Evidence Hub

Expanding the genotypic and phenotypic spectrum in a diverse cohort of 104 individuals with Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome

S. Sheppard, I. Campbell, M. Harr, Nina B. Gold, Dong Li, H. Bjornsson, J. Cohen, J. Fahrner et al.

American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 2021

104 participants · 66 citations

Abstract

Wiedemann‐Steiner syndrome (WSS) is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by monoallelic variants in KMT2A and characterized by intellectual disability and hypertrichosis. We performed a retrospective, multicenter, observational study of 104 individuals with WSS from five continents to characterize the clinical and molecular spectrum of WSS in diverse populations, to identify physical features that may be more prevalent in White versus Black Indigenous People of Color individuals, to delineate genotype–phenotype correlations, to define developmental milestones, to describe the syndrome through adulthood, and to examine clinicians' differential diagnoses. Sixty‐nine of the 82 variants (84%) observed in the study were not previously reported in the literature. Common clinical features identified in the cohort included: developmental delay or intellectual disability (97%), constipation (63.8%), failure to thrive (67.7%), feeding difficulties (66.3%), hypertrichosis cubiti (57%), short stature (57.8%), and vertebral anomalies (46.9%). The median ages at walking and first words were 20 months and 18 months, respectively. Hypotonia was associated with loss of function (LoF) variants, and seizures were associated with non‐LoF variants. This study identifies genotype–phenotype correlations as well as race‐facial feature associations in an ethnically diverse cohort, and accurately defines developmental trajectories, medical comorbidities, and long‐term outcomes in individuals with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 104 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free