Abstract
Cranial sutures are complex structures integrating mechanical forces with osteogenesis which are often affected in craniofacial syndromes. While premature fusion is frequently described, rare pathological widening of cranial sutures is a comparatively understudied phenomenon. This narrative review aims to bring to light the biologically variable underlying causes of widened sutures and persistent fontanelles leading to a common outcome. The authors herein present four syndromes, selected from a literature review, and their identified biological mechanisms in the context of altered suture physiology, exploring the roles of progenitor cell differentiation, extracellular matrix production, mineralization, and bone resorption. This article illustrates the gaps in understanding of complex craniofacial disorders, and the potential for further unification of genetics, cellular biology, and clinical pillars of health science research to improve treatment outcomes for patients.
Keywords: cranial sutures, pathophysiology, craniofacial development, genetics
Introduction
Cranial sutures, the fibrous joints connecting skull bones, have been the object of craniofacial study for millennia, with the earliest categorization of their number and arrangement dating back to the Hippocratic era. 1 Since these early morphological descriptions, the function of cranial sutures as secondary growth zones of calvaria has been uncovered. 2 The cranial vault is composed of paired frontal, parietal, and temporal bones, and a single posterior occipital bone. These membranous bones, called calvaria, are separated by cranial sutures, which intersect each other at fontanelles.
Critical for expansion of the skull throughout development, sutures represent a complex system in which mechanical forces interface with osteogenesis. Suture patency is mainly governed by stem and progenitor cells residing within the suture, which differentiate along the intramembranous ossification pathway toward bone-forming osteoblasts that line the bone (Figure 1). 3 Other factors influence suture development and function, such as signals and cells from the dura mater and periosteum. 4 Bone and stem cell biology thus weave into the cranial suture system, and many suture malformations can be traced to abnormalities in key gene regulatory networks and processes.
Figure 1.
Cranial suture milieu.
(A) Diagram of human fetal skull with red dotted line indicating plane of sectioning represented in B.
(B) Diagrammatic representation of major components seen in coronal section of an abutting cranial suture. The paired bones are separated from each other by a fibrous joint, the cranial suture (light and dark purple), and from the brain by the dura mater (magenta). The bone surface is covered by the periosteum. The main osteogenic cell types populating the suture space, or mesenchyme, are mesenchymal stem cells and progenitors (msc/prog) and osteoblasts (ob).
(C) Diagram of cells found in yellow rectangle in B. Mesenchymal stem cells (msc) differentiate into osteoprogenitors (prog), osteoblasts (ob), and osteocytes (oct) sequentially. The extracellular matrix surrounding these cells includes collagen fibers, proteoglycans, and fibroblasts. Cells in the suture mesenchyme sense and respond to forces from the extracellular matrix. Reciprocal signaling also influences recruitment of bone resorbing osteoclasts and formation of new bone by osteoblasts. Numbers indicate order of processes addressed in this review: 1) Progenitor cell differentiation, 2) Extracellular matrix production, 3) Mineralization, and 4) Bone resorption. Illustration made using BioRender.
The clinical significance of cranial sutures is mainly attributed to abnormalities in their intrinsic growth potential. Normal sutures and fontanelles fuse according to a predictable timeline throughout development; the anterior fontanelle ossifies in children around 10 months of age.5,6 Suture-related disorders involve either reduced or overactive bone formation within this niche, with major overall physiological implications. Craniosynostosis, for example, is a result of premature obliteration of the cranial sutures by bone, preventing appropriate expansion of the skull to accommodate mounting intracranial pressures with brain development. Common outcomes of craniosynostosis are facial and skull deformities and a host of neurological symptoms, such as raised intracranial pressure, seizures, developmental delay, and behavioral effects often accompanied by failure to thrive, though cause and consequence can be difficult to separate in syndromic cases. 7
The craniosynostotic skull and its bony sutures have attracted significant study of cranial suture malformation and treatment modalities to return or enhance obliterated suture function. 8 A comparatively understudied phenomenon is the widening and persistence of the cranial suture space, seen clinically in several rare bone disorders (Table 1). This narrative review aims to present exemplary cases of different causes for similarly widened cranial sutures due to defects in progenitor cell differentiation (cleidocranial dysplasia), extracellular matrix production (Yunis-Varón syndrome), mineralization (hypophosphatasia), and bone resorption (pycnodysostosis) selected from recent reports in the literature. These examples highlight the importance of early, precise diagnosis to determine the correct treatment modality, bearing in mind potentially overlapping clinical signs. While sutures and fontanelles are not necessarily the same structure, for simplicity we consider expanded or abnormally persistent fontanelles to be an extension of, or variation on, widened cranial sutures.
Table 1.
Recent Literature Describing Craniofacial Conditions Involving Widened or Persistent Cranial Suture(s) and/or Fontanelle(s).
