Establishing criteria for a carrier detection panel: lessons from the Ashkenazi Jewish model

Global analyses of Chromosome 17 and 18 genes of lung telocytes compared with mesenchymal stem cells, fibroblasts, alveolar type II cells, airway epithelial cells, and lymphocytes

Background

Telocytes (TCs) is an interstitial cell with extremely long and thin telopodes (Tps) with thin segments (podomers) and dilations (podoms) to interact with neighboring cells. TCs have been found in different organs, while there is still a lack of TCs-specific biomarkers to distinguish TCs from the other cells.

Results

We compared gene expression profiles of murine pulmonary TCs on days 5 (TC5) and days 10 (TC10) with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), fibroblasts (Fbs), alveolar type II cells (ATII), airway basal cells (ABCs), proximal airway cells (PACs), CD8⁺ T cells from bronchial lymph nodes (T-BL), and CD8⁺ T cells from lungs (T-LL). The chromosome 17 and 18 genes were extracted for further analysis. The TCs-specific genes and functional networks were identified and analyzed by bioinformatics tools. 16 and 10 of TCs-specific genes were up-regulated and 68 and 22 were down-regulated in chromosome 17 and 18, as compared with other cells respectively. Of them, Mapk14 and Trem2 were up-regulated to indicate the biological function of TCs in immune regulation, and up-regulated MCFD2 and down-regulated E4F1 and PDCD2 had an association with tissue homeostasis for TCs. Over-expressed Dpysl3 may promote TCs self-proliferation and cell-cell network forming.

Conclusions

The differential gene expression in chromosomes 17 and 18 clearly revealed that TCs were the distinctive type of interstitial cells. Our data also indicates that TCs may play a dual role in immune surveillance and immune homoeostasis to keep from immune disorder in acute and chronic pulmonary diseases. TCs also participated in proliferation, differentiation and regeneration.

Reviewers

This article was reviewed by Qing Kay Li and Dragos Cretoiu.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13062-015-0042-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Technical standards and guidelines for reproductive screening in the Ashkenazi Jewish population

DISCLAIMER

These Technical Standards and Guidelines were developed primarily as an educational resource for clinical laboratory geneticists to help them provide quality clinical laboratory genetic services. Adherence to these standards and guidelines is voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. These Standards and Guidelines should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinical laboratory geneticist should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinical laboratory geneticists are encouraged to document in the patient's record the rationale for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with these Standards and Guidelines. They also are advised to take notice of the date any particular standard or guidelines was adopted, and to consider other relevant medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date.

Carrier screening panels for Ashkenazi Jews: is more better?

PURPOSE

To describe the characteristics of Ashkenazi Jewish carrier testing panels offered by US Laboratories, including what diseases are included, the labels used to describe the panels, and the prices of individual tests compared to the prices of panels for each laboratory.

METHODS

GeneTests (http://www.genetests.org) was searched for laboratories that offered Tay-Sachs disease testing. Information was obtained from laboratory web sites, printed brochures, and telephone calls about tests/panels.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven laboratories offered up to 10 tests. The tests included two diseases associated with death in childhood (Niemann-Pick type A and Tay-Sachs disease), five with moderate disability and a variably shortened life span (Bloom syndrome, Canavan disease, cystic fibrosis, familial dysautonomia, Fanconi anemia, and mucolipidosis type IV), and two diseases that are not necessarily disabling or routinely shorten the lifespan (Gaucher disease type I and DFNB1 sensorineural hearing loss). Twenty laboratories offered a total of 27 panels of tests for three to nine diseases, ranging in price from $200 to $2082. Of these, 15 panels cost less than tests ordered individually. The panels were described by 24 different labels; eight included the phrase Ashkenazi Jewish Disease or disorder and six included the phrase Ashkenazi Jewish Carrier.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable variability in the diseases, prices, and labels of panels. Policy guidance for establishing appropriate criteria for inclusion in panels may be useful to the Ashkenazi Jewish community, clinicians, and payers. Pricing strategies that offer financial incentives for the use of "more tests" should be reexamined.

Closing the gaps in genetics legislation and policy: a report by the new york state task force on life and the law

The New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, a state bioethical policy commission, recently completed a project addressing the ethical, legal, and social concerns surrounding the predictive uses of genetic testing. Its report, Genetic Testing and Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine, makes legislative, public policy, and practice recommendations on a host of issues. As part of this project, the Task Force reviewed the current policy and legislative landscapes related to confidentiality protections for genetic information and the use of genetic information by insurers. It also assessed requirements for informed consent to clinical genetic testing and for the use of clinical samples for genetics research. The Task Force considered gaps and unintended consequences of relevant genetic testing legislation and assessed its flexibility to address new uses of genetic testing, such as pharmacogenetic testing, and new ways of offering tests, such as multiplex testing panels. The Task Force also considered the relevance of the pleiotropic characteristic of genes for issues of informed consent to genetic testing and the confidentiality of genetic information. The Task Force's recommendations, presented here, seek to promote the appropriate uses of clinical genetic testing and research while preventing potential harms.