Next Article in Journal
Identification of Main Genetic Causes Responsible for Non-Syndromic Hearing Loss in a Peruvian Population
Next Article in Special Issue
One NF1 Mutation may Conceal Another
Previous Article in Journal
Gene Flow and Genetic Variation Explain Signatures of Selection across a Climate Gradient in Two Riparian Species
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Clinical and Genetic Findings in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1, Legius Syndrome, and Other Related Neurocutaneous Disorders

by
Teresa Giugliano
1,†,
Claudia Santoro
2,†,
Annalaura Torella
1,
Francesca Del Vecchio Blanco
1,
Anna Grandone
2,
Maria Elena Onore
1,
Mariarosa Anna Beatrice Melone
3,
Giulia Straccia
3,
Daniela Melis
4,
Vincenzo Piccolo
5,
Giuseppe Limongelli
6,
Salvatore Buono
7,
Silverio Perrotta
2,
Vincenzo Nigro
1,8 and
Giulio Piluso
1,*
1
Department of Precision Medicine, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Via L. De Crecchio 7, 80138 Napoli, Italy
2
Departement of Women’s and Children’s Health and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Via Luigi De Crecchio 2, 80138 Napoli, Italy
3
Department of Medical Sciences and Advanced Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Piazza L. Miraglia 2, 80138 Napoli, Italy
4
Department of Pediatrics, University of Naples “Federico II”, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy
5
Dermatology Unit, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy
6
Department of Translational Medicine, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Via L. Bianchi c/o Ospedale Monaldi, 80131 Napoli, Italy
7
Department of Neurosciences, "Santobono-Pausilipon" Pediatric Hospital, Via Fiore 6, 80129 Napoli, Italy
8
Telethon Institute of Genetics and Medicine (TIGEM), Via Campi Flegrei 34, 80078 Pozzuoli, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Both authors contributed equally to this work.
Genes 2019, 10(8), 580; https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10080580
Submission received: 26 June 2019 / Revised: 27 July 2019 / Accepted: 30 July 2019 / Published: 31 July 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurofibromatosis 1 Genetics)

Abstract

:
Pigmentary manifestations can represent an early clinical sign in children affected by Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), Legius syndrome, and other neurocutaneous disorders. The differential molecular diagnosis of these pathologies is a challenge that can now be met by combining next generation sequencing of target genes with concurrent second-level tests, such as multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and RNA analysis. We clinically and genetically investigated 281 patients, almost all pediatric cases, presenting with either NF1 (n = 150), only pigmentary features (café au lait macules with or without freckling; (n = 95), or clinical suspicion of other RASopathies or neurocutaneous disorders (n = 36). The causative variant was identified in 239 out of the 281 patients analyzed (85.1%), while 42 patients remained undiagnosed (14.9%). The NF1 and SPRED1 genes were mutated in 73.3% and 2.8% of cases, respectively. The remaining 8.9% carried mutations in different genes associated with other disorders. We achieved a molecular diagnosis in 69.5% of cases with only pigmentary manifestations, allowing a more appropriate clinical management of these patients. Our findings, together with the increasing availability and sharing of clinical and genetic data, will help to identify further novel genotype–phenotype associations that may have a positive impact on patient follow-up.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Molecular diagnostic testing for Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1; MIM 162200) has improved considerably since identification of the first genotype–phenotype associations and an overlap disease, Legius syndrome (LS; MIM 611431) [1]. Both disorders belong to the RASopathies [2,3,4], a group of autosomal dominant and phenotypically overlapping disorders caused by mutations in genes encoding for components of the Ras/ mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway.
NF1 is a neurocutaneous condition characterized by multiple café au lait macules (CALMs), axillary and inguinal freckling, cutaneous neurofibromas, and iris Lisch nodules (LNs) [5,6]. Affected individuals show an increased susceptibility to developing benign tumors, such as plexiform neurofibroma, optic pathway glioma (OPG), and non-optic central nervous system glioma. Less common but potentially serious clinical manifestations are also reported [5,6,7].
With a birth incidence of approximately 1:3000, Neurofibromatosis type 1 is caused by dominantly inherited mutations in NF1 (MIM 613113) [8], a complex gene [9] encoding for neurofibromin, a GTPase-activating protein that negatively regulates the Ras/MAPK signaling pathway [10]. Diagnosis of NF1 is still performed worldwide using clinical criteria formally codified in 1987 [6,11,12]. Nevertheless, clinical manifestations are variable and age related, with some distinguishing signs such as LNs and cutaneous neurofibromas appearing in late childhood or during puberty, further complicating clinical diagnosis of NF1 in young children, as well as in sporadic cases [6]. The differential diagnosis with other RASopathies is sometimes challenging due to the occurrence of signs of Noonan syndrome in NF1 patients (e.g., macrocephaly, Noonan-like facial features, short stature, and learning disabilities), as well as the presence of CALMs associated with some RASopathies (e.g., Noonan and LEOPARD syndromes) [13]. Milder NF1 phenotypes with pigmentary manifestations but without neurofibromas or OPG are associated with Met992 deletion and Arg1809 substitution in neurofibromin [14,15,16]. The 17q11.2 microdeletion fully encompassing NF1 is known to be linked to a more severe phenotype with dysmorphic facial features, overgrowth or tall-for-age stature, significant delay in cognitive development, large hands and feet, hyper flexibility of joints, muscular hypotonia, and malignancies, such as the development of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) [17,18].
Initially described as an NF1-like phenotype, LS is caused by mutations in SPRED1 (MIM 609291) [1], which encodes Spred1, a member of the Sprouty/Spred protein family [19] and, similarly to neurofibromin, a negative regulator of the Ras/MAPK signaling pathway [20,21]. Legius syndrome is characterized by CALMs and freckling without neurofibromas or other typical NF1 features, such as LNs, bony lesions, and OPGs [1,22,23].
Milder or incomplete NF1 phenotypes observed in young-aged patients, sometimes related to specific mildly pathogenic NF1 variants, clinically overlap with LS or, in some cases, with other RASopathies and constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (CMMRD; MIM 276300) [24], necessitating recourse to molecular testing. In this diagnostic scenario, the increasing use of next generation sequencing (NGS), and particularly customized targeted gene panels, provides the opportunity to investigate these clinically overlapping conditions in a time- and cost-saving manner. The concurrent use of second-level tests, such as multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) or RNA analysis by RT-PCR and Sanger sequencing, can be useful to highlight specific classes of variants or to precisely characterize the effect of each variant on the protein product.
Here, we report our 10 year experience in molecular diagnosis of NF1 and LS, as well as other neurocutaneous conditions, in a large cohort of mostly pediatric patients. We also discuss how NGS and RNA analysis can improve the genetic characterization of patients, permitting differential diagnosis and guiding clinical follow-up.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Patient Recruitment and Clinical Classification

A total of 281 subjects, including 164 males (58.4%) and 117 females (41.6%), most of which were children (mean age 14 ± 12 years at the pre-test medical examination), were recruited for this study mainly from the Neurofibromatosis Referral Center at the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli” Department of Pediatrics. They were clinically evaluated according to the NIH diagnostic criteria and classified into six different groups.
Typical pigmentary manifestations (CALMs with or without freckling) were considered as the main clinical sign in children and were combined with distinctive NF1 features (LNs, OPG, bone dysplasia, and neurofibromas), age at the pre-test medical examination, and presence of affected first-degree relatives. Of the 281 subjects involved in this study, 150 received a definite clinical diagnosis of NF1 due to the presence of at least one NF1 distinctive sign and were further molecularly characterized only on the parents’ request or in presence of a milder phenotype (n = 139; Group 1), or when an NF1 microdeletion was suspected in the presence of a severe NF1 phenotype (n = 11; Group 2).
An age-based categorization was established mainly to prioritize NF1/SPRED1 mutation analysis, relying on the fact that some typical NF1 features, such as LNs and neurofibromas, may not be yet present in children aged <10 years. A further 44 patients with apparently pigmentary manifestations only, without affected first-degree relatives, and aged ≤ 9 years were prioritized for mutation analysis of NF1 and, subsequently, SPRED1 (Group 3), while 51 patients either with pigmentary manifestations only, without affected first-degree relatives, and aged ≥ 10 years (n = 31; Group 4), or with at least one affected first-degree relative (n = 20; Group 5) were prioritized for mutation analysis of SPRED1 and subsequently NF1. Finally, 36 patients with clinical features suggestive of a RASopathy or other neurocutaneous disorders formed Group 6.
Samples were also collected from patients’ affected or unaffected relatives (n = 167) when necessary.
Written informed consent for DNA analysis was obtained from all the subjects investigated or from their legal guardians at the pre-test medical examination, including explicit consent for future use of data for research purposes, according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli” (#254-05/02/2019).
For each subject, blood samples were collected in PAXgene Blood RNA Tubes (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) or Tempus Blood RNA Tubes (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA) to prevent illegitimate splicing during subsequent RNA extraction and analysis [25,26]. Genomic DNA was also extracted using standard procedures.

2.2. Primer Design for NF1 and SPRED1 Mutation Screening

NF1 pseudogenes occur on different human chromosomes [27]. To minimize the amplification of targets other than the expected templates, we used the Primer-BLAST tool (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/tools/primer-blast/) for primer design.
For RNA analysis of the entire coding sequences of NF1 and SPRED1 (RefSeq: NM_000267.3 and NM_152594.3, respectively), we designed primer pairs that amplified partially overlapping fragments of 500–700 bp (Supplementary Materials Table S1). For both genes, genomic oligonucleotide pairs were also designed to amplify each exon and its intronic flanking regions (Supplementary Materials Table S2).

2.3. Mutation Screening by RT-PCR

For a large number of subjects investigated, NF1 and SPRED1 were analyzed at the cDNA level.
Total RNA was extracted using PAXgene Blood RNA Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) or Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA) according to the manufacturers’ specifications. RNAs were then retro-transcripted using SuperScript III RT (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) and random primers, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Single-strand cDNAs were used in later experiments.
The RT-PCR was performed in a final volume of 20 μL containing 2 μL cDNA, 1X PCR Buffer II (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA), 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dNTPs, 0.5 μM of each primer, and 0.5 U of AmpliTaq Gold DNA polymerase (Applied Biosystems). Cycling conditions consisted of a first step at 96 °C for 7 min followed by 30 cycles of 30 s at 96 °C, 1 min at 63 °C, and 3 min plus 3 s/cycle at 68 °C.
The RT-PCR products were first analyzed by agarose gel electrophoresis to highlight possible unexpected products. For each sample, overlapping fragments covering the entire NF1 or SPRED1 coding sequence were subsequently analyzed by bidirectional sequencing.

2.4. Targeted NGS-Based Mutational Screening

To extend mutation analysis to other genes involved in RASopathies, neurocutaneous disorders, and other genetically determined conditions with pigmentary manifestations in pediatric age, we designed a customized target NGS panel using HaloPlex technology (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). We selected 35 known disease-causing genes (Supplementary Table S3). The custom panel design also included genes identified as potential interactors of these 35 disease genes using two different bioinformatic tools, STRING and GeneMania [28,29]. Only genes matching both tools were added to the design.
Enrichment of target sequences of all selected coding genes was performed using the HaloPlex Target Enrichment System for Illumina (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. For each sample, 200 ng of genomic DNA was digested with eight different restriction enzymes to create the fragment library and hybridized for 16 h to specific probes for Illumina sequencing. After capture of the biotinylated target DNA using streptavidin beads, nicks in the circularized fragments were closed by a ligase. Finally, the captured target DNA was eluted by NaOH and amplified by PCR. The amplified target molecules were purified using Agencourt AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter Genomics, Chaska, MN, USA). The enriched target DNA in each library sample was validated and quantified by microfluidic analysis using the Bioanalyzer High Sensitivity DNA Assay Kit and 2100 Bioanalyzer Expert Software (Agilent Technologies). Samples were run on a NextSeq500 System (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA), generating 150 bp-long paired-end reads.
Generated sequences were analyzed using an in-house pipeline designed to automate the analysis workflow [30]. Average coverage for all the experiments was 70× and at least 20× for 98% of the target. Paired sequencing reads were aligned to the reference genome (UCSC, hg19 build) using a Burrows–Wheeler Aligner, and sorted with SAMtools and Picard (http://picard.sourceforge.net). Calling of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small insertions/deletions (Ins/Del) was performed with the Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK) [31] with parameters adapted to HaloPlex-generated sequences. The called SNVs and Ins/Del variants were annotated using ANNOVAR [32], reporting variant position in RefSeq [33], amino acid change, presence in dbSNP v151 [34], frequency in the NHLBI Exome Variant Server (http://evs.gs.washington.edu/EVS), 1000 genomes [35], and Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) browser (http://exac.broadinstitute.org) projects, multiple cross-species conservation [36], and prediction scores of damaging on protein activity [37].

