Decoding the Genetic Enigma: A Case Study on Congenital Anomalies with Developmental Delay and 9q Duplication Unveiled Via Comprehensive Whole Exome Sequencing and Cytogenetic Analysis Unraveling 9q Duplication Via Comprehensive Whole Exome Sequencing
Iranian Journal of Child Neurology,
Vol. 20 No. 1 (2026),
1 Dey 2026
,
Page 79-84
https://doi.org/10.22037/ijcn.v20i1.45486
Abstract
Objectives:
Approximately 3% of newborns worldwide are affected by Congenital Anomalies (CAs) with or without Intellectual Disability (ID)/Developmental Delay (DD), often caused by genetic factors such as single-gene disorders or chromosome aberrations. Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) has become a highly effective first-tier test for identifying these genetic factors, detecting both Copy Number Variations (CNVs) and Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs)/Insertion/Deletion Polymorphisms (INDELs), while conventional cytogenetic analysis can provide additional valuable information to confirm results where applicable.
Materials & Methods:
The proband DNA was extracted and subjected to WES. Genetic variants were analyzed using the Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK) following the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guidelines. Additionally, karyotyping of the child and her parents was conducted with high-resolution CTG banding after harvesting conventional cell cultures and performing Giemsa banding on metaphase spreads of cultured leukocytes.
Results:
This study describes a patient with microcephaly, mild intellectual disability, and specific facial features, where initial WES did not identify any causative SNPs/INDELs. However, subsequent WES-based analysis for CNVs revealed the presence of dup (9) (q21.11q22.32). Further chromosomal analysis uncovered unique karyotypes for the patient [46, XX, t (5; 9) (p15.1; q22.1), add (14) (p11.1)] and her father [46, XY, t (5;9)(p15.1;q22.1)], and a normal karyotype for the mother.
Conclusion:
The present study confirms the effectiveness of utilizing WES-based analysis of CNVs and SNPs/INDELs as the primary diagnostic test for identifying patients with CAs/ID/DD.
- Congenital anomalies
- Intellectual disability
- Developmental delay
- Whole Exome Sequencing (WES)
- Copy Number Variations (CNVs)
How to Cite
References
Hsu R, Lee C, Chien Y, et al. Utility of whole‐exome sequencing for patients with multiple congenital anomalies with or without intellectual disability/developmental delay in East Asia population. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2023;e2160.
Miclea D, Osan S, Bucerzan S, et al. Copy number variation analysis in 189 Romanian patients with global developmental delay/intellectual disability. Ital J Pediatr. 2022;48(1):1–7.
Zablotsky B, Black LI, Maenner MJ, et al. Prevalence and trends of developmental disabilities among children in the United States: 2009–2017. Pediatrics. 2019;144(4).
Wang J, Wang Y, Wang L, et al. The diagnostic yield of intellectual disability: combined whole genome low-coverage sequencing and medical exome sequencing. BMC Med Genomics. 2020;13:1–15.
Cooper GM, Coe BP, Girirajan S, et al. A copy number variation morbidity map of developmental delay. Nat Genet. 2011;43(9):838–46.
Yuan H, Shangguan S, Li Z, et al. CNV profiles of Chinese pediatric patients with developmental disorders. Genetics in Medicine. 2021;23(4):669–78.
Chérot E, Keren B, Dubourg C, et al. Using medical exome sequencing to identify the causes of neurodevelopmental disorders: experience of 2 clinical units and 216 patients. Clin Genet. 2018;93(3):567–76.
Sadek AA, Mohamed MA. Yield of karyotyping in children with developmental delay and/or dysmorphic features in Sohag University Hospital, Upper Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics. 2018;19(3):253–9.
Leite AJ da C, Pinto IP, Leijsten N, et al. Diagnostic yield of patients with undiagnosed intellectual disability, global developmental delay and multiples congenital anomalies using karyotype, microarray analysis, whole exome sequencing from Central Brazil. PLoS One. 2022;17(4):e0266493.
Malinowski J, Miller DT, Demmer L, et al. Systematic evidence-based review: outcomes from exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability. Genetics in Medicine. 2020;22(6):986–1004.
Manickam K, McClain MR, Demmer LA, et al. Exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability: an evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genetics in Medicine. 2021;23(11):2029–37.
Lindstrand A, Ek M, Kvarnung M, et al. Genome sequencing is a sensitive first-line test to diagnose individuals with intellectual disability. Genetics in Medicine. 2022;24(11):2296–307.
