ACLS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mark, H.
Right arrow Articles by Bier, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mark, H.
Right arrow Articles by Bier, J.
Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science, Vol 27, Issue 4, 293-298
Copyright © 1997 by Association of Clinical Scientists


Articles

Disappearing trisomy 8 mosaicism

HF Mark and JA Bier

A case is presented of a patient with disappearing trisomy 8 mosaicism initially thought to have stigmata of the fragile X syndrome. This case is interesting for two reasons. First, it demonstrates the occurrence of "disappearing mosaicism," a phenomenon first described by LaMarche et al, in 1967. Our patient, initially studied in 1991 by two laboratories and found to be mosaic for chromosome 8 trisomy, was apparently normal by both GTG-banding and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) when studied in 1996. Second, this case further underscores the fact that except under special circumstances, it is important that GTG-banding analysis be performed so that the entire human genome be examined in addition to scoring for the fragile X mutation on Xq27.3. In a recent review of the existing database at Rhode Island Hospital on chromosomal abnormalities found in patients referred because of a question of the fragile X syndrome during the period from January 1, 1990 to June 30, 1995, it was found that the frequency of other chromosomal abnormalities in patients referred because of a question of fragile X syndrome equaled or exceeded that of patients found to be positive for fragile X. Our figures, consistent with those reported in the literature, underscore the value of routine karyotyping in this population of patients.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the Association of Clinical Scientists.