2.5. Multiplex Ligation-Dependent Probe Amplification

To identify complete or partial deletions/duplications in NF1, SPRED1, NF2, TSC1, and TSC2 genes, MLPA assays were performed using SALSA MLPA P081/P082 NF1 kit, SALSA MLPA P295 SPRED1 kit, SALSA MLPA P044 NF2 kit, SALSA MLPA P124 TSC1 kit, and SALSA MLPA P337 TSC2 kit, respectively (MRC-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands), according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. When NF1 microdeletions were detected, SALSA MLPA P122 NF1 kit (MRC-Holland) was also used to better define breakpoint boundaries.
Briefly, denatured genomic DNA (100 ng) was added to the MLPA mix and the probes were allowed to anneal overnight before the subsequent ligation reaction was performed. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was carried out with 6-carboxyfluorescein (FAM)-labeled primers using 5 μL of the ligation reaction as the template. The PCR products were then separated on an ABI 3130xL automatic DNA sequencer (Life Technologies), including at least three normal DNA samples in each batch of the MLPA assays for the subsequent normalization of results.
The MLPA data analysis was performed using the Coffalyser.Net package (MRC-Holland). Relative amounts of probe-amplified products were compared with reference samples to determine the copy number of target sequences. Values under a threshold of 0.7 and over a threshold of 1.3 for multiple adjacent probes indicate the presence of a deletion or duplication, respectively.

2.6. Real-Time PCR

To confirm copy-number mutations identified by MLPA, quantitative amplification of the specific genomic regions was performed on CFX96 Real-Time PCR Detection System (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA) using iQ SYBR Green Supermix (Bio-Rad Laboratories) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Uracil N-glycosylase (Amperase UNG, Life Technologies) was used to prevent PCR carry-over contamination. Each assay was performed in triplicate and the results were normalized and analyzed using CFX Manager software version 1.5 (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA).

2.7. Validation of Variants by Sanger Sequencing

The PCR products were double-strand sequenced using BigDye Terminator sequencing chemistry (Life Technologies) and analyzed on an ABI 3130xL automatic DNA sequencer (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA). Automatic variation calling was obtained by analyzing sequencing data (ABI file) using Mutation Surveyor software version 3.24 (SoftGenetics, State College, PA, USA), followed by careful inspection of the electropherograms to minimize variant loss.

3. Results

Over the last decade, approximately 600 patients suspected of being affected by NF1 or an NF1-like condition, or by RASopathies and other neurocutaneous disorders, were clinically evaluated at our Neurofibromatosis Referral Center in accordance with the NIH diagnostic criteria. For these patients, genetic testing was proposed whenever it may have been useful to confirm the clinical diagnosis. A total of 281 probands gave their informed consent and were included in this study, and molecular analysis was extended to their affected or unaffected relatives (n = 167) when necessary. To optimize the use of genetic testing in discriminating NF1 versus LS and other neurocutaneous disorders in childhood, patients were classified into six groups (see Materials and Methods) and prioritized according to their clinical features.

3.1. Molecular Diagnosis

Results of molecular diagnosis for each patient group are summarized in Table 1. The causative variant was detected in 239 out of 281 patients analyzed (85.1%), with only 42 undiagnosed patients (14.9%). Both NF1 and SPRED1 were mutated in 73.3% and 2.8% of cases, respectively. The remaining 8.9% presented causative variants in different genes.
In subjects with a clinical diagnosis of NF1 (Groups 1, 2), the mutation detection rate was 98% (147/150), similarly to previously reported findings [38]. When pigmentary manifestations were the only early clinical sign (Groups 3–5), the mutation detection rate fell to 69.5% (66/95), with SPRED1 accounting for around 8.4% (8/95) of identified causative variants. Interestingly, the lowest detection rate (64.5%) was obtained for subjects presenting only CALMs, aged ≥ 10 years at the pre-test medical examination, and without affected first-degree relatives (Group 4). In contrast, subjects presenting only CALMs and with at least one affected first-degree relative (Group 5) achieved a higher mutation detection rate (85%), with NF1 and SPRED1 accounting for 55% and 30%, respectively.
In subjects with a clinical suspicion of a RASopathy or neurocutaneous disorder, the mutation detection rate was 72.2% (26/36), with variants distributed in ten different genes, mainly PTPN11 (22.2%), and with only one causative variant in NF1 (2.7%).

3.2. NF1 Mutation Screening

By combining NGS, direct sequencing of RT-PCR products, and MLPA analysis, we identified 169 different causative variants along NF1 (Table A1). As expected, 33.1% of these (56/169) were novel variants. Single-nucleotide substitutions and single or very short deletion/insertion of bases accounted for 67.4% (114/169) and 30.2% (51/169) of the identified causative variants, respectively. Wider deletions or duplications at NF1 locus made up the remaining 2.4%. Excluding this last class of mutations, variants were distributed in almost all NF1 exons (Supplementary Materials Figure S1) and only 21 were recurrent variants, being present in at least two unrelated patients.
Base substitutions resulted in 31 nonsense variants (27.2%), three of which were novel, 34 missense variants (29.8%), eight of which were not previously reported, and 42 variants differently affecting splicing (36.8%), mainly resulting in a frameshift of NF1 coding sequence.
Novel missense variants were further investigated, considering segregation in familial cases or their de novo occurrence. In support of their pathogenic effect, these amino acid changes were predicted to be deleterious by common in silico prediction programs (SIFT, Polyphen-2, and Mutation Taster; Supplementary Materials Table S4) [39,40,41], and were not annotated in the gnomAD and ExAC browsers [42].
Variants affecting mRNA splicing are common in NF1 [25,38]. In our study, they represent 25.4% (43/169) of all identified causative variants, with 34 variants differently perturbing canonical splice acceptor or donor sites, five variants within exons creating de novo splice sites and resulting in the loss of a part of the exon, and four deep intronic mutations activating cryptic splice sites (Supplementary Materials Table S5). This last type would likely be underestimated without RNA analysis. In our cohort of NF1 patients, this class of mutation accounted for 2.4% of all identified variants (4/169), three of which were not previously reported.
Complete NF1 microdeletion and other rearrangements partially involving NF1 were detected by MLPA analysis. In line with other reports [43,44], NF1 microdeletions at 17q11.2 were present in 4.9% (10/205) of patients with an identified causative variant in NF1, while two intragenic deletions of exons 15(11)–36(27b) and exons 28(22)–29(23) and a duplication of exons 37(28)–51(42) in NF1 were identified in three further patients.

3.3. SPRED1 Mutation Screening

We identified eight different causative variants in SPRED1 (Table A2), three of which were novel. Single nucleotide substitutions resulted in four already reported nonsense variants and one missense variant. We also identified a novel 5 bp deletion in a large family with 10 affected individuals and a novel one-base duplication in another family. The MLPA analysis characterized a sporadic case with an intragenic deletion of the last two exons and the 3’UTR of SPRED1.

3.4. Phenotype-Genotype Overview

Table A3 summarizes the clinical features of 245 probands suspected of being affected by NF1 or an NF1-like condition evaluated at the pre-test medical examination (T0) and after genetic testing (T1). Based on the NIH diagnostic criteria, a clinical diagnosis of NF1 was achieved in 150 patients (Groups 1 and 2), 99.3% of which presented CALMs either with (78.7%) or without (18%) freckling associated with LNs (55.4%), OPG (14%), bone dysplasia (2%), cutaneous or plexiform neurofibromas (62.7%), or an affected first-degree relative (41.3%). One case (Family ID 108) did not quite meet the NIH diagnostic criteria but was nevertheless included in Group 1 due to the presence of neurofibromas at age 5 months, and minor clinical features such as macrocephaly, nevus anemicus, psychomotor delay, and thorax abnormalities. About 98% of these clinically diagnosed patients presented a causative NF1 variant that resulted in truncated or absent neurofibromin (75.5%), or in in-frame deletions (10.9%) or single substitutions (13.6%) of amino acids.
The remaining 95 patients (Groups 3–5) only presented CALMs (100%), with (29.5%) or without (70.5%) freckling and were negative for the other NIH diagnostic criteria at the pre-test medical examination. Among these, 75 patients were sporadic cases aged ≤ 9 years (n = 44; Group 3) or ≥10 years (n = 31; Group 4), while the remaining 20 patients were familial cases (Group 5). In Group 3, a causative variant in NF1 was identified in 63.6% of patients, resulting in truncated or absent neurofibromin (67.9%), or in in-frame deletions (10.7%) or single substitutions (21.4%) of amino acids. In Group 4, which presented the lowest mutation detection rate (61.3%), NF1 was still the most commonly involved gene with an increased percentage of variants causing in-frame deletions or single substitutions of amino acids (61.1%) compared to those resulting in truncated or absent neurofibromin (38.9%). Only one causative variant was detected in SPRED1 (Family ID 157). In Groups 3 and 4, typical NF1 clinical features subsequently appeared in only 11 patients with a causative variant in NF1 identified by genetic testing (T1). For Groups 3 and 4, 48% of patients (36/75) presented only CALMs without any other typical NF1 feature, even after genetic testing (T1), thus not falling within the NIH diagnostic criteria. Interestingly, a causative variant in NF1 was identified in 30.6% of cases (11/36). In only one case (Family ID 224) was a causative variant in SPRED1 detected. Finally, NF1 and SPRED1 were similarly mutated in patients from Group 5. Variants in NF1 (55%) gave rise to truncated or absent neurofibromin in only two patients, while SPRED1 variants (30%) mainly caused haploinsufficiency. Again, in Group 5, no further typical NF1 clinical features subsequently appeared in patients with an NF1 variant identified by genetic testing (T1).
Neurofibromatosis bright objects were the most frequently observed of all minor clinical features (Table A3), presenting in 20.8% of cases. Learning disabilities and/or speech problems were found in 18.8% of patients, while thorax abnormalities, macrocephaly, leg length discrepancy, and scoliosis in 16.7%. Noonan-like facial features (7.8%), intellectual disability (6.9%), and behavior problems (5.7%) were also observed. Less common but potentially serious malignancies, including malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), leukemia, and rhabdomyosarcoma, accounted for 2.9% of cases, while vascular alterations such as Moyamoya syndrome and pulmonary stenosis were observed in 2% and 1.6% of cases, respectively.

3.5. Mutation Screening in Non-NF1 or NF1-Like Conditions and Unsolved Cases

By combining NGS and MLPA analysis, we also investigated 36 patients with clinical features suggestive of a RASopathy or neurocutaneous disorder (Group 6; Table A4). Among these, 14 patients with RASopathy features presented causative variants in PTPN11 (8/14), SOS1 (2/14), PPP1CB (1/14), and NF1 (1/14), 14 patients diagnosed with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) showed variants in TSC1 (3/14) and TSC2 (5/14), five patients with Neurofibromatosis type 2 or Schwannomatosis presented causative variants in NF2 (3/5) and LZTR1 (1/5), while a variant in PTEN and KIT was identified in two other cases with a clinical diagnosis of Cowden syndrome and Piebaldism. Six of the identified causative variants were not previously reported (Table A4 and Supplementary Materials Table S4). Biallelic germline variants in mismatch repair (MMR) genes are known to be responsible for CMMRD. Although this condition is associated with a broad spectrum of early-onset tumors often associated with NF1 features, especially CALMs [24,45], no causative variants in MMR genes were found in our cohort.
In 42 unsolved cases, we also investigated for variants in candidate genes, considering different models of inheritance. For one patient only, we identified a rare missense heterozygous variant in MAPK3 (NM_001109891.1:c.601C>A; p.Leu201Met) not present in our internal database or in any public databases. Although MAPK3 encodes for a member of the MAP kinase family [46], any pathogenic role for the observed variant is currently only speculative.