| Name of condition | Gene affected | Wide suture(s) | Persistent fontanelle(s) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleidocranial dysplasia | RUNX2 | ✓ | ✓ | (Farrow et al., 2018 9 ; Hordyjewska-Kowalczyk et al., 2019 10 ; Jirapinyo et al., 2020 11 ; Lotlikar et al., 2018 12 ) |
| Pycnodysostosis | CTSK | ✓ | ✓ | (Otaify et al., 2018 13 ; Shi et al., 2017 14 ; Thomas et al., 2019 15 ) |
| Mandibuloacral dysplasia | ZMPSTE24 or LMNA | ✓ | (Haye et al., 2016 16 ; Hitzert et al., 2019 17 ; Ozer et al., 2016 18 ) | |
| Kenny-Caffey syndrome | FAM111A | ✓ | ✓ | (Cheng et al., 2021 19 ; Turner et al., 2020 20 ) |
| KBG syndrome | ANKRD11 | ✓ | (Low et al., 2016 21 ; Roth et al., 2021 22 ) | |
| 20p3 microdeletion syndrome |
SOX12
NRSN2 |
✓ | (Fang et al., 2019 23 ) | |
| De novo partial distal 1q trisomy | unknown | ✓ | (Wang et al., 2016 24 ) | |
| Hypophosphatasia | ALPL | ✓ | ✓ | (Di Rocco et al., 2017 25 ; Nahabet et al., 2016 26 ) |
| Teebi hypertelorism syndrome | SPECC1L | ✓ | ✓ | (Zhang et al., 2020 27 ) |
| Metopism | unknown | ✓ | (Vinchon, 2019 28 ) | |
| Cranium bifidum occultum | unknown | ✓ | (Dossani et al., 2017 29 ) | |
| CDAGS syndrome | unknown | ✓ | ✓ | (Pastrana-Ayala et al., 2017 30 ) |
| Autoimmune thyroiditis | unknown | ✓ | (Marzuillo et al., 2016 31 ) | |
| Ehlers-Danlos syndrome | CHST14 | ✓ | (Minatogawa et al., 2021 32 ) | |
| Dysosteosclerosis | SLC29A3 | ✓ | (Uludağ Alkaya et al., 2021 33 ) | |
| Caput membranaceum | ZIC1 | ✓ | ✓ | (Sasaki et al., 2020 34 ) |
| Neonatal polycystic kidney disease | unknown | ✓ | ✓ | (Mchaile et al., 2020 35 ) |
| Neonatal diabetes and hypothyroidism syndrome | GLI3 | ✓ | (Dimitri et al., 2016 36 ) |
Methods
The disorders discussed in this narrative review were identified through a targeted literature search in PubMed using the following search terms: (((“delayed closure” OR wide* OR dysplasia OR persistent) AND (“cranial suture*” OR “fontanelle”)) AND (patent)) AND ((“2016/01/01"[Date—Publication]: “2022/01/01"[Date—Publication])). 90 results were obtained over the 7-year period. Of those, 28 articles were considered relevant to the topic of this article based on abstract review. These studies were reviews or case reports describing 18 conditions that manifest with widened sutures and/or persistent fontanelles, summarized in Table 1. Subsequent un-restricted literature search conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid databases targeted pertinent cranial suture descriptions, etiology, and findings from the clinic and experimental systems based on the disorders identified in the preliminary search. The four clinical examples investigated in this review were chosen to illustrate independent biological principles of suture malformation.
Biologically Contextualized Clinical Examples
Cranial suture development and function are governed by distinct biological processes, including progenitor cell differentiation, extracellular matrix production and maturation, mineralization, and bone remodeling and resorption. The following clinical examples of suture widening are organized by these key processes in suture biology, illustrating that distinct underlying mechanisms can result in convergence of clinical phenotypic presentation.
Progenitor Cell Differentiation–Cleidocranial Dysplasia
Cleidocranial dysplasia (CCD) is a skeletal dysplasia with a frequency of one in one million individuals worldwide. 37 Clinically, individuals with CCD present with a triad of delayed closure of the cranial sutures and the anterior fontanelle, hypoplastic or aplastic clavicles, and dental abnormalities. Other features include delayed ossification of the skull, maxillary hypoplasia, moderate short stature, and other skeletal abnormalities. Interestingly, Wormian bones are a common feature in CCD, which have been proposed to stabilize the skull anatomy in cases of delayed suture closure. 38
The bony changes underlying CCD are due to autosomal dominant pathogenic variants of RUNX2. RUNX2 is a transcription factor critical for osteoblast progenitor proliferation and differentiation in both intramembranous and endochondral ossification.39,40 It is considered a master organizer of bone formation, which through cooperative binding to DNA sequences regulates the transcription of a variety of osteogenic genes. 41 The pathogenic variants identified in patients with CCD are most commonly located in the Runt domain of the gene, which abolishes the transactivation potential of the protein resulting in functional haploinsufficiency. 42 As a result, complexes of RUNX2 with other transcriptional co-activators required for cell differentiation cannot efficiently bind to osteogenic target genes, as RUNX2 on its own is a weak transcriptional regulator. 43
For patients with CCD, treatment is largely symptomatic as a team of craniofacial specialists is required to address multiple head and neck implications. A primary challenge is dental crowding, which requires orthodontic interventions. 44 If expansion of the cranial sutures is severe, a protective device or helmet may be required. 37 Normally, the anterior fontanelle closes around 10–24 months of age; in CCD, this closure is delayed, sometimes resulting in a persistent anterior fontanelle into adulthood.6,45 Some studies warn clinicians to weigh risks and benefits of repair of bone defects in individuals with CCD due to compromised RUNX2 activity. 46 However, cranioplasty techniques using autologous and alloplastic materials have been successful and non-union in the axial skeleton has been treated with vascularized free fibula grafts.47,48 Older patients are monitored and commonly administered preventative treatment for osteoporosis. Better understanding of how pathogenic variants of RUNX2 affect osteogenic capacity is required to develop precision treatments and assess their compatibility in the clinic.
Extracellular Matrix Production–Yunis-Varón Syndrome
Yunis-Varón syndrome (YVS) is a multisystem disorder with characteristic persistent, large fontanelles, hypoplastic clavicles, a characteristic facial appearance, digit abnormalities, and brain malformations resulting from an organelle-level (lysosome) disruption leading to abnormal extracellular matrix production. 49 Abnormalities of the central nervous system or neurological issues can result in feeding and respiratory difficulties in infants with this condition. 50 In some cases, patients with YVS have life-threatening complications.
