Suggestive Findings
Microphthalmia with linear skin defects (MLS) syndrome should be suspected in females with one or both major criteria especially in the presence of a family history consistent with X-linked inheritance with male lethality (see , , and ). Almost all individuals with MLS syndrome are female; however, a few affected males, typically with an XX karyotype, have been reported.
Reticulolinear scar lesions on the neck of a female age 36 years with an otherwise normal phenotype. Cytogenetic analysis revealed 46,X,del(X)(p22.3 pter) [Lindsay et al 1994].
Bilateral microphthalmia and irregular linear skin areas involving the face and neck in a female infant with MLS syndrome who has a single-nucleotide variant in exon 6 of HCCS [Wimplinger et al 2006]
Typical linear skin lesions on the face and neck of a newborn female with MLS syndrome who has a deletion of exons 1-3 of HCCS [Morleo et al 2005, Wimplinger et al 2006]
Establishing the Diagnosis
The clinical signs observed in MLS syndrome are considered major if they are present in at least 70% of affected individuals and minor if they are less frequent (see Clinical Description, Minor Criteria).
The clinical diagnosis of MLS syndrome can be made when the two major criteria are present [al-Gazali et al 1990, Happle et al 1993]; however, persons with a molecular diagnosis of MLS syndrome in whom only one of the two major criteria was present have been reported: some show characteristic skin defects without ocular abnormalities (see ); others show eye abnormalities without skin defects [Morleo & Franco 2008].
Minor criteria in the presence of a family history consistent with X-linked inheritance with male lethality supports the clinical diagnosis of MLS syndrome.
Female proband. The diagnosis of MLS syndrome is established in a female proband by identification of a heterozygous pathogenic variant in COX7B, HCCS, or NDUFB11 on molecular genetic testing (see Table 1).
Male proband. The diagnosis of MLS syndrome is established in a male proband by identification of a hemizygous pathogenic variant in COX7B, HCCS, or NDUFB11 on molecular genetic testing (see Table 1).
Molecular testing approaches can include a combination of gene-targeted testing (multigene panel) and comprehensive
genomic testing (chromosomal microarray analysis, exome sequencing, exome array, genome sequencing) depending on the phenotype.
Gene-targeted testing requires that the clinician determine which gene(s) are likely involved, whereas genomic testing does not. Because the phenotype of MLS syndrome is broad, individuals with both major criteria are likely to be diagnosed using gene-targeted testing (see Option 1), whereas those in whom the diagnosis of MLS syndrome has not been considered due to atypical findings are more likely to be diagnosed using genomic testing (see Option 2).
Option 1
When the phenotypic and laboratory findings suggest the diagnosis of MLS syndrome, molecular genetic testing approaches can include chromosome microarray analysis or use of a multigene panel:
Option 2
When the diagnosis of MLS syndrome is not considered because an individual has atypical phenotypic features, comprehensive genomic testing (which does not require the clinician to determine which gene[s] are likely involved) is often performed. MLS syndrome is likely to be diagnosed by chromosome microarray (CMA), which is the best first test when multiple congenital abnormalities are present. If CMA is not diagnostic, additional genomic testing is indicated. Exome sequencing is most commonly used; genome sequencing is also possible.
Exome array (when clinically available) may be considered if CMA and exome sequencing are non-diagnostic.
For an introduction to comprehensive genomic testing click here. More detailed information for clinicians ordering genomic testing can be found here.
Note: Although not used for diagnosis, X-chromosome inactivation studies have been performed in females with MLS syndrome. Skewed X-chromosome inactivation has been detected in 21 of the 22 individuals with MLS syndrome analyzed to date [Anguiano et al 2003, Wimplinger et al 2006, Cain et al 2007, Schluth et al 2007, Wimplinger et al 2007a, Wimplinger et al 2007b, Hobson et al 2009, Steichen-Gersdorf et al 2010, Alberry et al 2011]. In all individuals the abnormal X is inactive.
Table 1.
Molecular Genetic Testing Used in MLS Syndrome
View in own window
Gene 1, 2 | Proportion of MLS Syndrome Attributed to Pathogenic Variants in Gene | Proportion of Pathogenic Variants 3 Detectable by Method |
---|
Sequence analysis 4 | Gene-targeted deletion/duplication analysis 5 | CMA 6, 7, 8 |
---|
COX7B
| ~5% 9 | 3/3 10 | Unknown 11 | NA |
HCCS
| ~92% 9 | ~8% 12 | See footnote 13. | ~92% 14, 15 |
NDUFB11
| ~3% 9 | 2/2 9 | Unknown 11 | NA |
- 1.
Genes are listed alphabetically.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
Sequence analysis detects variants that are benign, likely benign, of uncertain significance, likely pathogenic, or pathogenic. Variants may include small intragenic deletions/insertions and missense, nonsense, and splice site variants; typically, exon or whole-gene deletions/duplications are not detected. For issues to consider in interpretation of sequence analysis results, click here.
- 5.
Gene-targeted deletion/duplication analysis detects intragenic deletions or duplications. Methods used may include a range of techniques such as quantitative PCR, long-range PCR, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), and a gene-targeted microarray designed to detect single-exon deletions or duplications.
- 6.
- 7.
Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) using oligonucleotide arrays or SNP arrays. CMA designs in current clinical use target the Xp22.3 region.
- 8.
Gene-targeted deletion/duplication testing will detect deletions ranging from a single exon to the whole gene; however, breakpoints of large deletions and/or deletion of adjacent genes may not be detected by these methods.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
No data on detection rate of gene-targeted deletion/duplication analysis are available.
- 12.
- 13.
All large deletions reported to date are large deletions that encompass HCCS and surrounding sequence. Gene-targeted methods will detect single-exon up to whole-gene deletions; however, breakpoints of large deletions and/or deletion of adjacent genes may not be detected. Thus, the detection rate for HCCS-targeted deletion assays would be ~92%; however, the deletion may not be fully characterized.
- 14.
- 15.
Note: Deletions reported in the literature were most frequently detected by karyotype and FISH analysis; however, CMA is more commonly used than karyotyping in clinical practice for individuals with complex medical issues and has greater resolution and precision than a karyotype. Some complex karyotypes have been reported (e.g., 45,X[18]/46,X,der(X)(p22q21)[24]/46,X,del(X)(p22)[58] and 46,X,der(X)t(X;Y)), therefore, karyotype and/or FISH follow up may be necessary based on CMA results.