4. Discussion

In recent years, NGS has greatly improved the molecular diagnosis of inherited diseases, particularly in the case of genetically heterogeneous and clinically overlapping conditions. Our experience further supports the diagnostic value of NGS and shows how a targeted NGS-based entry-level test [47,48,49] combined with RNA and MLPA analysis for a complete molecular characterization [50,51] achieves a high mutation detection rate and is extremely useful in addressing differential diagnosis of NF1 and overlap diseases. In fact, we obtained a molecular diagnosis in about 85% of cases investigated.
For patients with a clinical diagnosis of NF1 (Groups 1, 2), 98% carried an NF1 causative variant, resulting in truncated or absent neurofibromin in 75.5% of cases. All subjects presented CALMs, with freckling in 86% of cases, as well as the most common typical NF1 features including neurofibromas (64.7%), LNs (59.4%), and OPG (16%). Recently, causative variants in the cysteine/serine-rich domain (CSRD; residues 543–909) were positively associated with OPG [52]. Among the 24 NF1 patients presenting OPG investigated, seven showed an NF1 variant within the CSRD domain. Intellectual and/or learning disability or speech problems were present in about 26.7% of cases, while 8.7% showed Noonan-like facial features [53]. Malignancies and vascular alterations, such as Moyamoya syndrome, were observed in 4% and 4.7% of cases, respectively [54]. A large NF1 family with co-occurrence of Moyamoya syndrome in two first cousins (Family ID 16) was recently further investigated by whole exome sequencing, which identified MRVI1 as a susceptibility gene for Moyamoya syndrome in NF1 [55]. Of 11 patients with a more severe NF1 phenotype (Group 2) suggestive of NF1 microdeletion [17,18,56], a 17q11.2 microdeletion was in fact detected in six cases. Among these, two patients later died from MPNST, frequently seen in NF1 microdeletion patients [18,56]. Truncating variants were present in four other cases with severe NF1 phenotype, and removed large part of the protein sequence with its functional domains. The remaining patient (Family ID 119) showed an in-frame deletion (p.Tyr1614_Tyr1618del) falling in the Sec14-like domain of neurofibromin. This patient showed moderate intellectual disability with learning difficulties and speech problems, macrocephaly, dysmorphic facial features, tall stature, and skeletal anomalies (leg length discrepancy, dystrophic scoliosis, and vertebral scalloping), a small number of subcutaneous neurofibromas, and medullary unidentified bright objects [57]. Interestingly, the Sec14-like domain of neurofibromin interacts with valosin-containing protein (VCP), regulating dendritic spine density [58]. Dominantly inherited VCP mutations cause inclusion body myopathy with Paget disease of bone and frontotemporal dementia [59].
Molecular investigation was critical in achieving a clinical diagnosis for patients with only pigmentary features (CALMs with or without freckling; Groups 3–5); for these patients we were able to detect the causative variant in 69.5% of cases. This result highlights the clinical utility of genetic testing, particularly in pediatric age, even in those cases which do not fall within the NIH diagnostic criteria, driving the patient’s clinical early follow-up and management. In sporadic cases (n = 75; Groups 3, 4), NF1 was mutated in 62.7% of patients, with only two (Family ID 157 and 224) presenting a variant in SPRED1 causing haploinsufficiency. Among the NF1 variants, 55.3% resulted in haploinsufficiency, while the rest were in-frame deletions or single substitutions of amino acids. Subsequent to genetic testing, additional typical NF1 features (LNs and/or neurofibromas) appeared in 11 NF1 patients, 10 of which had a truncating variant in NF1. The remaining NF1 patients presented a mild phenotype, with only CALMs either with or without freckling, in some cases complicated by speech and learning problems, short stature, and macrocephaly. Of these, three cases carried the Arg1809 substitution in neurofibromin [15,16].
The causative variant was detected in 85% of patients with pigmentary manifestations also present in at least one affected first-degree relative (n = 20; Group 5), with NF1 and SPRED1 similarly involved. Missense variants were the most common type of variants found in NF1, with the Arg1809 substitution accounting for 45.5% [15,16]. In Group 5, we also molecularly diagnosed the highest percentage of LS (30%), which appears to be primarily associated with inherited mutant alleles, unlike NF1, in which de novo variants frequently occur.
Noonan-like features can be observed in NF1 patients. A neurofibromatosis-Noonan Syndrome (MIM 601321) was reported [60,61] and linked to variants in NF 1 [53], but also to the co-occurrence of independent variants in NF1 and PTPN11 in the same patient [62,63]. The NGS analysis excluded additive variants in Noonan syndrome-causing genes in our molecularly diagnosed NF1 patients with combined NF1 and Noonan-like features.
We also extended our investigation to 36 patients with clinical features suggestive of other RASopathies or neurocutaneous disorders (Group 6), identifying a causative variant in line with clinical suspicion in 25 cases (Table A4). In one child (Family ID 284) referred by endocrinologists due to clinical suspicion of Noonan syndrome, we did not find any causative variants in Noonan syndrome-causing genes but, unexpectedly, an unreported and maternally inherited missense variant in NF1 (p.Glu1198Lys). At genetic counseling, the patient presented CALMs, Noonan-like facial features and habitus (short stature, relative macrocephaly, hypertelorism, thoracic asymmetry, and sternum carinatum). Her mother also presented a very small number of CALMs, mild Noonan-like facial features, soft hands and feet, and short stature. Further investigation of this mild phenotype in other patients with the same NF1 variant may help characterize a possible genotype-phenotype association. This case is illustrative of the diagnostic overlap between these two conditions, as well as in the recently reported case [64] of a child (Family ID 187) carrying an SOS1 variant inherited from his mother, who initially received a diagnosis of NF1 due to the spinal nerve enlargement resembling neurofibromas.
The combined or alternative use of NGS and RNA analysis was able to precisely characterize the functional effect of each causative variant identified in NF1 and SPRED1, in some cases overcoming the limits of each approach when performed individually. Specifically, some missense or nonsense variants in NF1 caused exon skipping or generated cryptic splice sites. Moreover, similarly exon-skipped NF1 transcripts were caused by different genomic variants proximal to the same splice site. For some of these skipped exons, including 15(11), 37(27a), and 46(37), phenotype variability was observed in affected patients. Deep intronic mutations activating cryptic splice sites were only detectable by RNA analysis and accounted for 2.4% of all the causative variants we identified. Conversely, three variants in the first exon of NF1 causing RNA decay were only detectable by NGS analysis. Considering recently reported (and potential novel) genotype-phenotype correlations [15,16,18,52,65,66,67,68], evaluating the functional effect of genomic variants can have a positive impact on patients’ clinical follow-up.
Of the unsolved cases, only four patients had a definite clinical diagnosis of NF1 due to the presence of typical pigmentary manifestations combined with at least one additional distinctive NF1 clinical feature. One of these (Family ID 114) was subsequently diagnosed as having a mosaic form of NF1 because of the peculiar distribution of CALMs restricted to the right side of the trunk and LNs only in the right eye. As suggested by the lowest detection rate, isolated CALMs (Groups 3–5) are associated with a lower possibility of obtaining a molecular diagnosis. This might be due to mosaicism or to the existence of other genetic causes of isolated pigmentary manifestations yet to be discovered. In Group 6, six unsolved cases had a clinical diagnosis of TSC. However, about 15%–20% of TSC patients may have unidentifiable mutations or a mosaicism [69,70]. Finally, one patient (Family ID 219) with a clinical diagnosis of Schwannomatosis and negative for mutations in NF2, LZTR1, and SMARCB1 is under investigation for a somatic mosaicism in NF2.

