Title |
Diagnosis and management of Cornelia de Lange syndrome: first international consensus statement
|
---|---|
Published in |
Nature Reviews Genetics, July 2018
|
DOI | 10.1038/s41576-018-0031-0 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Antonie D. Kline, Joanna F. Moss, Angelo Selicorni, Anne-Marie Bisgaard, Matthew A. Deardorff, Peter M. Gillett, Stacey L. Ishman, Lynne M. Kerr, Alex V. Levin, Paul A. Mulder, Feliciano J. Ramos, Jolanta Wierzba, Paola Francesca Ajmone, David Axtell, Natalie Blagowidow, Anna Cereda, Antonella Costantino, Valerie Cormier-Daire, David FitzPatrick, Marco Grados, Laura Groves, Whitney Guthrie, Sylvia Huisman, Frank J. Kaiser, Gerritjan Koekkoek, Mary Levis, Milena Mariani, Joseph P. McCleery, Leonie A. Menke, Amy Metrena, Julia O’Connor, Chris Oliver, Juan Pie, Sigrid Piening, Carol J. Potter, Ana L. Quaglio, Egbert Redeker, David Richman, Claudia Rigamonti, Angell Shi, Zeynep Tümer, Ingrid D. C. Van Balkom, Raoul C. Hennekam |
Abstract |
Cornelia de Lange syndrome (CdLS) is an archetypical genetic syndrome that is characterized by intellectual disability, well-defined facial features, upper limb anomalies and atypical growth, among numerous other signs and symptoms. It is caused by variants in any one of seven genes, all of which have a structural or regulatory function in the cohesin complex. Although recent advances in next-generation sequencing have improved molecular diagnostics, marked heterogeneity exists in clinical and molecular diagnostic approaches and care practices worldwide. Here, we outline a series of recommendations that document the consensus of a group of international experts on clinical diagnostic criteria, both for classic CdLS and non-classic CdLS phenotypes, molecular investigations, long-term management and care planning. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Mexico | 2 | 10% |
Australia | 2 | 10% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
Chile | 1 | 5% |
United States | 1 | 5% |
Japan | 1 | 5% |
France | 1 | 5% |
Unknown | 10 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 15 | 75% |
Scientists | 5 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 358 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 51 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 10% |
Other | 33 | 9% |
Researcher | 30 | 8% |
Student > Master | 29 | 8% |
Other | 56 | 16% |
Unknown | 122 | 34% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 23% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 60 | 17% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 6% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 5% |
Psychology | 12 | 3% |
Other | 45 | 13% |
Unknown | 122 | 34% |