Clark MM, Stark Z, Farnaes L, et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic and clinical utility of genome and exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with suspected genetic diseases. NPJ Genom Med. 2018;3(1):16.
Zanardo ÉA, Monteiro FP, Chehimi SN, et al. Application of whole-exome sequencing in detecting copy number variants in patients with developmental delay and/or multiple congenital malformations. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2020;22(8):1041–9.
Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genetics in medicine. 2015;17(5):405–23.
Riggs ER, Andersen EF, Cherry AM, et al. Technical standards for the interpretation and reporting of constitutional copy-number variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen). Elsevier; 2020.
Rooney DE. Human Cytogenetics:. Malignancy and acquired abnormalities. Vol. 2. Oxford University Press, USA; 2001.
McGowan-Jordan J, Hastings RJ, Moore S. ISCN 2020: An International System for Human Cytogenomic Nomenclature (2020). Reprint Of: Cytogenetic and Genome Research 2020, Vol. 160, No. 7-8. Karger, S; 2020.
Wiener EK, Buchanan J, Krause A, et al. Retrospective file review shows limited genetic services fails most patients–an argument for the implementation of exome sequencing as a first-tier test in resource-constraint settings. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023;18(1):1–9.
Zhang H, Chen X, Tan H, et al. The exploration of genetic aetiology and diagnostic strategy for 321 Chinese individuals with intellectual disability. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2023;538:94–103.
Ogilvie CM, Scriven PN. Meiotic outcomes in reciprocal translocation carriers ascertained in 3-day human embryos. European Journal of Human Genetics. 2002;10(12):801–6.
Zhou W, Kanai M, Wu KHH, et al. Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative: Powering genetic discovery across human disease. Cell Genomics. 2022;2(10).
Chen CP, Wu PC, Lin CJ, et al. Balanced reciprocal translocations detected at amniocentesis. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;49(4):455–67.
Abeliovich D, Yagupsky P, Bashan N, et al. 3: 1 meiotic disjunction in a mother with a balanced translocation, 46, XX, t (5, 14)(p15; q13) resulting in tertiary trisomy and tertiary monosomy offspring. Am J Med Genet. 1982;12(1):83–9.
Aleck K, Williams J, Mongkolsmai C, et al. Partial trisomy 11p with interatrial septal aneurysm. Case report and literature review. In: Annales de Genetique. 1985. p. 102–6.
Back E, Vogel W, Hertel C, et al. Trisomy 10p due to t (5; 10)(p15; p11) segregating in a large sibship. Hum Genet. 1978;41(1):11–7.
Vahedi S, Vahedi M, Mirzaei F, et al. A rare case of partial trisomy 9q with dysmorphic clinical features and Hirschsprung’s disease. Int J Pediatr. 2022;10(12):17187–91.
Nampoothiri S, Lakshman L, Anilkumar A, et al. Partial Trisomy 9q due to Maternal 9q/17q Translocation. Indian Pediatr. 2008;45(7).
Tiong K, Cotterill A, Falhammar H. Adult case of partial trisomy 9q. BMC Med Genet. 2010;11(1):1–5.
Zhou Y, Zhang C, Zhai J, et al. A patient with unusual features and a 69.5 Mb duplication from a de novo extra der (9): a case report. Mol Med Rep. 2015;12(1):155–8.
Aftimos SF, Hoo JJ, Parslow MI. Partial trisomy 9q due to maternal 9/17 translocation. American Journal of Diseases of Children. 1980;134(9):848–50.
Penehaszadeh VB, Coco R. Partial 9 trisomy by 3: 1 segregation of balanced maternal translocation (7q+; 9q-). J Med Genet. 1975;12(3):301–5.
Soltan HC, Jung JH, Pyatt Z, et al. Partial trisomy 9q resulting from a familial translocation t (9; 16)(q32; q24). Clin Genet. 1984;25(5):449–54.
Zhou Y, Zhang C, Zhai J, et al. A patient with unusual features and a 69.5 Mb duplication from a de novo extra der (9): a case report. Mol Med Rep. 2015;12(1):155–8.
Izumi K, Hahn A, Christ L, et al. Familial 9q22. 3 microduplication spanning PTCH1 causes short stature syndrome with mild intellectual disability and dysmorphic features. Am J Med Genet A. 2011;155(6):1384–9.
- Abstract Viewed: 52 times