5. Conclusions

Our findings highlight the clinical and diagnostic challenges of a pediatric referral center for neurocutaneous disorders, demonstrating how a combined NGS-based approach can assist clinicians in the diagnosis of NF1 as well as other neurocutaneous disorders and overlapping conditions. We categorized patients based on clinical signs and considered an NF1 diagnosis certain only when other distinctive signs besides CALMs and freckling were present, achieving a very high detection rate and providing a precise characterization of identified causative variants. Our results also highlight how it can still make sense to prioritize patients for NF1 mutation analysis when presenting only CALMs, typical of NF1 in term of number and diameter, and independently from the age at clinical observation. Our categorization suggests that older patients showing only CALMs tend to remain without a definite molecular diagnosis. The RNA analysis facilitates in interpreting the functional effect of genomic variants and can drive the identification of new genotype-phenotype correlations, potentially impacting on the clinical management of NF1 pediatric patients. Through the sharing of clinical and molecular data among members of the scientific community, we are confident it will be possible to identify novel genotype–phenotype correlations and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/10/8/580/s1, Figure S1: Distribution of identified variants in exons of NF1, Table S1: List of primer pairs designed to amplify overlapping fragments for RNA analysis of the entire coding sequences of NF1 and SPRED1, Table S2: List of genomic primer pairs designed to amplify exons and intronic flanking regions of NF1 and SPRED1, Table S3: List of genes included in the customized target NGS panel, Table S4: In silico prediction of deleterious effects and segregation analysis for unreported missense variants, Table S5: In silico prediction of splice score for deep intronic mutations in NF1 (www.fruitfly.org/seq_tools/splice.html).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.G., C.S. and G.P.; Methodology, T.G. and G.P.; Validation, A.T., F.D.V.B. and M.E.O.; Formal Analysis, G.P.; Investigation, T.G., C.S. and G.P.; Resources, C.S., A.G., M.A.B.M., G.S., D.M., V.P., G.L., S.B. and S.P.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, T.G., C.S. and G.P.; Writing—Review and Editing, G.P.; Supervision, V.N.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to patients for their participation and cooperation. We thank Catherine Fisher for the English language revision. This study was partly supported by a grant from the Italian Association of Neurofibromatosis (A.N.F.).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Unique variants identified in NF1 (RefSeq NM_000267.3).
Table A1. Unique variants identified in NF1 (RefSeq NM_000267.3).
Family ID 1GroupExonType 2GenomiccDNAEffectProteinClinVar/HGMD/LOVD ID3
216 (3)501(01)SNV3G>ARNA decayRNA decay?LOVD: NF1_001130
220 (1)101(01)SNV59A>C (splicing)RNA decayRNA decay?New
212 (1)101(01)SNV60G>C (splicing)RNA decayRNA decay?New
35 (2)102(02)SNV128T>C128T>CMissenseLeu43ProLOVD: NF1_000049
67 (1)103(03)SNV277T>C277T>CMissenseCys93ArgLOVD: NF1_002264
294 (1)303(03)SNV288+1delG288delSplicingGlu97Asnfs*6LOVD: NF1_001615
81 (1)303(03)SNV288+1G>A (Splicing)205_288delSplicingArg69_Gly96delLOVD: NF1_001484
262 (1)503(03)SNV288+4A>G205_288delSplicingArg69_Gly96delLOVD: NF1_000270
93 (3)103(03)DIM289-2956C>T (cryptic splice site)288_289insAGTCTCACTCTGCGGCACAGGCTGAAGTGCAGTGGCACCCTCTCGGCTCATTGCAACCTCCACTTCCCGGGTTCAAGCTATTCTCATGCCTCAGCCTCCCAAGTAGCTGGGATTACAGIntronic cryptic splice siteGln97Valfs*8New
72 (1)104(04a)DEL363del363delFrame-shiftHis122Thrfs*43New
31 (1)105(04b)DEL499_502del499_502delFrame-shiftCys167Glnfs*10LOVD: NF1_000605
251 (1)1
2 (1)105(04b)SNV574C>T574C>TNonsenseArg192*LOVD: NF1_000702
68 (1)1
121 (1)307(05)SNV667T>A667T>AMissenseTrp223ArgLOVD: NF1_000800
128 (1)308(06)SNV818T>C818T>CMissenseLeu273ProNew
221 (1)109(07)DEL1019_1020del1019_1020delFrame-shiftSer340Cysfs*12LOVD: NF1_000005
172 (1)110(08)DEL1110del1110delFrame-shiftAla371Glnfs*5New
49 (1)310(08)DEL1123del1123delFrame-shiftLeu375*New
296 (1)410(08)SNV1144T>C1144T>CMissenseSer382ProNew
46 (1)110(08)SNV1185+1G>A (splicing)1063_1185delSplicingAsn355_Lys395delLOVD: NF1_000019
65 (1)1
218 (1)110(08)SNV1185G>T (splicing)1063_1185delSplicingAsn355_Lys395delHGMD: CS147216
125 (1)311(09)SNV1186-3T>G (splicing)1185_1186dupSplicingIle396Glufs*17New
292 (1)111(09)SNV1198C>T1198C>TNonsenseGln400*LOVD: NF1_000024
110 (1)311(09)INS1243dup1243dupFrame-shiftHis415Profs*14ClinVar: 426651
23 (2)111(09)SNV1246C>T1246C>TNonsenseArg416*LOVD: NF1_000034
152 (1)1
45 (1)311(09)DIM1260+1604A>G (cryptic splice site)1260_1261insCTGACTACATAGAGCACTTTCAAGCATGGACTTGGCACTGCTIntronic cryptic splice siteSer421Leufs*4LOVD: NF1_000035
165 (1)111(09)SNV1260+1G>A1260_1261insATAAGTCCAAAAGSplicingSer421Ilefs*12LOVD: NF1_000036
289 (1)112(10a)SNV1261-2A>C (cryptic splice site)1261_1284delSplicingSer421_Lys428delLOVD: NF1_000045
82 (1)112(10a)SNV1318C>T1318C>TNonsenseArg440*LOVD: NF1_000052
153 (1)1
54 (1)412(10a)DEL1329del1329delFrame-shiftPhe443Leufs*30LOVD: NF1_001174
52 (1)112(10a)INS1378dup1378dupFrame-shiftIle460Asnfs*10New
21 (1)112(10a)SNV1381C>T1381C>TNonsenseArg461*LOVD: NF1_000056
57 (1)3
144 (3)1
160 (1)112(10a)DIM1393-1554C>G (cryptic splice site)1392_1393insTGAAGATTTGTTTACACCAGCATCACTACAAACAATAACGCATTGTGCTTGGACATCACGATGGCTATGATAIntronic cryptic splice siteSer465*New
17 (3)113(10b)DEL1393-2del1393_1527delSplicingSer465_Cys509delLOVD: NF1_000061
116 (1)113(10b)INS1399dup1399dupFrame-shiftThr467Asnfs*3LOVD: NF1_002283
288 (1)113(10b)DEL1423del1423delFrame-shiftLys476Asnfs*22New
13 (1)413(10b)SNV1466A>G (cryptic splice site)1466_1527delSplicingTyr489*ClinVar: 354
222 (1)1
159 (1)113(10b)INS1470_1471insATACG1470_1471insATACGFrame-shiftTyr491Ilefs*9New
132 (2)113(10b)SNV1487T>G1487T>GMissenseMet496ArgNew
174 (1)113(10b)INDEL1499_1501delinsAAA1499_1501delinsAAADelInsIle500_His501delinsLysAsnNew
107 (1)213(10b)DEL1500del1500delFrame-shiftHis501Metfs*25New
138 (1)313(10b)DIM1527+1165T>A (cryptic splice site)1527_1528insGATGACATGTTTAACCTTTGTTGAGCTTCTTCAGTCCCTGGAGAGCAGCATCAAGCAAGIntronic cryptic splice siteAsn510Aspfs*7New
76 (1)114(10c)DEL1541_1542del1541_1542delFrame-shiftGln514Argfs*43LOVD: NF1_000074
44 (3)114(10c)SNV1595T>G1595T>GMissenseLeu532ArgLOVD: NF1_002498
5 (1)415(11)SNV1642-1G>A (splicing)1642_1721delSplicingAla548Leufs*13LOVD: NF1_000084
147 (3)515(11)SNV1642G>T1642_1721delSplicingAla548Leufs*13New
59 (1)415(11)SNV1658A>G1658A>GMissenseHis553ArgLOVD: NF1_000091
186 (1)115(11)SNV1721+3A>G (Splicing)1642_1721delSplicingAla548Leufs*13LOVD: NF1_000101
85 (1)115(11)SNV1721G>C (Splicing)1642_1721delSplicingAla548Leufs*13New
150 (1)115-36DEL1642-?_4772+?del
(intragenic deletion ex. 15-36)
1642_4772delIntragenic deletionAla548Valfs*9New
15 (1)116(12a)SNV1748A>G (cryptic splice site)1722_1748delSplicingSer574_Lys583delinsArgLOVD: NF1_000110
102 (2)117(12b)SNV1846C>T1846C>TNonsenseGln616*LOVD: NF1_000125
133 (2)117(12b)DEL1863del1863delFrame-shiftCys622Valfs*9LOVD: NF1_001427
168 (1)2
149 (1)2
214 (1)117(12b)SNV1942G>T1942G>TNonsenseGlu648*LOVD: NF1_002848
55 (2)117(12b)INS1995dup1995dupFrame-shiftSer666Leufs*4New
217 (1)118(13)SNV2002-10T>A (cryptic splice site)2001_2002insACTCTCAGSplicingAsp668Thrfs*23New
8 (1)118(13)SNV2002-1G>A (cryptic splice site)2002_2011delSplicingAsp668Glnfs*17LOVD: NF1_000143
192 (1)118(13)INDEL2027_2028delinsA2027_2028delinsADelInsThr676Asnfs*12New
29 (2)118(13)INS2033dup2033dupFrame-shiftIle679Aspfs*21LOVD: NF1_000148
63 (1)118(13)SNV2041C>T2041C>TNonsenseArg681*LOVD: NF1_000153
39 (2)118(13)INS2167dup2167dupFrame-shiftVal723Glyfs*3New
27 (2)118(13)SNV2251G>C (splicing)2002_2251delSplicingAsp668Glufs*9ClinVar: 584927
209 (1)119(14)SNV2266C>T2252_2325delSplicingArg752Leufs*17LOVD: NF1_000174
75 (1)119(14)SNV2288T>C2288T>CMissenseLeu763ProLOVD: NF1_000177
7 (2)119(14)INS2307dup2307dupFrame-shiftThr770Hisfs*6New
53 (1)320(15)SNV2326G>A2326_2409delSplicingTrp777_Ala804delNew
126 (1)1
184 (2)120(15)SNV2339C>A2339C>AMissenseThr780LysLOVD: NF1_000190
234 (2)120(15)SNV2339C>G2339C>GMissenseThr780ArgLOVD: NF1_001397
6 (3)120(15)SNV2351G>C2351G>CMissenseTrp784SerLOVD: NF1_000196
33 (2)120(15)SNV2352G>C2352G>CMissenseTrp784CysLOVD: NF1_001853
106 (1)421(16)SNV2540T>G2540T>GMissenseLeu847ArgLOVD: NF1_000229
188 (1)1
300 (1)121(16)SNV2557C>T2557C>TNonsenseGln853*LOVD: NF1_001222
241 (1)1
38 (1)121(16)SNV2693T>C2693T>CMissenseLeu898ProLOVD: NF1_000241
48 (1)121(16)SNV2850+1G>A (cryptic plice site)2707_2850delSplicingCys904_Val951delLOVD: NF1_000259
18 (1)122(17)SNV2851G>T (splicing)2851_2990delSplicingLeu952Cysfs*22LOVD: NF1_001526
190 (2)1
14 (1)122(17)SNV2887C>T2887C>TNonsenseGln963*ClinVar: 233495
109 (1)122(17)DEL2948del2948delFrame-shiftLeu983Glnfs*9New
19 (2)122(17)DEL2970_2972del2970_2972delIn-frame deletionMet992delLOVD: NF1_000277
134 (1)123(18)SNV3040A>T3040A>TNonsenseLys1014*ClinVar: 431616
140 (1)423(18)SNV3104T>A3104T>AMissenseMet1035LysNew
245 (1)423(18)SNV3106A>G3106A>GMissenseLys1036GluNew
182 (1)123(18)SNV3113+1G>A (splicing)2991_3113delSplicingTyr998_Arg1038delLOVD: NF1_000306
230 (1)325(19b)SNV3277G>A (cryptic splice site)3275_3314delSplicingGly1092Aspfs*7LOVD: NF1_000340
74 (1)126(20)SNV3326T>G3326T>GNonsenseLeu1109*New
41 (1)426(20)DEL3347_3350del3347_3350delFrame-shiftAsp1116Alafs*25LOVD: NF1_000351
255 (1)1
115 (1)326(20)SNV3445A>G3445A>GMissenseMet1149ValLOVD: NF1_000356
215 (1)3
20 (2)126(20)SNV3496+1G>A3315_3496delSplicingTyr1106Leufs*28HGMD: CS072245
40 (2)527(21)DEL3502_3519del3502_3519delIn-frame deletionGly1168_Leu1173delNew
284 (2)627(21)SNV3592G>A3592G>AMissenseGlu1198LysNew
256 (1)127(21)SNV3610C>G3610C>GMissenseArg1204GlyLOVD: NF1_000372
104 (1)128(22)SNV3826C>T3826C>TNonsenseArg1276*LOVD: NF1_000403
108 (1)1
166 (1)1
225 (1)128-29DEL(3708+1_3709-1)_(3973+1_3974-1)del
(intragenic deletion ex. 28-29)
not determinedIntragenic deletion?New
275 (1)329(23)DEL3899del3899delFrame-shiftLeu1300Profs*9New
180 (1)129(23)SNV3916C>T3916C>TNonsenseArg1306*LOVD: NF1_000416
58 (1)129(23)DEL3972del3972delFrame-shiftArg1325Glyfs*2New
247 (1)129(23)SNV3974G>A3873_3976delSplicingTyr1292Argfs*7LOVD: NF1_001992
129 (1)130(23-1)INS4100_4103dup4100_4103dupFrame-shiftTyr1369Phefs*6New
36 (1)232(24)DEL4168del4168delFrame-shiftLeu1390Serfs*17LOVD: NF1_000458
162 (1)132(24)SNV4172G>C4172G>CMissenseArg1391ThrLOVD: NF1_000461
285 (1)132(24)SNV4269+2T>Cnot determinedSplicing?New
261 (1)533(25)SNV4276C>G4276C>GMissenseGln1426GluLOVD: NF1_001275
154 (1)133(25)SNV4278G>C4278G>CMissenseGln1426HisLOVD: NF1_000483
32 (4)535(27a)SNV4515-21T>G (splicing)4514_4515insTTTGCTGTATCTAGSplicingArg1505Serfs*53New