YVS is caused by bi-allelic pathogenic variants in FIG4 or VAC14. 51 FIG4 encodes for a phosphoinositide phosphatase and its loss compromises formation of PI(3,5)P252,53; VAC14 encodes an adaptor protein which interacts with FIG4. Phosphoinositides are important for vesicle trafficking. 54 Drosophila Fig4 null animals accumulate enlarged lysosomes in muscle and neural cells. Thus, it is thought that FIG4 is important for lysosomal membrane homeostasis. 55 Recent work indicates that VAC14-FIG4 is part of a complex which participates in vesicular organization and PI3K/Akt signaling. 56 Fig4-null mice have generally normal morphology of hard tissue structures, but greatly reduced bone mineral density with porous bones. This defect has been attributed to extensive vacuolization of osteoblasts due to impaired vesicle transport. 49 The vacuolization of osteoblasts likely impairs their ability to form bone, though this has not been demonstrated in vivo. Lysosomes are also important for osteoclast function, hence the hypothesis of imbalanced bone remodeling due altered physiology of osteoblasts and osteoclasts resulting in impaired production or resorption of extracellular matrix. 57 The need for proper extracellular matrix homeostasis in bone is clear, and dysregulation of this axis will likely impair overall bone physiology. However, as with many animal models of human disease, it is important to note that the Fig4-null mouse model recapitulates important aspects of the YVS bone phenotype, but not all clinical features. 58
YVS is an ultra-rare disorder and follows an autosomal recessive inheritance pattern; only about 25 cases have been described since 1980. 21 Most individuals with YVS have a shortened lifespan due to respiratory insufficiency, swallowing, and feeding difficulties. It is difficult to inform future patient management based on such a limited number of clinical descriptions. However, a promising recent study has indicated that chloroquine can correct the enlarged lysosome phenotype in mice, at least temporarily. 59 It is currently unknown whether this treatment translates to clinical use.
Mineralization–Hypophosphatasia
Hypophosphatasia (HPP) is a well-characterised autosomal recessive or autosomal dominant inborn error of metabolism that results in under-mineralized bones and teeth. 60 In severe forms of the condition, the bones are weak and soft resulting in skeletal dysplasia and life-threatening complications. 61 HPP is caused by loss-of-function pathogenic variants in the ALPL gene. 62 ALPL encodes for tissue non-specific alkaline phosphatase (TNAP), an enzyme that hydrolyzes inorganic pyrophosphate, pyridoxal-5’-phosphate, and phosphoethanolamine (PEA). 63 Loss of this enzymatic activity leads to elevated levels of these substrates. Inorganic pyrophosphate inhibits mineralization and is produced by chondrocytes and osteoblasts.64,65 Characteristics of the condition are low levels of alkaline phosphatase in serum and high plasma and urine levels of PEA. 66 The mechanism proposed for HPP involves impaired TNAP function inside bone progenitor cells, involved in mitochondrial respiration and ATP production. 67 For this reason, therapeutic replacement of TNAP enzyme does not alter incidence of craniosynostosis despite improvement of skeletal mineralization, motor, and cognitive function. 68
Severe forms of HPP are estimated to occur at a frequency of 1 in 100, 000. 69 HPP has several phenotypes with varying severity: neonatal, infantile, late, and latent. 70 While all forms of show evidence of defective mineralization, early infantile hypophosphatasia has the appearance of widened sutures due to large patches of unmineralized skull 66 ; this neonatal form is lethal and is associated with multiple fractures. In a cohort study of 25 patients by Kozlowski et al., all subjects had widened cranial sutures. 71 Functional craniosynostosis occurs in these hypomineralized regions, causing a characteristic bulging anterior fontanelle. Precise diagnosis is especially critical in rare bone disorders to guide medical management. 64 For example, high intracranial pressures in the HPP skull indicate a need for skull expansion, in contrast to frequent cranioplasty in CCD to reconstruct skull defects.48,72,73 Improper management due to incorrect diagnosis can thus induce significant harm to the patient. 74
Bone Resorption–Pycnodysostosis
Pycnodysostosis is an autosomal recessive skeletal dysplasia with craniofacial and skeletal features including skull deformities, delayed suture closure, osteosclerosis, acro-osteolysis and bone fragility. 75 In infants, pycnodysostosis manifests as open fontanelles and sutures, frontal and parietal bossing, and maxillary and mandibular hypoplasia. 76 Open cranial sutures have also been observed to persist into adulthood.14,77 Osteosclerosis - abnormal hardening of the bone - advances with growth in pediatric patients and bears increased risk of fracture due to the bone's brittle nature. 78 With approximately 200 patients described in the literature, this rare disorder has a predicted prevalence of about 1.7 cases per million and can necessitate surgical management of craniofacial hypoplasia. 79
Individuals with pycnodysostosis have higher bone mineral density due to loss-of-function pathogenic variants in the CTSK gene, which encodes for Cathepsin K. Cathepsin K is a collagenase required for osteoclastic bone resorption. 80 It is synthesized as a pro-enzyme and is activated by lysosomal cleavage. 81 Quantitative computed tomography (CT) evaluation of bone mineral density in patients with pycnodysostosis shows increased bone volume, which can be explained by the impaired ability of osteoclasts to break down type I collagen matrix. 82 The high susceptibility to fractures may also be due to reduced bone remodeling. However, osteomalacia can also be observed in patients with CTSK variants, suggesting an additional role in bone mineralization. 83 Cathepsin K in osteocytes is likely to play an important role in the suture biology underlying pycnodysostosis and has been hypothesized to be central in mechanosensation and communication with osteoblasts to activate osteogenesis.84,85 The loss of Cathepsin K could influence bone formation and remodeling on several levels, beyond what is discussed in the literature.
