1 of 29

TREACHER COLLINS SYNDROME: A CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR STUDY BASED ON A LARGE SERIES OF PATIENTS

By Vincent et al

Presented by Joyce Wang’ombe

2 of 29

CONTENT

  • Introduction
  • Aim of the study
  • Materials and methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Critique

3 of 29

INTRODUCTION

  • Treacher Collins syndrome (TCS) is also known as Franceschetti-Zwahlen-Klein syndrome
  • It is a rare genetic condition affecting the way the face develops
  • It belongs to a larger group of disorders called mandibulofacial dysostosis (MFD)
  • Treacher Collins syndrome is the most common among Mandibulofacial dysostosis occurring in 1 in 50, 000 births

4 of 29

INTRODUCTION

TERM

DEFINITION

Mandibulofacial dysostosis

Abnormalities of the facial bones

Malar and mandibular hypoplasia

Under development of cheek and lower jaw bone

Downward slanting palpebral fissures

Drooping of the eye lids

Coloboma of the lower eyelid

V-shaped lower eyelid

Microtia

Having abnormal small ears

Choanal atresia

Blocking of the nasal air way

Aural atresia

Absence of the ear canal

Nail hypoplasia

Nails are absent

Rachis malformation

Malformation of the spine

Intubation/ tracheostoma

Artificial ventilation into the trachea

5 of 29

INTRODUCTION

  • TCS is characterized by typical bilateral facial features such as:

    • Malar and mandibular hypoplasia
    • Downward slanting palpebral fissures
    • Coloboma of the lower eyelid
    • Microtia
    • Conductive hearing loss

  • Intellectual disability is rarely reported and no visceral or skeletal malformations have been reported

6 of 29

INTRODUCTION

Treacher Collins syndrome features in children

7 of 29

INTRODUCTION

  • Treacher Collins syndrome is genetically heterogeneous and three genes are involved:
    • TCOF1 and POLR1D- autosomal dominant
    • POLR1D and POLR1C – autosomal recessive
  • TCOF1 is the major gene involved
  • It encodes Treacle, a nucleolar phosphoprotein involved in production of ribosomal RNA
  • This protein is active during early embryonic development in structures that become bones and other tissues of the face

8 of 29

INTRODUCTION

  • POLR1D and POLR1C encode subunits of RNA polymerase 1 and 3 respectively
  • Heterozygous intragenic deletions in TCOF1 have been described as rare causes of TCS
  • No correlations between phenotypic variability and location of mutations in TCOF1 have been established

9 of 29

INTRODUCTION

  • They also investigated another gene EFTUD2 which had been identified in patients with Mandibulofacial dysostosis and microcephaly or type Guion- Almeida
  • Guion-Almeida is characterized by severe microcephaly, intellectual disability, choanal, eosophageal and aural atresia, cleft palate and congenital heart defects
  • In another study it was investigated that mutation in this gene caused MFD without microcephaly

10 of 29

AIM OF THE STUDY

  • They investigated clinical features in patients assessed for Treacher Collins syndrome and performed molecular screening of the four genes: TCOF1, POLR1D, POLR1C, and EFTUD2; in order to establish genotype- phenotype correlations

11 of 29

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  • Clinical data and DNA samples were obtained from 146 patients: 71 males and 75 females
  • The age range was from birth to 40 years old
  • 76% of patients were from France, Guadeloupe and Reunion islands
  • 24% from Belgium, Hungary, Lithuania, Morocco, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland
  • The physician had to complete a form identifying 19 clinical features

12 of 29

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  • The patients were also put into two groups namely: typical and atypical Treacher Collins syndrome (TCS)
  • Typical TCS patients presented with the characteristic facial ‘gestalt’, including mandibular and malar hypoplasia, downward slanting palpebral fissures, lower eyelid coloboma and microtia
  • Atypical TCS patients were defined by the presence of intellectual disability, microcephaly, anomaly of the limbs, and organ malformation (except cardiac)

13 of 29

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  • In addition they also came up with a severity score for the clinical features
  • Mildly affected ≤8, and severely affected ≥9

14 of 29

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  • The patients were screened for the 4 genes using different methods:
    • Direct sequencing by Sanger methods
    • Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification analysis
    • Array-comparative genomic hybridization
    • Denaturing high pressure liquid chromatography
  • A statistical analysis using the chi-square test was performed to establish any relation between two qualitative variables

15 of 29

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  • They first investigated variants in the TCOF1 gene by Sanger sequencing
  • In the absence of a point mutation, they looked for large rearrangements by Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA)
  • In the absence of molecular anomaly in the TCOF1 gene they investigated the POLR1D and POLR1C genes by Sanger sequencing and MLPA
  • If these three genes were normal or if an abnormality was detected by MLPA, they analyzed the patients by array-CGH
  • If microcephaly, intellectual disability or esophageal atresia were described, they analyzed the EFTUD2 gene by Sanger sequencing as first line

16 of 29

RESULTS

17 of 29

RESULTS�

Frequency of clinical findings in patients with mutations in TCOF1POLR1D , and EFTUD2.

18 of 29

RESULTS �

  • In patients with mutations in TCOF1, 7 had cardiac malformation
  • Intellectual disability was present in one patient
  • One patient had nail hypoplasia
  • Mean severity score for the phenotype in TCOF1 of 7.5
  • In POLR1D, mutations one patient had severe scoliosis
  • Mean severity score for the phenotype in POLR1D of 7

CLINICAL DATA

19 of 29

RESULTS�

  • Results for all the patients
  • They found 101/146 patients positive for TCOF1 and POLR1D and no mutation in POLR1C
  • Out of the 11 analyzed for EFTUD2 gene, 4 patients had molecular abnormalities
  • 92 patients had mutations in TCOF1 gene and 47 were novel
  • 85/92 were predicted to lead to a premature stop codon as result of frameshift mutation

MOLECULAR STUDIES

20 of 29

RESULTS�

  • Similar to Teber et al. findings, frameshift mutation was the most frequent with 58/92 patients
  • The common 5bp deletion in exon 24 in previous studies occurred in 7/92 of the patients
  • 2 patients exhibited large deletions encompassing several genes including TCOF1
  • Among the 92 patients with molecular abnormalities in TCOF1, 27/92 were familial cases, 47/92 were sporadic cases, and 29/92 were de novo mutations

MOLECULAR STUDIES

21 of 29

RESULTS�

  • Extreme intrafamilial variability was observed with either mutations in TCOF1 and POLR1D mutations
  • There was an inherited mutation in 2 out of 6 patients referred to as sporadic in TCOF1 and 4 in POLR1D
  • In Familial cases 18 mutations were inherited from the mother and 6 from the father
  • One father had somatic mosaicism; about 30% mosaicism

MOLECULAR STUDIES

22 of 29

RESULTS�

  • Two coding domains were distinguished: LisH exon 1-2 domain and Treacle domain exon 2 -24
  • 4 mutations were found in LisH domain and 89/92 were found in the Treacle domain except for a hotspot in exon 24 which had 17/92 of the mutations
  • There were 9 patients with anomalies in POLR1D

MOLECULAR STUDIES

23 of 29

RESULTS�

  • No significant association between any of the clinical features and the two genes studied was noted
  • There was no significant association between the genotype and the degree of severity
  • No specific association occurred when the phenotype was scored as typical or atypical in TCOF1 mutations
  • In TCOF1 the severity of the TCS phenotype was not significantly different whatever the mutation

PHENOTYPE GENOTYPE CORRELATION

24 of 29

RESULTS

    • Regarding mutations in LisH or treacle domain there was no association with the clinical features or degree of severity
    • Among the 7 patients with cardiac defect, the mutations were all located in the TCOF1 gene
    • There were two large deletions identified encompassing TCOF1 and other genes in patients that had typical TCS and Intellectual disability

PHENOTYPE GENOTYPE CORRELATION

25 of 29

RESULTS �

  • 19 SNPs were identified
  • One SNP specifically studied (rs28372960) was present in 6 patients but there was no correlation of it with the clinical features or severity of the disease
  • All patients with EFTUD2 gene had microcephaly, malar and mandibular hypoplasia, deafness, downward slanting palpebral fissures and microtia
  • One patient had esophageal atresia and a complex cardiac malformation
  • Patients with mutations in POLR1D had mild features and no life threatening complications

PHENOTYPE GENOTYPE CORRELATION

26 of 29

Front or lateral view of four patients from the series.

(a) Patient with a heterozygous missense mutation in TCOF1 

(b) Patient with an intragenic deletion of TCOF1

(c) Patient with a missense mutation in POLR1D 

(d) Patient with complete deletion of POLR1D 

RESULTS �

27 of 29

DISCUSSION

  • In this study they analyzed clinical data including additional features that had not been previously described and molecular data of 3 genes involved in the syndrome
  • A high rate of congenital cardiac defects in patients with mutations in TCOF1 8% were observed
  • Intellectual disability(ID) was observed in only one patient hence confirming that (ID) is not a feature of TCS
  • Due to extreme intrafamilial variation observed, this study suggests verifying inheritance of the mutation even for asymptomatic parents

28 of 29

DISCUSSION

  • The fact that the high rate of SNPs was detected and no association with any of the 19 clinical features suggests the implication of other factors
  • In the study by Teber et al. the severity score was based on the overall facial features.
  • This study suggested evaluating the severity based on functional impairment and level of intervention required
  • Among the 45 Patients with no mutations in TCOF1, POLR1D and POLR1C, 6 patients had typical Treacher Collins syndrome features suggesting implications of additional genes

29 of 29

CRITIQUE

    • Detailed supplementary data that made it easier to understand the paper

    • There was a lot of repeated details in the results and in the discussion.
    • The case of somatic mosaicism was not clear in the graph
    • The total number patients kept on changing with the clinical features observed

POSITIVE

NEGATIVE