16 (13)135(27a)SNV4515-2A>G4514_4515insTTTGCTGTATCTGGSplicingArg1505Serfs*53LOVD: NF1_000518
28 (1)135(27a)SNV4537C>T4537C>TNonsenseArg1513*LOVD: NF1_000521
9 (2)135(27a)SNV4637C>A4637C>ANonsenseSer1546*LOVD: NF1_000534
181 (1)135(27a)DEL4644del4644delFrame-shiftPhe1548Leufs*5New
66 (1)136(27b)DEL4680_4683del4680_4683delFrame-shiftGlu1561Asnfs*5New
173 (1)436(27b)DEL4691del4691delFrame-shiftLys1564Argfs*3New
70 (1)436(27b)SNV4768C>T4768C>TMissenseArg1590TrpHGMD: CM971051
4 (1)137(28)SNV4780del4780delFrame-shiftThr1594Leufs*9New
119 (1)237(28)DEL4840_4854del4840_4854delIn-frame deletionTyr1614_Tyr1618delLOVD: NF1_001657
89 (1)137(28)DEL4914_4917del4914_4917delFrame-shiftLys1640Glyfs*36LOVD: NF1_000586
193 (1)137(28)SNV4922G>A4922G>ANonsenseTrp1641*LOVD: NF1_001303
80 (2)137(28)DEL4973_4978del4973_4978delIn-frame deletionIle1658_Tyr1659delLOVD: NF1_000597
95 (2)437-51DUP5035-?_7426-?dup
(intragenic duplication ex. 37-51)
not determinedIntragenic duplication?New
10 (2)138(29)SNV5264C>G5264C>GNonsenseSer1755*HGMD: CM001260
1 (2)438(29)SNV5401C>T5401C>TNonsenseGln1801*LOVD: NF1_001390
101 (2)538(29)SNV5425C>T5425C>TMissenseArg1809CysLOVD: NF1_000653
112 (5)5
178 (2)5
302 (1)3
155 (1)438(29)SNV5426G>C5426G>CMissenseArg1809ProClinVar: 208855
124 (3)538(29)SNV5426G>T5426G>TMissenseArg1809LeuLOVD: NF1_000654
156 (1)4
229 (1)5
175 (1)338(29)SNV5437T>C5437T>CMissenseSer1813ProNew
164 (2)138(29)SNV5483A>T5483A>TMissenseAsp1828ValLOVD: NF1_000666
259 (1)138(29)SNV5543T>A5543T>ANonsenseLeu1848*LOVD: NF1_000670
163 (1)139(30)DEL5592_5596del5592_5596delFrame-shiftAsn1864Lysfs*26New
231 (1)339(30)SNV5608C>T5608C>TNonsenseGln1870*ClinVar: 237577
22 (1)139(30)SNV5676G>T5676G>TMissenseLys1892AsnNew
177 (3)139(30)SNV5719G>T5719G>TNonsenseGlu1907*ClinVar: 187652
26 (2)139(30)DEL5739del5739delFrame-shiftPhe1913Leufs*8New
24 (2)140(31)SNV5839C>T5839C>TNonsenseArg1947*LOVD: NF1_000711
171 (1)140(31)SNV5842C>T5842C>TNonsenseGln1948*LOVD: NF1_001913
151 (1)140(31)SNV5928G>A5928G>ANonsenseTrp1976*LOVD: NF1_002495
71 (1)440(31)SNV5938G>C5938G>CMissenseGly1980ArgClinVar: 457773
282 (1)341(32)SNV5944-1G>C (cryptic splice site)5946_5952delSplicingThr1983Cysfs*6ClinVar: 431977
135 (1)341(32)SNV5944-5A>G (cryptic splice site)5943_5944insCTAGSplicingIle1982Leufs*7LOVD: NF1_001321
34 (2)142(33)SNV6085-2A>T (splicing)6085_6364delSplicingVal2029Lysfs*7LOVD: NF1_001919
83 (1)142(33)SNV6243C>A6243C>ANonsenseY2081*New
223 (1)142(33)SNV6335T>C6335T>CMissenseLeu2112ProLOVD: NF1_000756
233 (1)142(33)SNV6364+4A>G6085_6364delSplicingVal2029Lysfs*7HGMD: CS941517
97 (1)343(34)SNV6579+1G>T (splicing)6365_6579delSplicingGlu2122Glyfs*27LOVD: NF1_000784
253 (1)343(34)SNV6579+2T>Cnot determinedSplicing?New
42 (1)344(35)SNV6606C>A6606C>ANonsenseCys2202*LOVD: NF1_001338
137 (1)144(35)SNV6611G>A6611G>ANonsenseTrp2204*LOVD: NF1_001584
170 (1)344(35)SNV6641+1G>C6580_6641delSplicingAla2194Ilefs*6LOVD: NF1_000796
139 (1)145(36)DEL6688del6688delFrame-shiftVal2230Serfs*14LOVD: NF1_001670
50 (1)145(36)SNV6709C>T6709C>TNonsenseArg2237*LOVD: NF1_000802
73 (1)146(37)INS6791_6792insAA6791_6792insAAFrame-shiftTyr2264*LOVD: NF1_001349
51 (2)146(37)INS6791dup6791dupFrame-shiftTyr2264*LOVD: NF1_000815
118 (1)346(37)SNV6792C>A
(STOP determining splicing)
6757_6858delSplicingAla2253_Lys2286delLOVD: NF1_000816
143 (1)4
176 (1)1
299 (1)346(37)SNV6792C>G
(STOP determining splicing)
6757_6858delSplicingAla2253_Lys2286delLOVD: NF1_000817
30 (1)146(37)SNV6858+1G>T (splicing)6757_6858delSplicingAla2253_Lys2286delLOVD: NF1_000824
268 (1)146(37)SNV6858+2T>C6757_6858delSplicingAla2253_Lys2286delHGMD: CS073509
47 (1)347(38)DEL6881del6881delFrame-shiftLeu2294Profs*4LOVD: NF1_001726
84 (1)147(38)DEL6898_6903del6898_6903delIn-frame deletionAla2300_Val2301delNew
88 (2)147(38)SNV6955C>T6955C>TNonsenseGln2319*New
276 (1)147(38)DEL6974_6977del6974_6977delFrame-shiftAsp2325Valfs*49LOVD: NF1_001352
94 (1)148(39)INS7089dup7089dupFrame-shiftAsn2364*LOVD: NF1_001359
183 (1)1
43 (3)148(39)DEL7125del7125delFrame-shiftTyr2377Thrfs*20LOVD: NF1_000849
158 (3)1
169 (1)149(40)DEL7169_7170del7169_7170delFrame-shiftArg2390Asnfs*10New
79 (2)149(40)SNV7184T>C7184T>CMissenseLeu2395ProLOVD: NF1_000857
227 (1)149(40)INS7232dup7232dupFrame-shiftAsn2411Lysfs*16New
185 (1)150(41)SNV7259C>A7259C>AMissenseAla2420AspLOVD: NF1_000867
3 (1)150(41)SNV7285C>T7285C>TNonsenseArg2429*LOVD: NF1_000871
87 (1)1
37 (1)351(42)DEL7518del7518delFrame-shiftGln2507Asnfs*20ClinVar: 237598
130 (1)452(43)SNVnot determined7553_7675delIn-frame deletionGly2518_Met2558del
12 (2)153(44)DEL7686del7686delFrame-shiftIle2563Phefs*40LOVD: NF1_002529
25 (2)154(45)INS7874_7875dup7874_7875dupFrame-shiftSer2626Profs*33New
103 (1)156(47)SNV8051-1G>C (splicing)8051_8097delSplicingSer2684Thrfs*9New
260 (1)457(48)INS8207_8231dup8207_8231dupFrame-shiftLeu2745Serfs*14New
61 (1)2allDEL-718-?_8375+?del
(Microdeletion 17q11.2)
Microdeletion 17q11.2Microdeletion 17q11.2?LOVD: NF1_000001
64 (1)2
69 (1)2
77 (1)2
78 (1)1
99 (1)2
127 (1)2
136 (1)1
211 (1)1
277 (1)1
1 Number of family members presenting the variant is reported in parentheses. 2 Type of variant: SNV = Single-nucleotide variant, DEL = Deletion, DUP = Duplication, INS = Insertion, INDEL = Insertion-deletion, DIM = Deep intronic mutation. 3 ID of annotated variants in ClinVar (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar), Human Genome Variation Database (HGMD; www.hgmd.cf.ac.uk), and Leiden Open Variation Database (LOVD; databases.lovd.nl/shared/genes/NF1).
Table A2. Unique variants identified in SPRED1 (RefSeq NM_152594.2).
Table A2. Unique variants identified in SPRED1 (RefSeq NM_152594.2).
Family ID 1GroupExonType 2GenomiccDNAEffectProteinClinVar/HGMD/LOVD ID 3
11(10)52DEL49_53del49_53delFrame-shiftVal17Serfs*8New
224(1)32SNV52C>T52C>TNonsenseArg18*LOVD: SPRED1_000177
92(3)52SNV70C>T70C>TNonsenseArg24*LOVD: SPRED1_000014
179(3)52SNV74A>G74A>GMissenseAsp25GlyClinVar: 391600
161(2)53SNV229A>T229A>TNonsenseLys77*LOVD: SPRED1_000121
157(1)46–7DEL618-?_*91+?del
(intragenic deletion ex. 6-7)
???New
167(4)57SNV973C>T973C>TNonsenseArg325*LOVD: SPRED1_000077
286(2)57DUP993dup993dupFrame-shiftArg332Thrfs*12New
1 Number of family members presenting the variant is reported in parentheses. 2 Type of variant: SNV = Single-nucleotide variant, DEL = Deletion, DUP = Duplication. 3 ID of annotated variants in ClinVar (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar), Human Genome Variation Database (HGMD; www.hgmd.cf.ac.uk), and Leiden Open Variation Database (LOVD; databases.lovd.nl/shared/genes/SPRED1).
Table A3. Clinical features of 245 probands with suspicion of NF1 or an NF1-like condition (the most serious clinical features that could reduce patients’ life expectancy are highlighted in bold).
Table A3. Clinical features of 245 probands with suspicion of NF1 or an NF1-like condition (the most serious clinical features that could reduce patients’ life expectancy are highlighted in bold).
GroupFamily IDPatient IDSexMolecularly Characterized Affected RelativesSporadic (Y/N)Paternal/Maternal InheritanceAge (yy:mm)CALMs (≥6)FrecklingLisch NodulesOPGBone DysplasiaNeurofibromas (Cutaneous or Plexiform)Other Clinical Features 1
T0T1T0T1T0T1T0T1T0T1T0T1T0T1
124F0NMaternal212:06++-+++----++LGG, DLL
135M0NMaternal6:0814++++-------+Thor
146M0NPaternal14:0218:05++++--n.a.n.a.----
168M2NMaternal613++++++----++DLL, DS, ID
1710M1NPaternal2022++++++------NBOs, Epy
1812M0NPaternal1019:08++++++----++DLL
1913F1NPaternal14:0917++++++----++UH
11016F1NMaternal1015:04++-+--++--++NBOs
112116M3 (2 twin)NPaternal1014:08++-+--------LD, SP
11423M0Y 9:0911:08++++++------
11524M0NMaternal1011++++++------DS
11626M12NMaternal10:0112:04++++++----++UH, MMS, Thor, NBOs, DLL, PmD, LD
11737F1NPaternal3:019:01++-+-------+LD, NBOs
11838F0NPaternal5:098:11++++------++Noon, MacroC, SP, Thor
11940F1NMaternal12:0115:08++++++------Noon, MacroC, SP, Thor, SS, BvP, BP,
12041M1NMaternal1119++n.a.n.a.++------Thor
12143M0NPaternal21:1122:08++++++----++
12245M0NMaternal14:0815:06++++++----++
12348F1 (twin)Y 1517:06++++++----++DS, DE, VS, LD, SP
12450M1NMaternal13:0917:06++++n.a.n.a.++--++SS, DE, DS, NBOs
12551F1NMaternal11:0211:07++++++------
12653F1NMaternal6:0110++-+----n.a.n.a.--LD
12754M1 (twin)Y 15:0318:11++++++-----+Thor
12856F0NMaternal78:11++++n.a.n.a.----++
12958F1NPaternal19:0422:11++++++----++DS, NBOs
13061M0NPaternal11:0913:01++++-n.a.------Thor
13162M0NPaternal9:0710:03++++++++----DLL, NBOs
13365F1NPaternal14:0214:08++++++n.a.n.a.----SS, DLL, MacroC, DS, Noon
13466M1NMaternal14:0516++++++------MMS
13567F1NPaternal2227++++------++
13872F0NPaternal6:047:05++-+--------NA, MacroC
13976M1NMaternal8:069:05++++n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.----BP
14388F2NMaternal78:01++++--++--++Leuk, DLL, MacroC, NBOs
14491M2Nn.a.3536++++--n.a.n.a.--++
14693M0Y 1418++++-+---+++Thor, DS
14899F0Y 20:0121:09++++++----++
150101M0Y 46:06++-+++-+--++SS, NBOs
151102F1NMaternal57:08++++++----++
152104F0Y 1314:02++++++------BvP, NA, LD, SP, CD
155107M1 (twin)Y 9:0214:04++++++-+--++DLL, NBOs
158112F0NMaternal710++++++n.a.n.a.--++mild ID
163125F0Y 16:0416:07++++++----++DLL, NBOs, Thor, MacroC
165128F0Y 1219:02++++++----++LD, DS, NBOs, Thor
166129M0Y 713:03++++------++
167130M0Y 1213:03++++n.a.n.a.----++
168132M0Y 713:06++--++----++DLL, NBOs
172137M0Y 2122:02++++++--++--
173138F0Y 17:0319:05++++------++MacroC
174139F0Y 12:0413:04++++++----++NBOs, LD, SP
175140M0NMaternal6:058:02++++--------Thor, LD, NBOs
176141F0Y 9:0912:03++++++----++DLL
178149F0Y 1618++n.a.+-+----++
179151M1NMaternal5:068:05++++-+-+--++NBOs, CIm, SP, DS, Cry, Noon
180155M1NPaternal4:035:05++-+--------NBOs, ID
182158M0NMaternal4:115:11++---+------DLL
183160F0Y 89:07++++-+----++NBOs, BvP
184161F0Y 23:0125:11++++++-----++NBOs
185162F0NPaternal1:113:01++++--------MacroC, UH
187171F0NPaternal78:01++++-+----++DS, DE, VS, LD, SP, DLL,
188253F1NMaternal7:068:06++++++------NBOs
189175F0Y 2021++++++------LD, NBOs
193185M2NMaternal7:0611++++++----++PmD, SP
194187M0NMaternal1518:04++++--------BvP
198204F0NPaternal13:0616:06++++++-+--++DS
1102218F1NMaternal2527++++--------Myo, MLyn
1103220F0Y 2123++--++----++SF
1104223F0Y 1516:05++++n.a.n.a.----++NBOs, BvP, MacroC
1108228M0Y 0:053:05-+-+------++NA, MacroC, Thor, PmD
1109236M1NMaternal12:0713:01++++++----++
1114247M0Y 1821:08++--++------
1116250M0Y 12:0313:03++++------++
1126271M0NMaternal4:055:03++--++++--++UH, NBOs, BvP, LD
1129276M0Y 6:047++++------++PmD, DLL, Epy
1132286M1NPaternal11:0912:01++++++++----NBOs, SP, PmD
1133287F1Nn.a.11:06++++++------Noon
1134289M0Y 1010:08++++++------
1136291M0Y 15:0515:09++++n.a.n.a.----++LD, PmD, SD, NBOs, BvP, SF
1137309F0Y 0:081:01++--------++
1139301M1Nn.a.30:0631:02++--++----++
1144317F2NMaternal3030:03++++++----++MacroC, Noon
1150325M0Y 11:1113++++++----++BSL, LD