Discussion
This literature review presents examples of clinical widening of cranial sutures and fontanelles contextualized within key elements of suture biology, illustrating the variety of causes for similar suture malformations. Cranial sutures exemplify a dynamic continuum between bone formation and resorption. Disruption of the genetic drivers of cell differentiation, extracellular matrix production, mineralization, bone resorption, or any combination can manifest as dramatic craniofacial changes. 86 Suture malformations demonstrate how specific cellular changes can lead to major physiological consequences.
It is unsurprising that the outcome of widened sutures or a persistent fontanelle can arise in multiple ways, given the range of factors governing normal suture development and function, as well as bone formation as a whole. A 1992 case study of an 11-month-old boy with undiagnosed hypophosphatasia further underscores the concept of careful differential diagnosis. The patient was given a presumptive diagnosis of rickets, due to his widened fontanelle, and was treated with high doses of calcium and vitamin D supplementation as a result. However, eventual lab testing revealed reduced ALP levels, hypercalcemia, hypercalciuria, low parathyroid hormone (PTH), and normal levels of vitamin D, which were suggestive of HPP instead of the previously diagnosed rickets. 74 While both rickets and HPP are disorders of bone mineralization, in this case severe clinical complications resulted from indiscriminate treatment.
It is critical to consider the molecular mechanisms underpinning a disorder. Some treatments may not be effective due to mutations in critical pathways. How do the genetic changes underlying the suture malformation interact with the selected treatment modality? This is a crucial element of precision therapeutics, in which clinicians’ evolving ability to ascertain genetic or physiological characteristics of patients can streamline treatment of complex conditions. For example, stimulation of bone formation with a growth factor is dependent on the osteoblast's ability to respond to the factor. 87 Disruption of a critical process like cellular metabolism, as in HPP, impacts other structures in addition to the suture phenotypes described herein. 88 An understanding of underlying bone biology, including gene regulatory networks facilitating normal development, can benefit clinical treatment of rare bone disorders, furthering the field of personalized medicine by carefully considering treatment modality and mechanism in the context of the disordered system. This attention to biological detail can help clinicians to identify the most effective treatments, avoiding those that could cause inadvertent harm.
Study of conditions in which there are abnormal suture outcomes has furthered our understanding of the molecular biology of normal suture development; this is the basis of animal modeling of craniofacial anomalies. In addition to its direct benefit to patients, the study of rare disease biology can also help inform treatments for more common conditions. 8 Thus, there is value in studying rare conditions such as those presented in this review. Indeed, the literature describes several bone disorders presenting with widened cranial sutures with undetermined mechanisms89–94 In addition to the direct effects of gene disruption on osteogenesis or mineralization, ubiquitous facets of cell biology such as epigenetics or mechanotransduction also influence the phenotype.95,96 An example is Craniostenosis, Deafness, Anal abnormalities, and Genitourinary malformations with Skin rash (CDAGS) syndrome, in which disruption of nuclear RNA and intron splicing due to a rare biallelic variant in the RNU12 gene causes a suite of multi-system malformations, including delayed closure of cranial sutures. 97 While the underlying spliceosomopathy has been identified, the downstream effect of minor spliceosome alteration on bone formation leading to delays in CDAGS syndrome is still unknown. The mechanism by which metopism, a persistent metopic suture, occurs is similarly unclear. Genetic underpinnings are the most likely explanation, especially in the context of evolution.98,99
Biology is rarely linear, and these disorders are likely the result of compounding effects of the gene variant or variants on several interacting gene regulatory networks or biological processes. Hence, the identification of the gene affected by pathogenic variation may not be sufficient to fully understand the underpinnings of disordered bone.
The four cases presented in this narrative review illustrate concepts of progenitor cell differentiation, bone mineralization and resorption, and extracellular matrix production; however, these processes do not exist in isolation. The interconnected nature of bone biology dictates additional axes of involvement in craniofacial suture widening. Cleidocranial dysplasia is directly connected to RUNX2 pathogenic variants clinically, but little exploration of the interplay of abnormal RUNX2 with other processes and gene regulatory networks is evidenced in the clinical literature. In contrast, foundational research on Runx2 and understanding of this master bone regulatory gene in non-clinical contexts is vast. 100 Epigenetic regulation of Runx2 through transcriptional silencing, poising cells for expression, and induction of osteoblast differentiation is intricately connected at many levels, which should be considered in the context of the processes and disorders discussed in this review. 101 Other overarching processes governing cell-cell interaction and response to the environment, such as mechanotransduction or lineage commitment, may influence the phenotype or severity of the effects of pathogenic variants. 102 Nevertheless, it is clear from in vitro studies replicating the in vivo suture microenvironment that countless unidentified factors and forces influence bone differentiation.103,104
When a clinician is presented with a patient with widened sutures or fontanelles with delayed closure, it warrants a thorough pediatrics assessment. The mean age of closure for the anterior fontanelle is approximately 14 months of age. By 2 years of age the anterior fontanelle is closed in 96% of children. 105 Non-genetic causes of a large fontanelle include hydrocephalus, hypothyroidism, and rickets. It is important not to miss these treatable conditions. If these conditions have been ruled out and the fontanelle is open after 2 years of age, consideration should be given to an evaluation by a medical geneticist. Red flags that warrant medical genetics consultation, including early referral, are dysmorphic features, developmental delay, congenital anomalies, or additional skeletal anomalies such as unusual body proportions. Genetic testing may involve chromosomal microarray, single gene testing, gene panel testing or exome sequencing depending on the findings of the assessment. The results of genetic testing not only aid the diagnosis of rare diseases but also help inform recurrence risks for future pregnancies. The challenge with rare genetic disease is that there are very few cases and there are rarely established medical management guidelines. Frequently, the natural history of these conditions is not well established. Treatment and surveillance are typically tailored to the individual patient. We highlighted several conditions in this narrative review. The only condition we reviewed for which a targeted therapeutic intervention exists is hypophosphatasia. The therapeutic intervention consists of an enzyme replacement therapy for the infantile and juvenile types, we should be initiated early for best outcomes. Cleidocranial dysostosis, Yunis-Varón syndrome, and pycnodysostosis do not currently have medical management guidelines. While the enlarged fontanelle may eventually close over time in these conditions, there are individuals with cleidocranial dysostosis whose fontanelle remains open throughout life. Individuals with these conditions are managed in a multidisciplinary team with a considered approach to surgical intervention when appropriate. Identification and proactive consideration of underpinning genetic mechanisms should inform these personalized, interdisciplinary treatment plans whenever possible.
The future of bench-to-bedside translation of knowledge and clinical intervention options for patients affected by cranial dysmorphology is teeming with potential. The combination of foundational principles observed and capitulated in pre-clinical animal models with known clinical phenotypes and outcomes from affected patient populations will ignite novel avenues of diagnostic and therapeutic exploration. Drawing from recent successes in preclinical animal models of craniosynostosis, similar efforts may be possible to drive homeostatic maintenance of cranial sutures which fail to grow properly. 106 Future pathophysiological studies will provide a better understanding of suture maintenance, stem cell biology, and osteogenic differentiation cues in the context of pathologically widened cranial sutures. Importantly, the convergence of clinical, basic science, and medical engineering experts is crucial to the development of disease mechanism-based therapeutics to help translate improved treatment to patients with cranial suture pathologies.
Conclusions
Widening of cranial sutures is a rare craniofacial outcome revealing what is not yet known about the causes and implications of cranial suture malformation. The spectrum of craniofacial disorders involving widened sutures described here is caused by pathogenic variants in genes required for the cellular processes governing suture formation and function. Each of the cases presented in this review shares a common feature: widened cranial sutures, or a persistent anterior fontanelle. However, each pathology arises from a different underlying biological perturbation. Whereas distinctions between causes of suture widening are difficult to make clinically, a wholistic view of the disorder and potential biologically relevant causes is required for effective personalized treatment plans for individual patients. Importantly, widened cranial sutures or persistent fontanelles are not simply the inverse of craniosynostosis. This paradigm emphasizes consideration of the underlying biology as patient-specific interventions evolve. This narrative review has illustrated significant gaps in understanding of complex craniofacial disorders in the context of pathologically widened cranial sutures, highlighting avenues for exciting future work to unite foundational biology with clinical practice.
Footnotes
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Alberta Dental Association and College Chair in Oral Health Research
ORCID iDs: Daniela M. Roth https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8156-4681
Melissa MacPherson https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3382-7480
Daniel Graf https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1163-8117
References
- 1.Dimopoulos VG, Kapsalakis IZ, Fountas KN. Skull morphology and its neurosurgical implications in the hippocratic era. Neurosurg Focus. 2007;23(1):E10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Opperman LA. Cranial sutures as intramembranous bone growth sites. Dev Dyn. 2000;219(4):472-485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Menon S, Salhotra A, Shailendra S, et al. Skeletal stem and progenitor cells maintain cranial suture patency and prevent craniosynostosis. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):4640. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Li B, Wang Y, Fan Y, Ouchi T, Zhao Z, Li L. Cranial suture mesenchymal stem cells: Insights and advances. Biomolecules. 2021;11(8):1129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Rice DP. Developmental anatomy of craniofacial sutures. In: Rice DP, ed. Craniofacial Sutures. S.Karger AG; 2008:1-21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Boran P, Oğuz F, Furman A, Sakarya S. Evaluation of fontanel size variation and closure time in children followed up from birth to 24 months. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2018;22(3):323-329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Fotouhi AR, Chiang SN, Peterson AM, et al. Neurodevelopment in unilateral coronal craniosynostosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2022;31(1):16-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Stanton E, Urata M, Chen JF, Chai Y. The clinical manifestations, molecular mechanisms and treatment of craniosynostosis. Dis Model Mech. 2022;15(4):dmm049390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Farrow E, Nicot R, Wiss A, Laborde A, Ferri J. Cleidocranial dysplasia: A review of clinical, radiological, genetic implications and a guidelines proposal. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(2):382-389. 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004200 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hordyjewska‐Kowalczyk E, Sowińska‐Seidler A, Olech EM, Socha M, Glazar R, Kruczek A, Latos‐Bieleńska A, Tylzanowski P, Jamsheer A. Functional analysis of novel RUNX2 mutations identified in patients with cleidocranial dysplasia. Clin Genet. 2019;96(5):429-438. 10.1111/cge.v96.5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Jirapinyo C, Deraje V, Huang G, Gue S, Anderson PJ, Moore MH. Cleidocranial dysplasia. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(4):908–911. 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006306 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Lotlikar PP, Creanga AG, Singer SR. Clinical and radiological findings in a severe case of cleidocranial dysplasia. BMJ Case Rep. 2018;2018:bcr-2018–226671. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Otaify GA, Abdel-Hamid MS, Mehrez MI, et al. Genetic study of eight Egyptian patients with pycnodysostosis: Identification of novel CTSK mutations and founder effect. Osteoporos Int. 2018;29(8):1833-1841. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Shi X, Huang C, Xiao F, Liu W, Zeng J, Li X. Pycnodysostosis with novel gene mutation and sporadic medullary thyroid carcinoma: A case report. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(50):e8730. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Thomas GPL, Magdum SA, Saeed NR, Johnson D. Multisuture craniosynostosis and papilledema in pycnodysostosis: A paradox? J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30(1):110-114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Haye D, Dridi H, Levy J, et al. Failure of ossification of the occipital bone in mandibuloacral dysplasia type B. Am J Med Genet A. 2016;170(10):2750-2755. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Hitzert MM, van der Crabben SN, Baldewsingh G, et al. Mandibuloacral dysplasia type B (MADB): A cohort of eight patients from Suriname with a homozygous founder mutation in ZMPSTE24 (FACE1), clinical diagnostic criteria and management guidelines. