Advertisement

Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 541–547 | Cite as

Bayesian Assessment of Genetic Risk in Families with a Balanced Translocation

  • Douglas VanDerwerken
Professional Issues

Abstract

An important problem from the field of genetics involves the calculation of a personalized risk estimate on behalf of a heterozygous carrier of a balanced translocation. Though phenotypically normal, the carrier may be at increased risk of having a child who is mentally and physically abnormal due to an unbalanced translocation of chromosomal segments. An accurate estimate of the probability of this event is understandably desirable. Unfortunately, translocations are almost always family-specific so there is very little data that are perfectly relevant and one has to rely heavily on general risk figures derived from studies of families with similar translocations. This makes the problem particularly well suited to Bayesian analysis, which coherently combines family-specific data and a priori knowledge. However, much of the genetics counseling literature recommends an either/or approach: if the family is large enough, use family data; else, use pooled population data. In this article, we describe how uncertainty can be significantly reduced by incorporating all available information in the context of deriving a risk estimate for a hypothetical familial translocation.

Keywords

Balanced translocation Bayes’ rule Chromosomal abnormalities Personalized risk assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Karen O’Connell and Dr. Allyn McConkie-Rosell for their input on earlier versions of this manuscript, as well as Editor-in-Chief Bonnie LeRoy and anonymous referees whose recommendations greatly improved the paper.

Conflict of interests

Douglas VanDerwerken has no conflict of interest to declare.

Human or Animal Studies

No animal or human studies were carried out by the author for this article.

References

  1. Cans, C., Cohen, O., Mermet, M., Demongeot, J., Jalbert, P. (1993). Human reciprocal translocations: is the unbalanced mode at birth predictable? Human Genetics, 91, 228–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carrell, D. (2008). The clinical implementation of sperm chromosome aneuploidy testing: pitfalls and promises. Journal of Andrology, 29, 124–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Casella, G., & Berger, R. (2002). Statistical Inference, 2nd ed. USA: Duxbury.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, O., Cans, C., Mermet, M., Demongeot, J., Jalbert, P. (1994). Viability thresholds for partial trisomies and monosomies. A study of 1,159 viable unbalanced reciprocal translocations. Human Genetics, 93, 188–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Friedhoff, F., Rajendra, B., Moody, R., Alapatt, T. (1983). Novel reciprocal translocation between chromosomes 8 and 9 found in a patient with myeloproliferative disorder. Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, 9, 391–394.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gardner, R., Sutherland, G., Shaffer, L. (2004). Chromosome Abnormalities and Genetic Counseling, 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hodge, S. (1998). A simple, unified approach to Bayesian risk calculations. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 7, 235–261.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jalbert, P., Sele, B., Jalbert, H. (1980). Reciprocal translocations: a way to predict the mode of imbalanced segregation by pachytene-diagram drawing. Human Genetics, 55, 209–222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kozma, C., Slavotinek, A., Meck, J. (1983). Segregation of a t(1;3) translocation in multiple affected family members with both types of adjacent-1 segregants . Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, 9, 391–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Midro, A., Stengel-Rutkowski, S., Stene, J. (1992). Experiences with risk estimates for carriers of chromosomal reciprocal translocations. Clinical Genetics, 41, 113–122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ogino, S., & Wilson, R. (2004). Bayesian analysis and risk assessment in genetic counseling and testing. Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 6, 1–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Oppenheimer, S., Dignan, P., Soukup, S. (2000). Partial trisomy 20p: familial occurrence. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 95, 316–319.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Reiss, J., Sheffield, L., Sutherland, G. (1986). Partial Trisomy 3p Syndrome. Clinical Genetics, 30, 50–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stene, J., & Stengel-Rutkowski, S. (1988). Genetic Risks of Familial Reciprocal and Robertsonian Translocation Carriers In Daniel, A. (Ed.), The Cytogenetics of Mammalian Autosomal Rearrangements, (pp. 3–72). New York: Alan R. Liss.Google Scholar
  15. Stengel-Rutkowski, S., Stene, J., Gallano, P. (1988). Risk Estimates in Balanced Parental Reciprocal Translocations. Monographie des Annales de Genet́iqué, 1–147.Google Scholar
  16. Young, I. (2007). Introduction to Risk Calculation in Genetic Counseling, 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Statistical ScienceDuke UniversityDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations