Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/3086
Title: The genetics of recurrent hydatidiform moles: new insights and lessons from a comprehensive analysis of 113 patients
Authors: Aguinaga, Monica
Arseneau, Jocelyne
Hovanes, Karine
Clisham, Ronald
Lenzi, Tiffanee
Scurry, Bonnie
Addor, Marie-Claude
Bagga, Rashmi
Nendaz, Genevieve Girardet
Finci, Vildana
Poke, Gemma
Grimes, Leslie
Gregersen, Nerine
York, Kayla
Bolze, Pierre-Adrien
Patel, Chirag
Mozdarani, Hossein
Puechberty, Jacques
Scotchie, Jessica
Fardaei, Majid
Harma, Muge
Gardner, R. J. McKinlay
Sahoo, Trilochan
Dudding-Byth, Tracy
Srinivasan, Radhika
Sauthier, Philippe
Slim, Rima
Nguyen, Ngoc Minh Phuong
Khawajkie, Yassemine
Mechtouf, Nawel
Rezaei, Maryam
Breguet, Magali
Kurvinen, Elvira
Jagadeesh, Sujatha
Solmaz, Asli Ece
Hemida, Reda
Harma, Mehmet Ibrahim
Rittore, Cécile
Rahimi, Kurosh
Issue Date: 2018
Source: 31, (7), 2018, p. 1116-1130
Pages: 1116-1130
Journal: Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc
Abstract: Hydatidiform mole is an aberrant human pregnancy characterized by early embryonic arrest and excessive trophoblastic proliferation. Recurrent hydatidiform moles are defined by the occurrence of at least two hydatidiform moles in the same patient. Fifty to eighty percent of patients with recurrent hydatidiform moles have biallelic pathogenic variants in NLRP7 or KHDC3L. However, in the remaining patients, the genotypic types of the moles are unknown. We characterized 80 new hydatidiform mole tissues, 57 of which were from patients with no mutations in the known genes, and we reviewed the genotypes of a total of 123 molar tissues. We also reviewed mutation analysis in 113 patients with recurrent hydatidiform moles. While all hydatidiform moles from patients with biallelic NLRP7 or KHDC3L mutations are diploid biparental, we demonstrate that those from patients without mutations are highly heterogeneous and only a small minority of them are diploid biparental (8%). The other mechanisms that were found to recur in patients without mutations are diploid androgenetic monospermic (24%) and triploid dispermic (32%); the remaining hydatidiform moles were misdiagnosed as moles due to errors in the analyses and/or their unusual mechanisms. We compared three parameters of genetic susceptibility in patients with and without mutations and show that patients without mutations are mostly from non-familial cases, have fewer reproductive losses, and more live births. Our data demonstrate that patients with recurrent hydatidiform moles and no mutations in the known genes are, in general, different from those with mutations; they have a milder genetic susceptibility and/or a multifactorial etiology underlying their recurrent hydatidiform moles. Categorizing these patients according to the genotypic types of their recurrent hydatidiform moles may facilitate the identification of novel genes for this entity.Grant Information: MOP-86546 Canada CIHR; POP-122897 Canada CIHR; MOP-130364 Canada CIHR Date of Electronic Publication: 2018 Feb 20. Current Imprints: Publication: <2004- > : New York, NY : Nature Pub. Group; Original Imprints: Publication: Baltimore, MD : Williams & Wilkins, c1988-
DOI: 10.1038/s41379-018-0031-9
Resources: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,athens&db=mdc&AN=29463882&site=ehost-live
Keywords: DNA Mutational Analysis;Female;Uterine Neoplasms/*genetics;Genetic Predisposition to Disease;Genotype;Humans;Pregnancy;Proteins/*genetics;Neoplasms, Second Primary/*genetics;Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing/*geneticsHydatidiform Mole/*genetics
Type: Article
Appears in Sites:Children's Health Queensland Publications

Show full item record

Page view(s)

32
checked on Mar 25, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.