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ozer L, Unsal E, Aktuna S, et al. Mandibuloacral dysplasia and LMNA A529 V mutation in turkish patients with severe skeletal changes and absent breast development. Clin Dysmorphol. 2016;25(3):91-97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Cheng SSW, Chan PKJ, Luk HM, Mok MTS, Lo IFM. Adult Chinese twins with kenny-caffey syndrome type 2: A potential age-dependent phenotype and review of literature. Am J Med Genet A. 2021;185(2):636-646. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Turner AE, Abu-Ghname A, Davis MJ, et al. Kenny-Caffey syndrome type 2: A unique presentation and craniofacial analysis. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(5):e471-e475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Low K, Ashraf T, Canham N, et al. Clinical and genetic aspects of KBG syndrome. Am J Med Genet A. 2016;170(11):2835-2846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Roth DM, Baddam P, Lin H, et al. The chromatin regulator Ankrd11 controls palate and cranial bone development. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021;9:985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Fang H, Liu S, Wang Y, Chiang C, Liu C, Lin C. Phenotypic features of a microdeletion in chromosome band 20p13: A case report and review of the literature. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2019;7(7):e00739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Wang J, Fu C, Zhang S, et al. A rare occurrence of two large de novo duplications on 1q42-q44 and 9q21.12-q21.33. Gene. 2016;594(1):59-65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Di Rocco F, Baujat G, Cormier-Daire V, Rothenbuhler A, Linglart A. Craniosynostosis and hypophosphatasia. Arch Pediatr Organe Off Soc Francaise Pediatr . 2017;24(5S2):5S89-85S92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Nahabet EH, Gatherwright J, Vockley J, et al. Postnatal pancraniosynostosis in a patient with infantile hypophosphatasia. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(6):741-744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Zhang T, Wu Q, Zhu L, et al. A novel SPECC1L mutation causing teebi hypertelorism syndrome: Expanding phenotypic and genetic spectrum. Eur J Med Genet. 2020;63(4):103851. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Vinchon M. The metopic suture: Natural history. Neurochirurgie. 2019;65(5):239-245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Dossani RH, Yates DM, Kalakoti P, et al. Cranium Bifidum Occultum associated with hypertelorism treated with posterior vault reconstruction and orbital box osteotomies: Case report and technical note. World Neurosurg. 2017;107:40-46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Pastrana-Ayala R, Peña-Castro GL, Valencia-Herrera AM, et al. Craniosynostosis, delayed closure of the fontanelle, anal, genitourinary, and skin abnormalities (CDAGS syndrome): First report in a Mexican patient and review of the literature. Int J Dermatol. 2017;56(4):435-439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Marzuillo P, Grandone A, Perrotta S, et al. Very early onset of autoimmune thyroiditis in a toddler with severe hypothyroidism presentation: A case report. Ital J Pediatr. 2016;42(1):61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Minatogawa M, Unzaki A, Morisaki H, et al. Clinical and molecular features of 66 patients with musculocontractural Ehlers − Danlos syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in CHST14 (mcEDS-CHST14). J Med Genet. , 2022;59(9):865–877. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Uludağ Alkaya D, Akpınar E, Bilguvar K, Tüysüz B. Resolution of sclerotic lesions of dysosteosclerosis due to biallelic SLC29A3 variant in a turkish girl. Am J Med Genet A. 2021;185(7):2271-2277. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Sasaki E, Byrne AT, Murray DJ, Reardon W. Caput membranaceum: A novel clinical presentation of ZIC1 related skull malformation and craniosynostosis. Am J Med Genet A. 2020;182(12):2994-2998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Mchaile D, Mrindoko P, Mselle M, et al. <P > neonatal polycystic kidney disease in a one-day-old baby: A case report</p > . Pediatr Health Med Ther. 2020;11:445-448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Dimitri P, De Franco E, Habeb AM, et al. An emerging, recognizable facial phenotype in association with mutations in GLI-similar 3 (GLIS3). Am J Med Genet A. 2016;170(7):1918-1923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Machol K, Mendoza-Londono R, Lee B. Cleidocranial dysplasia spectrum disorder. 2006 Jan 3 [Updated 2017 Nov 16]. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al. , eds. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle: University of Washington; 2006: 1993-2023. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1513/. [Google Scholar]
- 38.Barberini F, Bruner E, Cartolari R, et al. An unusually-wide human bregmatic wormian bone: Anatomy, tomographic description, and possible significance. Surg Radiol Anat. 2008;30(8):683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Jaruga A, Hordyjewska E, Kandzierski G, Tylzanowski P. Cleidocranial dysplasia and RUNX2-clinical phenotype–genotype correlation. Clin Genet. 2016;90(5):393-402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Komori T. Regulation of proliferation, differentiation and functions of osteoblasts by Runx2. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(7):1694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Schroeder TM, Jensen ED, Westendorf JJ. Runx2: A master organizer of gene transcription in developing and maturing osteoblasts. Birth Defects Res Part C Embryo Today Rev. 2005;75(3):213-225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Han MS, Kim HJ, Wee HJ, et al. The cleidocranial dysplasia-related R131G mutation in the runt-related transcription factor RUNX2 disrupts binding to DNA but not CBF-β. J Cell Biochem. 2010;110(1):97-103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Liu TM, Lee EH. Transcriptional regulatory cascades in Runx2-dependent bone development. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2013;19(3):254-263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Roberts T, Stephen L, Beighton P. Cleidocranial dysplasia: A review of the dental, historical, and practical implications with an overview of the South African experience. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013;115(1):46-55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Gömleksiz C, Arslan E, Arslan S, Pusat S, Arslan EA. Delayed diagnosis of cleidocranial dysplasia in an adult: A case report. Acta Medica Acad. 2014;43(1):92-96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Tu Q, Zhang J, James L, et al. Cbfa1/Runx2-deficiency delays bone wound healing and locally delivered Cbfa1/Runx2 promotes bone repair in animal models. Wound Repair Regen Off Publ Wound Heal Soc Eur Tissue Repair Soc. 2007;15(3):404-412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Shimizu J, Iba K, Emori M, Sasaki M, Yamashita T. Reconstruction using free vascularized fibular grafts after wide resection of humerus chondrosarcoma in a patient with cleidocranial dysplasia. Case Rep Orthop. 2021;2021:2302879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Jung YT, Cho JI, Lee SP. Cranioplasty using a modified split calvarial graft technique in cleidocranial dysplasia. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2015;58(1):79-82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Campeau PM, Lenk GM, Lu JT, et al. Yunis-Varón syndrome is caused by mutations in FIG4, encoding a phosphoinositide phosphatase. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;92(5):781-791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Basel-Vanagaite L, Kornreich L, Schiller O, Yacobovich J, Merlob P. Yunis–varon syndrome: Further delineation of the phenotype. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A(4):532-537. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Lines MA, Ito Y, Kernohan KD, et al. Yunis-Varón syndrome caused by biallelic VAC14 mutations. Eur J Hum Genet. 2017;25(9):1049-1054. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Nakajima J, Okamoto N, Shiraishi J, et al. Novel FIG4 mutations in yunis–varon syndrome. J Hum Genet. 2013;58(12):822-824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Cao X, Lenk GM, Meisler MH. Altered phenotypes due to genetic interaction between the mouse phosphoinositide biosynthesis genes Fig4 and Pip4k2c. G3 GenesGenomesGenetics. Published online January 24, 2023:jkad007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 54.Baulac S, Lenk GM, Dufresnois B, et al. Role of the phosphoinositide phosphatase FIG4 gene in familial epilepsy with polymicrogyria. Neurology. 2014;82(12):1068-1075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Bharadwaj R, Cunningham KM, Zhang K, Lloyd TE. FIG4 Regulates lysosome membrane homeostasis independent of phosphatase function. Hum Mol Genet. 2016;25(4):681-692. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Qiu S, Lavallée-Adam M, Côté M. Proximity interactome map of the Vac14–Fig4 Complex using BioID. J Proteome Res. 2021;20(11):4959-4973. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Lacombe J, Karsenty G, Ferron M. Regulation of lysosome biogenesis and functions in osteoclasts. Cell Cycle. 2013;12(17):2744-2752. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Lenk GM, Meisler MH. Chapter fourteen - mouse models of PI(3,5)P2 deficiency with impaired lysosome function. In: Conn PM, ed. Methods in enzymology. 534. Endosome Signaling Part A. Academic Press; 2014:245-260. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Lenk GM, Meisler MH. Chloroquine corrects enlarged lysosomes in FIG4 null cells and reduces neurodegeneration in Fig4 null mice. Mol Genet Metab. 2022;137(4):382-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Root AW, Levine MA. One half-century of advances in the evaluation and management of disorders of bone and mineral metabolism in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2023;36(2):105-118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Collins MT, Marcucci G, Anders HJ, et al. Skeletal and extraskeletal disorders of biomineralization. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2022;18(8):473-489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Oheim R, Tsourdi E, Seefried L, et al. Genetic diagnostics in routine osteological assessment of adult low bone mass disorders. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(7):e3048-e3057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Liu J, Nam HK, Campbell C, Gasque KC da S, Millán JL, Hatch NE. Tissue-nonspecific alkaline phosphatase deficiency causes abnormal craniofacial bone development in the alpl(-/-) mouse model of infantile hypophosphatasia. Bone. 2014;67:81-94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Foster BL, Ramnitz MS, Gafni RI, et al. Rare bone diseases and their dental, oral, and craniofacial manifestations. J Dent Res. 2014;93(7 Suppl):7S-19S. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Salles JP. Clinical forms and animal models of hypophosphatasia. Subcell Biochem. 2015;76:3-24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Svejcar J, Walther A. The diagnosis of the early infantile form of hypophosphatasia tarda. Humangenetik. 1975;28(1):49-56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Zhang Z, Nam HK, Crouch S, Hatch NE. Tissue nonspecific alkaline phosphatase function in bone and muscle progenitor cells: Control of mitochondrial respiration and ATP production. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(3):1140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Whyte MP, Greenberg CR, Salman NJ, et al. Enzyme-Replacement therapy in life-threatening hypophosphatasia. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(10):904-913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Mornet E. Hypophosphatasia. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;2(1):40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Hepp N, Frederiksen AL, Duno M, Jørgensen NR, Jensen JEB. Biochemical and clinical manifestations in adults with hypophosphatasia: A national cross-sectional study. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(12):2595-2605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Kozlowski K, Sutcliffe J, Barylak A, et al. Hypophosphatasia. Review of 24 cases. Pediatr Radiol. 1976;5(2):103-117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Kosnik-Infinger L, Gendron C, Gordon CB, et al. Enzyme replacement therapy for congenital hypophosphatasia allows for surgical treatment of related complex craniosynostosis: A case series. Neurosurg Focus. 2015;38(5):E10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.McGuire TP, Gomes PP, Lam DK, Sándor GKB. Cranioplasty for midline metopic suture defects in adults with cleidocranial dysplasia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology. 2007;103(2):175-179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Mohn A, De Leonibus C, de Giorgis T, Mornet E, Chiarelli F. Hypophosphatasia in a child with widened anterior fontanelle: Lessons learned from late diagnosis and incorrect treatment. Acta Paediatr Oslo Nor 1992. 2011;100(7):e43-e46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Appelman-Dijkstra NM, Papapoulos SE. From disease to treatment: From rare skeletal disorders to treatments for osteoporosis. Endocrine. 2016;52:414-426. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Hald JD, Beck-Nielsen S, Gregersen PA, Gjørup H, Langdahl B. Pycnodysostosis in children and adults. Bone. 2023;169:116674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Kundu ZS, Marya KM, Devgan A, Yadav V, Rohilla S. Subtrochanteric fracture managed by intramedullary nail in a patient with pycnodysostosis. Joint Bone Spine. 2004;71(2):154-156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Romans M, Sambandam B, Moses J, Pragash M. A rare case of pycnodysostosis: Technical difficulties in managing long bone fractures. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(2):332-338. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.LeBlanc S, Savarirayan R.. 2020 Aug 17 [Updated 2020 Nov 5]. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al. , eds. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle: University of Washington; 2020: 1993-2023. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563694/. [Google Scholar]
- 80.Mijanović O, Jakovleva A, Branković A, et al. Cathepsin K in pathological conditions and new therapeutic and diagnostic perspectives. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(22):13762. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Sait H, Srivastava P, Gupta N, et al. Phenotypic and genotypic spectrum of CTSK variants in a cohort of twenty-five Indian patients with pycnodysostosis. Eur J Med Genet. 2021;64(7):104235 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Ferlias N, Gjørup H, Aagaard Doherty M, Haagerup A, Klit Pedersen T. Three-dimensional analysis of craniofacial morphology in patients with pycnodysostosis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2021;24(4):568-574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Schilling AF, Mülhausen C, Lehmann W, et al. High bone mineral density in pycnodysostotic patients with a novel mutation in the propeptide of cathepsin K. Osteoporos Int. 2007;18(5):659-669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Dai R, Wu Z, Chu HY, et al. Cathepsin K: The action in and beyond bone. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Qin L, Liu W, Cao H, Xiao G. Molecular mechanosensors in osteocytes. Bone Res. 2020;8(1):1-24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Roth DM, Souter K, Graf D. Craniofacial sutures: Signaling centres integrating mechanosensation, cell signaling, and cell differentiation. Eur J Cell Biol. 2022;101(3):151258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Maciel GBM, Maciel RM, Danesi CC. Bone cells and their role in physiological remodeling. Mol Biol Rep. 2023;50(3):2857-2863. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Langeveld M, Hollak CEM. Bone health in patients with inborn errors of metabolism. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2018;19(1):81-92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Chaisrisawadisuk S, Constantine S, Lottering N, Moore MH, Anderson PJ. Incidence of persistent metopic suture in Australia: findings from 1034 three-dimensional computed tomography scans. Childs Nerv Syst. 2021;37:3871-3879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Chirathivat S, Post MJ. CT Demonstration of dural metastases in neuroblastoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1980;4(3):316-319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Lucas-Herald AK, Zürbig P, Mason A, et al. Proteomic evidence of biological aging in a child with a compound heterozygous ZMPSTE24 mutation. Proteomics Clin Appl. 2019;13(2):e1800135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Nelke KH, Pawlak W, Kurlej W, Gerber H. Metopic frontal suture in a patient with severe dentofacial deformity undergoing bimaxillary surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(2):517-518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Pascual-Castroviejo I, Lopez-Martin V, Rodriguez-Costa T, Pascual-Pascual JI. Radiological and anatomical aspects of the cranial metastases of neuroblastomas. Neuroradiology. 1975;9(1):33-38. [Google Scholar]
- 94.Pochedly C, Sarrafi G, Dobbs JB. Widened cranial sutures in metastatic neuroblastoma. JAMA. 1974;227(6):659. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Di Pietro L, Barba M, Palacios D, et al. Shaping modern human skull through epigenetic, transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation of the RUNX2 master bone gene. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):21316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Alamer OB, Jimenez AE, Azad TD. Single-suture craniosynostosis and the epigenome: Current evidence and a review of epigenetic principles. Neurosurg Focus. 2021;50(4):E10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Xing C, Kanchwala M, Rios JJ, et al. Biallelic variants in RNU12 cause CDAGS syndrome. Hum Mutat. 2021;42(8):1042-1052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Holloway RL, Broadfield DC, Carlson KJ. New high-resolution computed tomography data of the taung partial cranium and endocast and their bearing on metopism and hominin brain evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(36):13022-13027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.Zdilla MJ, Russell ML, Koons AW, Bliss KN, Mangus KR. Metopism: A study of the persistent metopic suture. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(1):204-208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Karsenty G. Transcriptional control of skeletogenesis. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2008;9(1):183-196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Montecino M, Carrasco ME, Nardocci G. Epigenetic control of osteogenic lineage commitment. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021;8:1759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Al-Rekabi Z, Cunningham ML, Sniadecki NJ. Cell mechanics of craniosynostosis. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2017;3(11):2733-2743. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Pereira AR, Lipphaus A, Ergin M, et al. Modeling of the human bone environment: Mechanical stimuli guide mesenchymal stem cell–extracellular matrix interactions. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(16):4431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Yuste I, Luciano FC, González-Burgos E, Lalatsa A, Serrano DR. Mimicking bone microenvironment: 2D and 3D in vitro models of human osteoblasts. Pharmacol Res. 2021;169:105626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Kiesler J, Ricer R. The abnormal fontanel. Am Fam Physician. 2003; 67(12):2547-2552. PMID: 12825844. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Yu M, Ma L, Yuan Y, et al. Cranial suture regeneration mitigates skull and neurocognitive defects in craniosynostosis. Cell. 2021;184(1):243-256.e18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

