Recurrent trisomy 21 in a couple with a child presenting trisomy 21 mosaicism and maternal uniparental disomy for chromosome 21 in the euploid cell line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrence of trisomy 21 was observed in a family in which both parents had a normal chromosome complement. Mosaic trisomy 21 was found in a blood karyotype of the first child, a second pregnancy ended in spontaneous abortion, and a full trisomy 21 was found at prenatal diagnosis of the third pregnancy of this same couple. Although recurrent trisomy 21 may be due to chance, the possibility of germline mosaicism for trisomy 21 in one of the parents has important implications for recurrence risk. Molecular analysis was therefore undertaken in this family to determine the parental origin and the stage of nondisjunction of the extra chromosome 21 in both cases. Although a maternal origin of both instances of trisomy 21 was observed, the mosaic case showed homozygosity for all markers along the duplicated maternal chromosome. Such a finding would normally suggest a postzygotic origin of the trisomy 21. However, the diploid cell line in this same case showed maternal uniparental disomy 21, implying that it was the result of a trisomic conception. We suggest that a somatic nondisjunction in the maternal germ cells is the most likely explanation for these findings. The apparent meiotic II stage of nondisjunction of the nonmosaic trisomy 21 fetus was consistent with maternal mosaicism. A review of the literature for recurrent trisomy 21 cases studied by molecular means, suggests that mosaicism in germ cells may account for more cases than is detected cytogenetically. These results also show that DNA marker analysis does not provide a valuable tool for patient counseling in case of recurrent trisomy 21.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".