Who ever heard of 16p11.2 deletion syndrome? Parents’ perspectives on a susceptibility copy number variation syndrome

Abstract

Chromosomal microarray analysis is an important diagnostic tool to identify copy number variations (CNV). Some of the CNVs affect susceptibility regions, which means that deletions or duplications in these regions have partial penetrance and often give an increased risk for a spectrum of neurocognitive disorders. Not much is known about the impact of rare CNV susceptibility syndromes on the life of patients or their parents. In this study, we focus on one specific susceptibility CNV disorder, 16p11.2 deletion syndrome. This rare condition is characterised by an increased risk of mild intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, epilepsy, and obesity. We aimed to explore the impact of such a disorder on the family members involved in the daily care of children with this syndrome. Three focus group discussions were held with 23 Dutch (grand)parents. Thematic analysis was performed by two independent researchers. The following five themes emerged: (1) the end of a diagnostic odyssey and response to the diagnosis, (2) after the diagnosis—life with a child with 16p11.2 deletion syndrome, (3) access to medical care and support services, (4) nobody knows what 16p11.2 deletion syndrome is, and (5) future perspective—ideal care. The participants experienced a lack of knowledge among involved professionals. Together with the large variability of the syndrome, this led to fragmented care and unfulfilled needs regarding healthcare, social, and/or educational assistance. Care for children with a CNV susceptibility syndrome could be improved by a multidisciplinary approach or central healthcare professional, providing education and information for all involved professionals.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S, Biesecker LG, Brothman AR, Carter NP, et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86:749–64.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Paul JL, Pope-Couston R, Wake S, Burgess T, Tan TY. Communicating microarray results of uncertain clinical significance in consultation summary letters and implications for practice. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;25:22–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Kaminsky EB, Kaul V, Paschall J, Church DM, Bunke B, Kunig D, et al. An evidence-based approach to establish the functional and clinical significance of copy number variants in intellectual and developmental disabilities. Genet Med. 2011;13:777–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Vo OK, McNeill A, Vogt KS. The psychosocial impact of 22q11 deletion syndrome on patients and families: a systematic review. Am J Med Genet A. 2018;176:2215–25.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Martin N, Mikhaelian M, Cytrynbaum C, Shuman C, Chitayat DA, Weksberg R, et al. 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: attitudes towards disclosing the risk of psychiatric illness. J Genet Couns. 2012;21:825–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Thapar A, Cooper M. Copy number variation: what is it and what has it told us about child psychiatric disorders? J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2013;52:772–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Bijlsma EK, Gijsbers AC, Schuurs-Hoeijmakers JH, van Haeringen A, Fransen van de Putte DE, Anderlid BM, et al. Extending the phenotype of recurrent rearrangements of 16p11.2: deletions in mentally retarded patients without autism and in normal individuals. Eur J Med Genet. 2009;52:77–87.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Stefansson H, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Steinberg S, Magnusdottir B, Morgen K, Arnarsdottir S, et al. CNVs conferring risk of autism or schizophrenia affect cognition in controls. Nature. 2014;505:361–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Weiss LA, Shen Y, Korn JM, Arking DE, Miller DT, Fossdal R, et al. Association between microdeletion and microduplication at 16p11.2 and autism. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:667–75.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Mei C, Fedorenko E, Amor DJ, Boys A, Hoeflin C, Carew P, et al. Deep phenotyping of speech and language skills in individuals with 16p11.2 deletion. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26:676–86.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Miller DT, Chung W, Nasir R, Shen Y, Steinman KJ, Wu BL, et al. 16p11.2 recurrent microdeletion. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, Wallace SE, Bean LJH, Stephens K, et al., editors. GeneReviews((R)). Seattle, WA; 1993.

  12. 12.

    Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ. 1995;311:299–302.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    VERBI Software. MAXQDA analytics Pro 12 ed. Berlin (Germany): VERBI; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    IBM Corporation. SPSS statistics for Windows, version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corporation; 2016.

  16. 16.

    Rosenthal ET, Biesecker LG, Biesecker BB. Parental attitudes toward a diagnosis in children with unidentified multiple congenital anomaly syndromes. Am J Med Genet. 2001;103:106–14.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Reiff M, Bernhardt BA, Mulchandani S, Soucier D, Cornell D, Pyeritz RE, et al. “What does it mean?”: uncertainties in understanding results of chromosomal microarray testing. Genet Med. 2012;14:250–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Reiff M, Ross K, Mulchandani S, Propert KJ, Pyeritz RE, Spinner NB, et al. Physicians’ perspectives on the uncertainties and implications of chromosomal microarray testing of children and families. Clin Genet. 2013;83:23–30.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Cardinali P, Migliorini L, Rania N. The caregiving experiences of fathers and mothers of children with rare diseases in italy: challenges and social support perceptions. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Baumbusch J, Mayer S, Sloan-Yip I. Alone in a Crowd? Parents of children with rare diseases’ experiences of navigating the healthcare system. J Genet Couns. 2019;28:80–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Turnpenny P, Smith R. Of eponyms, acronyms and…orthonyms. Nat Rev Genet. 2003;4:152–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Smith J, Cheater F, Bekker H. Parents’ experiences of living with a child with a long-term condition: a rapid structured review of the literature. Health Expect. 2015;18:452–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Hennekam RC. Care for patients with ultra-rare disorders. Eur J Med Genet. 2011;54:220–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the participants of the focus group interviews. We thank Saskia Kleinendorst for the transcriptions and Mellody Cooiman for her help during the focus group sessions.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lotte Kleinendorst.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kleinendorst, L., van den Heuvel, L.M., Henneman, L. et al. Who ever heard of 16p11.2 deletion syndrome? Parents’ perspectives on a susceptibility copy number variation syndrome. Eur J Hum Genet 28, 1196–1204 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0644-6

Download citation

Search

Quick links