Congenital heart disease and consanguineous marriage in South India

Diagnostic strategies and genotype-phenotype correlation in a large Indian cohort of osteogenesis imperfecta

Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) is a clinically and genetically heterogeneous disorder. Although differential diagnosis is greatly facilitated by next generation sequencing, its availability can vary considerably. In this study, we compared targeted gene panel or exome sequencing with clinical scoring and grouping in a cohort of 50 OI index patients recruited by a single Indian clinical center in an unselected fashion. In 48 patients we observed a total of 24 novel mutations and 24 known OI mutations, of which several were recurrent. In one patient neither gene panel nor exome sequencing revealed any significant mutation and another patient harbored a class III COL1A1 intronic variant. The percentage of autosomal recessive forms due to mutations in BMP1, FKBP10, LEPRE1, SERPINF1, and WNT1 was unusually high (48%). Grouping according to phenotypic and radiographic features revealed four individuals with Bruck syndrome due to FKBP10 mutations, three patients with hypertrophic callus caused by IFITM5 mutations, and twenty with pronounced bone bowing, of which eight carried WNT1 mutations. There was a clear correlation between genotype and phenotype severity: IFITM5=LEPRE1>WNT1>SERPINF1>COL1A1 (qualitative)>BMP1>FKBP10>COL1A2 (qualitative)>COL1A1 (quantitative)>COL1A2 (quantitative). In one patient we found heterozygous variants in COL1A1 and COL1A2 inherited from parents without an obvious bone phenotype indicating that both variants might contribute to the phenotype. Our findings demonstrate the clinical utility of gene panel testing for OI, but in cases with contractures, hypertrophic callus formation, or - to some extent - extensive bowing single gene analysis might still be more cost-effective.

Consanguinity and the risk of congenital heart disease

Consanguineous unions have been associated with an increased susceptibility to various forms of inherited disease. Although consanguinity is known to contribute to recessive diseases, the potential role of consanguinity in certain common birth defects is less clear, particularly since the disease pathophysiology may involve genetic and environmental/epigenetic factors. In this study, we ask whether consanguinity affects one of the most common birth defects, congenital heart disease, and identify areas for further research into these birth defects, since consanguinity may now impact health on a near-global basis. A systematic review of consanguinity in congenital heart disease was performed, focusing on non-syndromic disease, with the methodologies and results from studies of different ethnic populations compared. The risks for congenital heart disease have been assessed and summarized collectively and by individual lesion. The majority of studies support the view that consanguinity increases the prevalence of congenital heart disease, however, the study designs differed dramatically. Only a few (n = 3) population-based studies that controlled for potential sociodemographic confounding were identified, and data on individual cardiac lesions were limited by case numbers. Overall the results suggest that the risk for congenital heart disease is increased in consanguineous unions in the studied populations, principally at first-cousin level and closer, a factor that should be considered in empiric risk estimates in genetic counseling. However, for more precise risk estimates a better understanding of the underlying disease factors is needed.

Assessing the influence of consanguinity on congenital heart disease

Numerous articles have been published linking consanguineous marriage to an elevated prevalence of congenital heart disease, with ventricular septal defects and atrial septal defects the most commonly cited disorders. While initially persuasive, on closer examination many of these studies have fundamental shortcomings in their design and in the recruitment of study subjects and controls. Improved matching of cases and controls, to include recognition of the long-established community boundaries within which most marriages are contracted, and the assessment of consanguinity within specific levels and types of marital union would improve and help to focus the study outcomes. At the same time, major discrepancies between studies in their reported prevalence and types of congenital heart disease suggest an urgent need for greater standardization in the classification and reporting of these disorders.