1151326F0Y 14:0114:08++++++++----MMS
1152328M0Y 1314:06++++++++----
1153329M0Y 1919:6++++++------
1154331M0Y 2020:06++++++----++
1158341F2NMaternal15:0315:09++++++------
1159343M0Y 14:1115:05++++++++----
1160385M0Y 29:0130++--++------PS, CD, MacroC, Noon
1162354F0Y 42:0643++++n.a.n.a.----++PS, SS, BvP
1163350F0Y 49:0150:08++++++------
1164384F1NPaternal12:0613:04++++++------NBOs, MMS
116552F0NPaternal2026++++++----++
116628F0NMaternal17:0119++++++----++HY
1169334M0Y 1819++++++----++Thor, MacroC
1171405M0Y 5:056:01++--++++--++
1172395M0Y 37:0237:08++++++------
1174435F0Y 60:0260:09++++------++
1176463F0Y 3737:03++++++----++MacroC
1177199M2NPaternal10:0313:09++++++n.a.n.a.----PmD, SP, Cry
1180340M0Y 1315++++++------
1181450F0Y 15:0116:03++++++------
118295M0Y 2021++n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.----++NBOs
1183146M0YPaternal1517++++--n.a.n.a.----HY
1184166M1NMaternal2431++n.a.n.a.++----++NBOs, LD, DLL, DS, PmD, ID, VS
1185146M0Y 6976++n.a.n.a.++----++
1186189F0Y 2834++++++----++NBOs, LD, SP, DS, PmD, ID, BvP, SS, Epy, AD
1188255M0Y 4142++++n.a.n.a.+---++LGG, Malignancies, SS
1190367F1NMaternal6870++++n.a.n.a.----++DS
1192425M0Y 2022++++++++--++NBOs, LD, DLL, DS, MacroC, HY
1193431M0Y 3136++++++----++NBOs, LD, SP, DLL, PmD, Malignancies, HY
119586F0Y 320++++--------
1209345M0Y 46++++++------
1211432M0Y 3333++++++----++
1212442M0Y 3436:8++++n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.----Dlip
1214453F0Y 1314:5++++++n.a.n.a.--++BvP
1217470F0Y 2021++++++++--++NBOs
1218471M0Y 77:09++----++--++NBOs, ID, SP, Noon
1220480F0Y 1919++++------++NBOS, DLL, DS, SS
1221481M0Y 910:02++++--n.a.-++--NBOs, ID, Bover
1222483M0N 0:081:06++----n.a.n.a.----CD
1223491M0Y 3740++++------++DS, SF
1225495F0Y 810:01++++--------DE, VS, Noon, SS, NBOs
1227500M0Y 1313++++++++--++
1233523F0Y 2121:05++--------++
1234524M1NPaternal1718:2++++------++Hyd, NA, Noon, Chem, SS
1241548M0Y 3033++++------++NBOs, LD, DS, BP
1247567M0NMaternal57++++--++--++NBOs
1251575M0Y 1011++++--++--++NBOs
1255585M0Y 1213:03++----------ID, NBOs
1256592M0Y 1920++++--------
1259602M0Y 1314:25++++----++++AD
1268632M0Y 1517++--------++
1276646M0Y 130:05++----++----
1277647M0Y 4648++++------++DLL, DS
1285657M0Y 5154++--------++HY, SF
1288665M0Y 56++++--n.a.n.a.--++DD, SP
1289667F0Y 5558++++++----++HY, Malignancies
1292670M0Y 1111:04++++n.a.n.a.----++NBOs, SP, LD
1300681M0Y 4547++++++----++NBOs, DS
23670M0NMaternal1012:11++++++++--++RMS, NBOs, MacroC, DS, VS
261118M0Y 2:013:11++-+------++ID, BP, MacroC, UH, Noon, Thor,
264127M0Y 14:0616:02++++++----++ID, Thor
269134M0Y 1617:02++++++----++Thor, NBOs, DLL, ID
277147M0Y 4:096:06++--------++ID, BvP, NBOs, Thor,
299205F0Y 2929:08++++++------ID, NBOs, MPNST
2107227M0Y 5:037++++++------ID, SP, Noon, NA
2119259M0Y 11:0213++++++----++DE, DS, VS, ID, SP, LD, Noon, macroC, NBOs, DLL, BSL
2127272M0Y 1515:09++++------++ID, PS, Epy
2149324M0Y 1416++++--++--++ID
216897M0NPaternal2023++++++++--++ID
33771M0Y 912:11++++--------Leuk
34283M0Y 68:09++---+------
34592F0Y 9:0214:08++-+-------+Thor, DS, DLL
34796F0Y 4:115:11++++-+------
349100M0Y 1:043:01++-+-------+BP, XG
353105M0Y 810++-+--------LD
357110F0Y 3:094:03++-+--------
381157M0Y 2:014:11++-+--------SP, Cry, NA, Thor, Noon
391180M0Y 3:054:07++----------DD, MacroC, SP
397203F0Y 37:2++-+-------+
3110238F0Y 1:014:02++++--------
3113245F0Y 9:0112:02++----------
3115249M0Y 99:02++++--------DLL
3118257M0Y 5:088++-+--------XG
3120260F0Y 8:0812++----------
3121261F0Y 1:093:05++++--------
3125268F0Y 3:053:06++++--------UH, XG
3128273M0Y 8:0810:04++----------ID, UH, Thor
3131282F0Y 46++----n.a.n.a.----NA
3135290F0Y 9:0310:01++++--------
3138293M0Y 5:085:01++++--------
3142314M0Y 8:0610++----------
3145321F0Y 9:0110:01++----------
3146322F0Y 67++----------
3170145M0Y 3:056:02++++--------MacroC, NBOs
3175358F0Y 2:084:04++-+--------SS, SP
3202374M0Y 89++----------Thor
3215464F0Y 23:03++----------SP, CD
3224494M0Y 912++----------LD, BvP
3228503M0Y 23:08++----n.a.n.a.----
3230507M0Y 78:03++----n.a.n.a.----
3231508F0Y 11:03++----n.a.n.a.----
3239536M0Y 5 ++----n.a.n.a.----MacroC
3244555M0Y 78:01++----------
3252576M0Y 35++++---+---+ID, SP, NBOs, CIm, MBG, secondary Epy, DE, VS
3253579M0Y 79++----n.a.n.a.----SP
3275644M0Y 67:02++++-------+SP, DD
3278649M0Y 33:08++----n.a.n.a.----NA
3279650M0Y 23:25++----n.a.n.a.----AtC
3282653M0Y 88:06++++--n.a.n.a.----
3294672F0Y 22:10++-+--n.a.n.a.----CD
3297677F0Y 78++----n.a.n.a.----AtC
3299680M0Y 68++---+------ID
3302683M0Y 12++----------
413M1 (twin)Y 1214++++n.a.n.a.------LD
457M0Y 13:0317++---+------Thor
41320M0Y 10:0712:08++---+------ArC, NBOs, BP, Noon, Thor, SP, MMS
44182F0Y 1618++++--------
454106M0Y 12:0313:01++++--------UH, NBOs
456109M0Y 15:0416:02++----------
459113F0Y 11:0313:05++-+--------DS, SS
470135M0Y 17:0618++----n.a.n.a.----SS, BvP
471136M0Y 15:0717:05++----------ID, SP, DLL
486163F0Y 14:0217:01++----------LD
495198F1Y 13:0515:03++-+-------+
496202F0Y 14:0115++++--------
4106225M0Y 10:0612:09++++--------
4117251M0Y 13:0414:04++----------Myo, AtIN
4123264M0Y 1114:07++----------
4130278M0Y 16:0318:01++++--------
4140306F0Y 16:0417++++--------DS, BvP, DLL
4143315F0Y 14:0114:08++++-+------
4155339F0Y 11:0912:04++----n.a.n.a.----MacroC, LD
4156195F0Y 11:0313:09++----------
4157196F0Y 11:0914:08++-+--------
4173404F0Y 15:0115:07++++--------SS, MacroC
419687F0Y 1411++----n.a.n.a.----OD
4201265M0Y 1314++----n.a.n.a.----
4237532M0Y 1314++----n.a.n.a.----
4245557F0Y 1011:05++----n.a.n.a.----NA
4260608F0Y 3436++++--------
4269635M0Y 1415++----n.a.n.a.----
4280651F0Y 1415++----n.a.n.a.----
4281652M0Y 1012++----n.a.n.a.----
4296675F0Y 2929++--n.a.n.a.------
51117M9NPaternal1215:08++----------Cry
532170M3NMaternal12:0912:11++++--------
54079F1NMaternal1819:01++++--------
562121F0NPaternal8:0512++++--------
592183F2NPaternal56:02++----------NA
5100212M0NPaternal15:0817++----------Thor
5101216F1NMaternal7:068:02++++--------LD
5112243F4NPaternal10:0110:06++-+--------Thor
5124269M2NMaternal3:085:06++----------UH
5147323F2NPaternal3:054:03++----------PS, Noon, IH
5161391F1NPaternal10:0110:04++----------
5167416F3NPaternal0:071:01++----------
5178492M1NPaternal55:03++----------MacroC, Noon
5179362F2NPaternal8:019:01++++--------IPP
5207335F0NPaternal910++----n.a.n.a.----
5216638M2NPaternal14++----n.a.n.a.----Chem
5229504F3NPaternal911:09++----n.a.n.a.----SS
5261609F0NMaternal3234++++--n.a.n.a.----Noon
5262 F0NMaternal2829++----n.a.n.a.----Noon, MacroC
5286658M1NMaternal77:05++----n.a.n.a.----AD
1 The most serious clinical features that could reduce patients’ life expectancy are highlighted in bold. Abbreviations: AD = Attention deficit; ArC = Arachnoid cyst; AtC = Atypical CALMs; AtIN = Atypical iris nodules; Bover = Bone overgrowth; BP = Bilateral ptosis; BSL = Brain stem lesions; BvP = Behavior problems; CD = Other cardiac defects (DIA, HCM, CoA); Chem = Cherry hemangioma; CIm = Chiari I malformation; Cry = Cryptorchidism; DE = Dural ectasia; Dlip = Diffuse lipomas; DLL = Legs of different length (>1 cm); DS = Dystrophic scoliosis; Epy = Epilepsy (idiopathic); HY = Hypertension; Hyd = Hydrocephalus; ID = Intellectual disability (moderate or severe); IH = Inguinal herniation; IPP = Idiopathic precocious puberty; LD = Learning disabilities (calculation, reading, memory); Leuk = Leukemia; LGG = Low-grade glioma (other than OPG); MacroC = Macrocephaly (>95th PCTL or +3.33 plus 2 SD of difference with height); MBG = Multifocal brain gliomas; MLyn = Mild lymphoedema; MMS = Moyamoya syndrome; MPNST = Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor; Myo = Myopia; NA = Nevus anemicus; NBOs = Neurofibromatosis bright objects; Noon = Noonan-like facial features; OD = Oligodontia; OPG = Optic pathway glioma; PmD = Psychomotor delay; PS = Pulmonary stenosis; RMS = Rhabdomyosarcoma; SF = Spinal form; SP = Speech problem (needing therapy); SS = Short stature (<3rd PCTL; <10th PCTL general population); Thor = Thorax abnormalities (excavatum or carinatum, asymmetric); UH = Umbilical herniation; VS = Vertebral scalloping; XG = Xantogranulomas; n.a. = not available.
Table A4. Unique variants identified in other disease genes: KIT (RefSeq NM_000222.2), LZTR1 (RefSeq NM_006767.3), NF2 (RefSeq NM_000268.3), PPP1CB (RefSeq NM_206876.1), PTEN (RefSeq NM_000314.4), PTPN11 (RefSeq NM_002834.3), SOS1 (RefSeq NM_005633.3), TSC1 (RefSeq NM_000368.4), and TSC2 (RefSeq NM_000548.3).
Table A4. Unique variants identified in other disease genes: KIT (RefSeq NM_000222.2), LZTR1 (RefSeq NM_006767.3), NF2 (RefSeq NM_000268.3), PPP1CB (RefSeq NM_206876.1), PTEN (RefSeq NM_000314.4), PTPN11 (RefSeq NM_002834.3), SOS1 (RefSeq NM_005633.3), TSC1 (RefSeq NM_000368.4), and TSC2 (RefSeq NM_000548.3).
Family ID 1GeneExonType 2GenomiccDNAEffectProteinClinVar/HGMD/LOVD ID 3
240 (1)KIT14DEL2027del2027delFrame-shiftGly676Valfs*4New
298 (1)LZTR14SNV353G>A353G>AMissenseArg118HisLOVD: LZTR1_000051
232 (1)NF25DEL465del465delFrame-shiftSer156Valfs*18ClinVar: 547705
238 (1)13SNV1396C>T1396C>TNonsenseArg466*ClinVar: 3295
226 (1)2–6DUP(114+1_115-1)_(599+1_600-1)dup
(intragenic duplication ex. 2-6)
n.a.Intragenic duplication?New
263 (1)PPP1CB3SNV146C>G146C>GMissensePro49ArgClinVar: 254648
258 (2)PTEN7INS778_779insG778_779insGFrame-shiftLys260Argfs*38New
287 (1)PTPN113SNV235C>A235C>AMissenseGln79LysClinVar: 44605
242 (1)8SNV923A>G923A>GMissenseAsn308SerClinVar: 13327
191 (1)12SNV1403C>T1403C>TMissenseThr468MetClinVar: 13331
204 (1)
257 (1)
272 (1)
236 (1)13SNV1492C>T1492C>TMissenseArg498TrpClinVar: 40553
301 (1)SNV1528C>G1528C>GMissenseGln510GluClinVar: 40566
270 (1)SOS14SNV429G>T429G>TMissenseLys143AsnNew
187 (2)10SNV1642A>C1642A>CMissenseSer548ArgLOVD: SOS1_000142
189 (2)TSC113DEL1326_1327del1326_1327delFrame-shiftGly443Ilefs*15ClinVar: 421669
265 (1)18SNV2293C>T2293C>TNonsenseGln765*ClinVar: 48934
274 (1)19INS2421dup2421dupFrame-shiftAla808Cysfs*18LOVD: TSC1_00419
305 (1)TSC21–16DEL(-30+1_-29-1)_(1716+1_1717-1)del
(intragenic deletion ex. 1-16)
n.a.Intragenic deletion?New
267 (1)1–22DELc.(-30+1_-29-1)_(2545+1_2546-1)del
(intragenic deletion ex. 1-22)
n.a.Intragenic deletion?New
295 (1)7SNV648+1G>Tn.a.Splicing?LOVD: TSC2_03572
303 (1)37DELc.(4662+1_4663-1)_(4849+1_4850-1)del
(intragenic deletion ex. 37)
n.a.Intragenic deletion?LOVD: TSC2_03465
248 (1)41DEL5238_5255del5238_5255del In-frame deletionHis1746_Arg1751delLOVD: TSC2_00149
1 Number of family members presenting the variant is reported in parentheses; 2 Type of variant: SNV = Single-nucleotide variant, DEL = Deletion, DUP = Duplication, INS = Insertion. 3 ID of annotated variants in ClinVar (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar), Human Genome Variation Database (HGMD; www.hgmd.cf.ac.uk) and Leiden Open Variation Database (LOVD; databases.lovd.nl/shared/genes).

