoblastoid lines from age- and sex- matched normally developing comparison subjects with normal chromosomes were obtained from the Coriell cell repository [(AG14724 (8 yo), AG14948 (10 yo), AG14980 (9 yo)] were used for gene expression comparison with the proband. The samples from the father, mother and paternal grandmother with heterozygous 15q13.3 deletions were compared to samples from lymphoblastoid cells from adult male and female subjects respectively (normal copy number for 15q13.3 determined by qPCR).
2013-02-17 | E-GEOD-43583 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:This is array CGH data of recurrent 17q21.31 deletions used to delineate breakpoints within segmental duplications in a study by Itsara et al. Somatic cell hybrids were generated from three parent-child trios probands with 17q21.31 deletions and three 17q21.31 probands for which no parental DNA was available that isolated individual chromosome 17 homologues. In parents, this isolated the H2 from the H1 haplotypes in distinct cell lines, and in probands, isolated the deletion-bearing chromosomes from the unaffected chromosome 17. In parent-child trios, the deletion-bearing chromosomes were hybridized against the progenitor parental chromosome. In probands with no parental DNA, the deletion-bearing chromosomes were hybridized against an H2 chromosome. 6 experimental hybes of deletion-bearing proband vs H2 chromosome reference. 3 control hybes of H1 vs H2 haplotype, H2 vs H2 haplotype (different individuals), and H1 vs deletion-bearing H2 haplotype.
2012-06-01 | E-GEOD-34867 | biostudies-arrayexpress