Abstract Background Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is characterized by skin fragility and blistering. In Brazil, the diagnosis is usually obtained through immunomapping, which involves a skin biopsy. Most recently, whole exome sequencing (WES) has become an important tool for the diagnosis of the subtypes of EB, providing information on prognosis as well as allowing appropriate genetic counseling for the families. Objective To compare the results of immunomapping and molecular analysis and to describe the characteristics of a Brazilian cohort of patients with EB. Methods Patients were submitted to clinical evaluation and WES using peripheral blood samples. WES results were compared to those obtained from immunomapping testing from skin biopsies. Results 67 patients from 60 families were classified: 47 patients with recessive dystrophic EB (DEB), 4 with dominant DEB, 15 with EB simplex (EBS), and 1 with junctional EB (JEB). Novel causative variants were: 10/60 (16%) in COL7A1 associated with recessive DEB and 3 other variants in dominant DEB; one homozygous variant in KRT5 and another homozygous variant in PLEC, both associated with EBS. Immunomapping was available for 59 of the 67 patients and the results were concordant with exome results in 37 (62%), discordant in 13 (22%), and inconclusive in 9 patients (15%). Study limitations Even though EB is a rare disease, for statistical purposes, the number of patients evaluated by this cohort can still be considered limited; other than that, there was a significant difference between the proportion of types of EB (only one case with JEB, against more than 50 with DEB), which unfortunately represents a selection bias. Also, for a small subset of families, segregation (usually through Sanger sequencing) was not an option, usually due to deceased or unknown parent status (mostly the father). Conclusion Although immunomapping has been useful in services where molecular studies are not available, this invasive method may provide a misdiagnosis or an inconclusive result in about 1/3 of the patients. This study shows that WES is an effective method for the diagnosis and genetic counseling of EB patients.

Abstract Background: Mucopolysaccharidosis type II, also known as Hunter syndrome, is a rare X-linked recessive disorder caused by deficiency of the lysosomal enzyme Iduronate-2- Sulfatase (IDS), leading to progressive accumulation of Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) in several organs. Over the years, Enzyme Replacement Therapy (ERT) has provided significant benefits for patients, retarding the natural progression of the disease. Results: The authors evaluated 17 patients from the same family with a mild form of MPS type II; the proband had developed acute decompensated heart failure refractory to clinical measurements at 23 years and needed a rather urgent heart transplant; however, he died from surgical complications shortly after the procedure. Nevertheless, subsequent to his tragic death, 16 affected male relatives were detected after biochemical tests identifying the low or absent activity of the IDS enzyme and confirmed by molecular analysis of the IDS gene. Following diagnosis, different options of treatment were chosen: 6 patients started ERT with Elaprase® (Idursulfase) soon after, while the other 10 remained without ERT. Eventually, 4 patients in the latter group began ERT with Hunterase® (Idursulfase Beta). None presented adverse effects to either form of the enzyme. Among the 6 individuals without any ERT, two died of natural causes, after reaching 70 years. Despite the variable phenotype within the same family (mainly heart dysfunctions and carpal tunnel syndrome), all 14 remaining patients were alive with an independent lifestyle. Conclusion: Here, the authors report the variable progress of the disease with and without ERT in a large Brazilian family with a slowly progressive form of MPS II, harboring the same missense variant in the IDS gene.

Abstract Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has altered clinical genetic testing by widening the access to molecular diagnosis of genetically determined rare diseases. However, physicians may face difficulties selecting the best diagnostic approach. Our goal is to estimate the rate of possible molecular diagnoses missed by different targeted gene panels using data from a cohort of patients with rare genetic diseases diagnosed with exome sequencing (ES). For this purpose, we simulated a comparison between different targeted gene panels and ES: the list of genes harboring clinically relevant variants from 158 patients was used to estimate the theoretical rate of diagnoses missed by NGS panels from 53 different NGS panels from eight different laboratories. Panels presented a mean rate of missed diagnoses of 64% (range 14%-100%) compared to ES, representing an average predicted sensitivity of 36%. Metabolic abnormalities represented the group with highest mean of missed diagnoses (86%), while seizure represented the group with lowest mean (46%). Focused gene panels are restricted in covering select sets of genes implicated in specific diseases and they may miss molecular diagnoses of rare diseases compared to ES. However, their role in genetic diagnosis remains important especially for well-known genetic diseases with established genetic locus heterogeneity.