References

  1. Brems, H.; Chmara, M.; Sahbatou, M.; Denayer, E.; Taniguchi, K.; Kato, R.; Somers, R.; Messiaen, L.; De Schepper, S.; Fryns, J.-P.; et al. Germline loss-of-function mutations in SPRED1 cause a neurofibromatosis 1-like phenotype. Nat. Genet. 2007, 39, 1120–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Denayer, E.; de Ravel, T.; Legius, E. Clinical and molecular aspects of RAS related disorders. J. Med. Genet. 2008, 45, 695–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Tartaglia, M.; Gelb, B.D. Disorders of dysregulated signal traffic through the RAS-MAPK pathway: Phenotypic spectrum and molecular mechanisms. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2010, 1214, 99–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Tidyman, W.E.; Rauen, K.A. The RASopathies: Developmental syndromes of Ras/MAPK pathway dysregulation. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2009, 19, 230–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Jett, K.; Friedman, J.M. Clinical and genetic aspects of neurofibromatosis 1. Genet. Med. 2010, 12, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Williams, V.C.; Lucas, J.; Babcock, M.A.; Gutmann, D.H.; Korf, B.; Maria, B.L. Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Revisited. Pediatrics 2009, 123, 124–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Ferner, R.E. Neurofibromatosis 1. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2006, 15, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Shen, M.H.; Harper, P.S.; Upadhyaya, M. Molecular genetics of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). J. Med. Genet. 1996, 33, 2–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Li, Y.; O’Connell, P.; Breidenbach, H.H.; Cawthon, R.; Stevens, J.; Xu, G.; Neil, S.; Robertson, M.; White, R.; Viskochil, D. Genomic organization of the neurofibromatosis 1 gene (NF1). Genomics 1995, 25, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ratner, N.; Miller, S.J. A RASopathy gene commonly mutated in cancer: The neurofibromatosis type 1 tumour suppressor. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2015, 15, 290–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ferner, R.E. Neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2: A twenty first century perspective. Lancet Neurol. 2007, 6, 340–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development, C. Neurofibromatosis: Conference Statement. Arch. Neurol. 1988, 45, 575–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Santoro, C.; Pacileo, G.; Limongelli, G.; Scianguetta, S.; Giugliano, T.; Piluso, G.; Ragione, F.D.; Cirillo, M.; Mirone, G.; Perrotta, S. LEOPARD syndrome: Clinical dilemmas in differential diagnosis of RASopathies. BMC Med. Genet. 2014, 15, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Upadhyaya, M.; Huson, S.M.; Davies, M.; Thomas, N.; Chuzhanova, N.; Giovannini, S.; Evans, D.G.; Howard, E.; Kerr, B.; Griffiths, S.; et al. An absence of cutaneous neurofibromas associated with a 3-bp inframe deletion in exon 17 of the NF1 gene (c.2970–2972 delAAT): Evidence of a clinically significant NF1 genotype-phenotype correlation. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2007, 80, 140–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Santoro, C.; Maietta, A.; Giugliano, T.; Melis, D.; Perrotta, S.; Nigro, V.; Piluso, G. Arg(1809) substitution in neurofibromin: Further evidence of a genotype-phenotype correlation in neurofibromatosis type 1. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2015, 23, 1460–1461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Pinna, V.; Lanari, V.; Daniele, P.; Consoli, F.; Agolini, E.; Margiotti, K.; Bottillo, I.; Torrente, I.; Bruselles, A.; Fusilli, C.; et al. p.Arg1809Cys substitution in neurofibromin is associated with a distinctive NF1 phenotype without neurofibromas. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2015, 23, 1068–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Pasmant, E.; Sabbagh, A.; Spurlock, G.; Laurendeau, I.; Grillo, E.; Hamel, M.J.; Martin, L.; Barbarot, S.; Leheup, B.; Rodriguez, D.; et al. NF1 microdeletions in neurofibromatosis type 1: From genotype to phenotype. Hum. Mutat. 2010, 31, E1506–E1518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kehrer-Sawatzki, H.; Mautner, V.F.; Cooper, D.N. Emerging genotype-phenotype relationships in patients with large NF1 deletions. Hum. Genet. 2017, 136, 349–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Wakioka, T.; Sasaki, A.; Kato, R.; Shouda, T.; Matsumoto, A.; Miyoshi, K.; Tsuneoka, M.; Komiya, S.; Baron, R.; Yoshimura, A. Spred is a Sprouty-related suppressor of Ras signalling. Nature 2001, 412, 647–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Stowe, I.B.; Mercado, E.L.; Stowe, T.R.; Bell, E.L.; Oses-Prieto, J.A.; Hernández, H.; Burlingame, A.L.; McCormick, F. A shared molecular mechanism underlies the human rasopathies Legius syndrome and Neurofibromatosis-1. Genes Dev. 2012, 26, 1421–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Hirata, Y.; Brems, H.; Suzuki, M.; Kanamori, M.; Okada, M.; Morita, R.; Llano-Rivas, I.; Ose, T.; Messiaen, L.; Legius, E.; et al. Interaction between a domain of a negative regulator of the RAS-ERK pathway, SPRED1, and the GTPase-Activating Protein-Related Domain of neurofibromin is implicated in Legius Syndrome and Neurofibromatosis Type 1. J. Biol. Chem. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Messiaen, L.; Yao, S.; Brems, H.; Callens, T.; Sathienkijkanchai, A.; Denayer, E.; Spencer, E.; Arn, P.; Babovic-Vuksanovic, D.; Bay, C.; et al. Clinical and Mutational Spectrum of Neurofibromatosis Type 1-like Syndrome. JAMA 2009, 302, 2111–2118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Spurlock, G.; Bennett, E.; Chuzhanova, N.; Thomas, N.; Jim, H.P.; Side, L.; Davies, S.; Haan, E.; Kerr, B.; Huson, S.M.; et al. SPRED1 mutations (Legius syndrome): Another clinically useful genotype for dissecting the neurofibromatosis type 1 phenotype. J. Med. Genet. 2009, 46, 431–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Suerink, M.; Ripperger, T.; Messiaen, L.; Menko, F.H.; Bourdeaut, F.; Colas, C.; Jongmans, M.; Goldberg, Y.; Nielsen, M.; Muleris, M.; et al. Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency as a differential diagnosis of neurofibromatosis type 1: Consensus guidelines for testing a child without malignancy. J. Med. Genet. 2019, 56, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ars, E.; Serra, E.; GarcÃ-a, J.; Kruyer, H.; Gaona, A.; Lázaro, C.; Estivill, X. Mutations affecting mRNA splicing are the most common molecular defects in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2000, 9, 237–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Wimmer, K.; Eckart, M.; Rehder, H.; Fonatsch, C. Illegitimate splicing of the NF1 gene in healthy individuals mimics mutation-induced splicing alterations in NF1 patients. Hum. Genet. 2000, 106, 311–313. [Google Scholar]
  27. Luijten, M.; Wang, Y.; Smith, B.T.; Westerveld, A.; Smink, L.J.; Dunham, I.; Roe, B.A.; Hulsebos, T.J. Mechanism of spreading of the highly related neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) pseudogenes on chromosomes 2, 14 and 22. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2000, 8, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Szklarczyk, D.; Franceschini, A.; Wyder, S.; Forslund, K.; Heller, D.; Huerta-Cepas, J.; Simonovic, M.; Roth, A.; Santos, A.; Tsafou, K.P.; et al. STRING v10: Protein-protein interaction networks, integrated over the tree of life. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015, 43, D447–D452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Warde-Farley, D.; Donaldson, S.L.; Comes, O.; Zuberi, K.; Badrawi, R.; Chao, P.; Franz, M.; Grouios, C.; Kazi, F.; Lopes, C.T.; et al. The GeneMANIA prediction server: Biological network integration for gene prioritization and predicting gene function. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38, W214–W220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mutarelli, M.; Marwah, V.; Rispoli, R.; Carrella, D.; Dharmalingam, G.; Oliva, G.; di Bernardo, D. A community-based resource for automatic exome variant-calling and annotation in Mendelian disorders. BMC Genom. 2014, 15 (Suppl. S3), S5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. DePristo, M.A.; Banks, E.; Poplin, R.; Garimella, K.V.; Maguire, J.R.; Hartl, C.; Philippakis, A.A.; del Angel, G.; Rivas, M.A.; Hanna, M.; et al. A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data. Nat. Genet. 2011, 43, 491–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Wang, K.; Li, M.; Hakonarson, H. ANNOVAR: Functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38, e164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Pruitt, K.D.; Tatusova, T.; Klimke, W.; Maglott, D.R. NCBI Reference Sequences: Current status, policy and new initiatives. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37, D32–D36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Sherry, S.T.; Ward, M.H.; Kholodov, M.; Baker, J.; Phan, L.; Smigielski, E.M.; Sirotkin, K. dbSNP: The NCBI database of genetic variation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001, 29, 308–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Genomes Project, C.; Abecasis, G.R.; Altshuler, D.; Auton, A.; Brooks, L.D.; Durbin, R.M.; Gibbs, R.A.; Hurles, M.E.; McVean, G.A. A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature 2010, 467, 1061–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Pollard, K.S.; Hubisz, M.J.; Rosenbloom, K.R.; Siepel, A. Detection of nonneutral substitution rates on mammalian phylogenies. Genome Res. 2010, 20, 110–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liu, X.; Jian, X.; Boerwinkle, E. dbNSFP: A lightweight database of human nonsynonymous SNPs and their functional predictions. Hum. Mutat. 2011, 32, 894–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Messiaen, L.M.; Callens, T.; Mortier, G.; Beysen, D.; Vandenbroucke, I.; Van Roy, N.; Speleman, F.; Paepe, A.D. Exhaustive mutation analysis of the NF1 gene allows identification of 95% of mutations and reveals a high frequency of unusual splicing defects. Hum. Mutat. 2000, 15, 541–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Adzhubei, I.A.; Schmidt, S.; Peshkin, L.; Ramensky, V.E.; Gerasimova, A.; Bork, P.; Kondrashov, A.S.; Sunyaev, S.R. A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations. Nat. Methods 2010, 7, 248–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Kumar, P.; Henikoff, S.; Ng, P.C. Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm. Nat. Protocols 2009, 4, 1073–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Schwarz, J.M.; Cooper, D.N.; Schuelke, M.; Seelow, D. MutationTaster2: Mutation prediction for the deep-sequencing age. Nat. Methods 2014, 11, 361–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Lek, M.; Karczewski, K.J.; Minikel, E.V.; Samocha, K.E.; Banks, E.; Fennell, T.; O’Donnell-Luria, A.H.; Ware, J.S.; Hill, A.J.; Cummings, B.B.; et al. Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans. Nature 2016, 536, 285–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Kluwe, L.; Siebert, R.; Gesk, S.; Friedrich, R.E.; Tinschert, S.; Kehrer-Sawatzki, H.; Mautner, V.F. Screening 500 unselected neurofibromatosis 1 patients for deletions of the NF1 gene. Hum. Mutat. 2004, 23, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Wimmer, K.; Yao, S.; Claes, K.; Kehrer-Sawatzki, H.; Tinschert, S.; De Raedt, T.; Legius, E.; Callens, T.; Beiglböck, H.; Maertens, O.; et al. Spectrum of single- and multiexon NF1 copy number changes in a cohort of 1,100 unselected NF1 patients. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2006, 45, 265–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bandipalliam, P. Syndrome of early onset colon cancers, hematologic malignancies & features of neurofibromatosis in HNPCC families with homozygous mismatch repair gene mutations. Fam. Cancer 2005, 4, 323–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Charest, D.L.; Mordret, G.; Harder, K.W.; Jirik, F.; Pelech, S.L. Molecular cloning, expression, and characterization of the human mitogen-activated protein kinase p44erk1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1993, 13, 4679–4690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Tsipi, M.; Poulou, M.; Fylaktou, I.; Kosma, K.; Tsoutsou, E.; Pons, M.R.; Kokkinou, E.; Kitsiou-Tzeli, S.; Fryssira, H.; Tzetis, M. Phenotypic expression of a spectrum of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 (NF1) mutations identified through NGS and MLPA. J. Neurol. Sci. 2018, 395, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Balla, B.; Arvai, K.; Horvath, P.; Tobias, B.; Takacs, I.; Nagy, Z.; Dank, M.; Fekete, G.; Kosa, J.P.; Lakatos, P. Fast and robust next-generation sequencing technique using ion torrent personal genome machine for the screening of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) gene. J. Mol. Neurosci.: MN 2014, 53, 204–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Pasmant, E.; Parfait, B.; Luscan, A.; Goussard, P.; Briand-Suleau, A.; Laurendeau, I.; Fouveaut, C.; Leroy, C.; Montadert, A.; Wolkenstein, P.; et al. Neurofibromatosis type 1 molecular diagnosis: What can NGS do for you when you have a large gene with loss of function mutations? Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2015, 23, 596–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Griffiths, S.; Thompson, P.; Frayling, I.; Upadhyaya, M. Molecular diagnosis of neurofibromatosis type 1: 2 years experience. Fam. Cancer 2007, 6, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Valero, M.C.; Martin, Y.; Hernandez-Imaz, E.; Marina Hernandez, A.; Melean, G.; Valero, A.M.; Javier Rodriguez-Alvarez, F.; Telleria, D.; Hernandez-Chico, C. A highly sensitive genetic protocol to detect NF1 mutations. J. Mol. Diagn.: JMD 2011, 13, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Xu, M.; Xiong, H.; Han, Y.; Li, C.; Mai, S.; Huang, Z.; Ai, X.; Guo, Z.; Zeng, F.; Guo, Q. Identification of Mutation Regions on NF1 Responsible for High- and Low-Risk Development of Optic Pathway Glioma in Neurofibromatosis Type I. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. De Luca, A.; Bottillo, I.; Sarkozy, A.; Carta, C.; Neri, C.; Bellacchio, E.; Schirinzi, A.; Conti, E.; Zampino, G.; Battaglia, A.; et al. NF1 Gene Mutations Represent the Major Molecular Event Underlying Neurofibromatosis-Noonan Syndrome. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2005, 77, 1092–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Santoro, C.; Di Rocco, F.; Kossorotoff, M.; Zerah, M.; Boddaert, N.; Calmon, R.; Vidaud, D.; Cirillo, M.; Cinalli, G.; Mirone, G.; et al. Moyamoya syndrome in children with neurofibromatosis type 1: Italian-French experience. Am. J. Med. Genet. Part A 2017, 173, 1521–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Santoro, C.; Giugliano, T.; Kraemer, M.; Torella, A.; Schwitalla, J.C.; Cirillo, M.; Melis, D.; Berlit, P.; Nigro, V.; Perrotta, S.; et al. Whole exome sequencing identifies MRVI1 as a susceptibility gene for moyamoya syndrome in neurofibromatosis type 1. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. De Raedt, T.; Brems, H.; Wolkenstein, P.; Vidaud, D.; Pilotti, S.; Perrone, F.; Mautner, V.; Frahm, S.; Sciot, R.; Legius, E. Elevated risk for MPNST in NF1 microdeletion patients. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2003, 72, 1288–1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. D’Amico, A.; Mazio, F.; Ugga, L.; Cuocolo, R.; Cirillo, M.; Santoro, C.; Perrotta, S.; Melis, D.; Brunetti, A. Medullary unidentified bright objects in Neurofibromatosis type 1: A case series. BMC Pediatr. 2018, 18, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Wang, H.F.; Shih, Y.T.; Chen, C.Y.; Chao, H.W.; Lee, M.J.; Hsueh, Y.P. Valosin-containing protein and neurofibromin interact to regulate dendritic spine density. J. Clin. Investig. 2011, 121, 4820–4837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Watts, G.D.; Wymer, J.; Kovach, M.J.; Mehta, S.G.; Mumm, S.; Darvish, D.; Pestronk, A.; Whyte, M.P.; Kimonis, V.E. Inclusion body myopathy associated with Paget disease of bone and frontotemporal dementia is caused by mutant valosin-containing protein. Nat. Genet. 2004, 36, 377–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Opitz, J.M.; Weaver, D.D. The neurofibromatosis-Noonan syndrome. Am. J. Med. Genet. 1985, 21, 477–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Allanson, J.E.; Hall, J.G.; Van Allen, M.I. Noonan phenotype associated with neurofibromatosis. Am. J. Med. 1985, 21, 457–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Bertola, D.R.; Pereira, A.C.; Passetti, F.; de Oliveira, P.S.; Messiaen, L.; Gelb, B.D.; Kim, C.A.; Krieger, J.E. Neurofibromatosis-Noonan syndrome: Molecular evidence of the concurrence of both disorders in a patient. Am. J. Med. Genet. Part A 2005, 136, 242–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Thiel, C.; Wilken, M.; Zenker, M.; Sticht, H.; Fahsold, R.; Gusek-Schneider, G.C.; Rauch, A. Independent NF1 and PTPN11 mutations in a family with neurofibromatosis-Noonan syndrome. Am. J. Med. Genet. Part A 2009, 149A, 1263–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Santoro, C.; Giugliano, T.; Melone, M.A.B.; Cirillo, M.; Schettino, C.; Bernardo, P.; Cirillo, G.; Perrotta, S.; Piluso, G. Multiple spinal nerve enlargement and SOS1 mutation: Further evidence of overlap between neurofibromatosis type 1 and Noonan phenotype. Clin. Genet. 2018, 93, 138–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Trevisson, E.; Morbidoni, V.; Forzan, M.; Daolio, C.; Fumini, V.; Parrozzani, R.; Cassina, M.; Midena, E.; Salviati, L.; Clementi, M. The Arg1038Gly missense variant in the NF1 gene causes a mild phenotype without neurofibromas. Mol. Genet. Genom. Med. 2019, 7, e616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Koczkowska, M.; Callens, T.; Gomes, A.; Sharp, A.; Chen, Y.; Hicks, A.D.; Aylsworth, A.S.; Azizi, A.A.; Basel, D.G.; Bellus, G.; et al. Expanding the clinical phenotype of individuals with a 3-bp in-frame deletion of the NF1 gene (c.2970_2972del): An update of genotype-phenotype correlation. Genet. Med.: Off. J. Am. Coll. Med. Genet. 2019, 21, 867–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Koczkowska, M.; Chen, Y.; Callens, T.; Gomes, A.; Sharp, A.; Johnson, S.; Hsiao, M.C.; Chen, Z.; Balasubramanian, M.; Barnett, C.P.; et al. Genotype-Phenotype Correlation in NF1: Evidence for a More Severe Phenotype Associated with Missense Mutations Affecting NF1 Codons 844–848. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2018, 102, 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Rojnueangnit, K.; Xie, J.; Gomes, A.; Sharp, A.; Callens, T.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Cochran, M.; Abbott, M.A.; Atkin, J.; et al. High Incidence of Noonan Syndrome Features Including Short Stature and Pulmonic Stenosis in Patients carrying NF1 Missense Mutations Affecting p.Arg1809: Genotype-Phenotype Correlation. Hum. Mutat. 2015, 36, 1052–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Curatolo, P.; Bombardieri, R.; Jozwiak, S. Tuberous sclerosis. Lancet 2008, 372, 657–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Crino, P.B.; Nathanson, K.L.; Henske, E.P. The tuberous sclerosis complex. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006, 355, 1345–1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Results of the molecular diagnosis by patient group.
Table 1. Results of the molecular diagnosis by patient group.
GroupCriteria for Molecular TestingNumber of Selected PatientsNumber of Mutated Patients Mutation Detection Rate (%)Number of Patients without Molecular Diagnosis (%)
1Clinical diagnosis of NF1 (test requested by parents or milder phenotype)139136 (NF1 = 136; SPRED1 = 0; OTHER = 0)97.8% (NF1 = 97.8%; SPRED1 = 0.0%; OTHER = 0.0%)3 (2.2%)
2Severe NF1 phenotype with suspicion of 17q11.2 microdeletion1111 (NF1 = 11; SPRED1 = 0; OTHER = 0)100.0% (NF1 = 100.0%; SPRED1 = 0.0%; OTHER = 0.0%)0 (0.0%)
3Isolated CALMs in patients without affected first-degree relatives and age ≤ 9 y4429 (NF1 = 28; SPRED1 = 1; OTHER = 0)65.9% (NF1 = 63.6%; SPRED1 = 2.3%; OTHER = 0.0%)15 (34.1%)
4Isolated CALMs in patients without affected first-degree relatives and age ≥ 10 y3120 (NF1 = 19; SPRED1 = 1; OTHER = 0)64.5% (NF1 = 61.3%; SPRED1 = 3.2%; OTHER = 0.0%)11 (35.5%)
5Isolated CALMs in patients and at least one affected first-degree relative2017 (NF1 = 11; SPRED1 = 6; OTHER = 0)85.0% (NF1 = 55.0%; SPRED1 = 30.0%; OTHER = 0.0%)3 (15.0%)
6Other RASopathies or neurocutaneous disorders3626 (NF1 = 1; SPRED1 = 0; OTHER = 25)72.2% (NF1 = 2.7%; SPRED1 = 0.0%; OTHER = 69.4%)10 (27.8%)
Total281239 (NF1 = 206; SPRED1 = 8; OTHER = 25)85.0% (NF1 = 73.3%; SPRED1 = 2.8%; OTHER = 8.9%)42 (15.0%)
Notes: NF1 = neurofibromatosis type 1; CALMs = café au lait macules; OTHER = other disease genes investigated (the identified causative variants are reported in Table A4).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Giugliano, T.; Santoro, C.; Torella, A.; Del Vecchio Blanco, F.; Grandone, A.; Onore, M.E.; Melone, M.A.B.; Straccia, G.; Melis, D.; Piccolo, V.; et al. Clinical and Genetic Findings in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1, Legius Syndrome, and Other Related Neurocutaneous Disorders. Genes 2019, 10, 580. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10080580

AMA Style

Giugliano T, Santoro C, Torella A, Del Vecchio Blanco F, Grandone A, Onore ME, Melone MAB, Straccia G, Melis D, Piccolo V, et al. Clinical and Genetic Findings in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1, Legius Syndrome, and Other Related Neurocutaneous Disorders. Genes. 2019; 10(8):580. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10080580

Chicago/Turabian Style

Giugliano, Teresa, Claudia Santoro, Annalaura Torella, Francesca Del Vecchio Blanco, Anna Grandone, Maria Elena Onore, Mariarosa Anna Beatrice Melone, Giulia Straccia, Daniela Melis, Vincenzo Piccolo, and et al. 2019. "Clinical and Genetic Findings in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1, Legius Syndrome, and Other Related Neurocutaneous Disorders" Genes 10, no. 8: 580. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10080580

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop