Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Molecular Syndromology logoLink to Molecular Syndromology
. 2011 Sep 14;1(6):282–289. doi: 10.1159/000331266

RASopathies: Clinical Diagnosis in the First Year of Life

MC Digilio a,*, F Lepri a, A Baban a, ML Dentici a, P Versacci b, R Capolino a, R Ferese d, A De Luca d, M Tartaglia c, B Marino b, B Dallapiccola a
PMCID: PMC3214957  PMID: 22190897

Abstract

Diagnosis within Noonan syndrome and related disorders (RASopathies) still presents a challenge during the first months of life, since most clinical features used to differentiate these conditions become manifest later in childhood. Here, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical records referred to the first year of life of 57 subjects with molecularly confirmed diagnosis of RASopathy, to define the early clinical features characterizing these disorders and improve our knowledge on natural history. Mildly or markedly expressed facial features were invariably present. Congenital heart defects were the clinical issue leading to medical attention in patients with Noonan syndrome and LEOPARD syndrome. Feeding difficulties and developmental motor delay represented the most recurrent features occurring in subjects with cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome and Costello syndrome. Thin hair was prevalent among SHOC2 and BRAF mutation-positive infants. Café-au-lait spots were found in patients with LS and PTPN11 mutations, while keratosis pilaris was more common in individuals with SOS1, SHOC2 and BRAF mutations. In conclusion, some characteristics can be used as hints for suspecting a RASopathy during the first months of life, and individual RASopathies may be suspected by analysis of specific clinical signs. In the first year of life, these include congenital heart defects, severity of feeding difficulties and delay of developmental milestones, hair and skin anomalies, which may help to distinguish different entities, for their subsequent molecular confirmation and appropriate clinical management.

Key Words: Cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome, Costello syndrome, Genotype-phenotype correlations, LEOPARD syndrome, Noonan syndrome, Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair

Introduction

In the last 10 years, germline mutations in a number of genes coding transducers and modulatory proteins participating in the RAS-MAP kinase-signaling path- way have been causally linked to Noonan syndrome (NS) and a group of clinically related disorders, the so-called neuro-cardio-facio-cutaneous syndromes or RASopathies [Schubbert et al., 2007; Tidyman and Rauen, 2009; Tartaglia et al., 2010]. These disorders are characterized by facial dysmorphism, a wide spectrum of cardiac disease, postnatal reduced growth, ectodermal and skeletal defects, and variable cognitive deficits. Mutations in PTPN11, SOS1, KRAS, NRAS, RAF1 and BRAF genes have been documented to account for approximately 75% of individuals with NS [Tartaglia et al., 2001, 2007; Carta et al., 2006; Schubbert et al., 2006; Pandit et al., 2007; Razzaque et al., 2007; Roberts et al., 2007; Sarkozy et al., 2009a; Cirstea et al., 2010], the commonest and clinically most variable among these disorders [Allanson, 1987; Noonan, 1994; van der Burgt, 2007]. LEOPARD syndrome (LS) [Gorlin et al., 1969; Voron et al., 1976; Sarkozy et al., 2009b] and Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair (NS/LAH) [Mazzanti et al., 2003], which phenotypically resemble NS, have been shown to be caused by mutations in the PTPN11, RAF1 and BRAF [Digilio et al., 2002; Legius et al., 2002; Pandit et al., 2007; Sarkozy et al., 2009a], and SHOC2 genes [Cordeddu et al., 2009], respectively, while defects in the CBL gene have been linked to a variable condition partially overlapping NS [Martinelli et al., 2010; Niemeyer et al., 2010; Perez et al., 2010]. Other disorders more severely affecting development and growth, but with clinical overlap with NS, include cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome (CFCS) [Reynolds et al., 1986; Roberts et al., 2006] and Costello syndrome (CS) [Costello, 1977; Hennekam, 2003; Gripp, 2005]. Both conditions are caused by defects in genes functionally related to those implicated in NS, the former being associated with mutations affecting the KRAS, BRAF, MEK1 and MEK2 genes [Niihori et al., 2006; Rodriguez-Viciana et al., 2006], and the latter being caused by a relatively narrow spectrum of HRAS mutations [Aoki et al., 2005].

In general, the clinical diagnosis of a condition with clinical traits fitting a specific RASopathy can be difficult in the first months of life, since most cardinal features utilized to categorize NS, LS, NS/LAH, CFCS and CS manifest later during childhood [Digilio et al., 2006a, 2007]. Nevertheless, a detailed definition of the neonatal phenotype and degree of variation characterizing these disorders would represent a clinically relevant tool to guide pediatricians and medical geneticists towards an earlier clinical diagnosis of general RASopathies and specific subtypes, prompting molecular characterization and more effective patient management and counseling.

Here, we review the clinical records referred to the first year of life of 57 patients clinically diagnosed as having a RASopathy and subsequently molecularly genotyped, in order to outline clinical features facilitating early diagnosis of these disorders, and add information on clinical history referred to the first months of life.

Patients and Methods

Patients, Molecular Analyses and Clinical Data Collection

From 1990 to 2010, 134 patients with clinical features fitting the RASopathy spectrum were evaluated in their first year of life. Within this cohort, genomic DNA obtained from circulating leukocytes was available for molecular analysis in 96 subjects, for whom no obvious selection bias was apparent. The entire coding sequence of the PTPN11 gene was screened for mutations in all patients by single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis or denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography, as previously reported [Digilio et al., 2002; Tartaglia et al., 2002]. Fragments with an aberrant migration/elution pattern were sequenced. PTPN11 mutation-negative samples were successively screened for mutations in the coding region of the SOS1, RAF1, KRAS, NRAS, SHOC2, CBL, BRAF, MEK1, MEK2, and HRAS genes by denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography analysis and bi-directional direct sequencing. Disease causative changes were identified in 57 patients (table 1). PTPN11 mutations were detected in 31 subjects (54% of mutation-positive cases), allowing to obtain a molecularly confirmed diagnosis of NS and LS in 20 and 11 individuals, respectively. Heterozygous mutations in SOS1 (n = 8, 14%), RAF1 (n = 4, 7%), BRAF (n = 1, 2%), NRAS (n = 1, 2%) and CBL (n = 1, 2%) were found in subjects with a phenotype fitting in with NS. A missense BRAF mutation was documented in 4 patients with a diagnosis of CFCS (7%), and one MEK2 mutation was found to occur in 1 additional CFCS case. Finally, mutations in HRAS and SHOC2 were observed in 4 patients with CS (7%), and 2 subjects with NS/LAH (4%), respectively. None of the analyzed patients carried a mutation in the KRAS gene.

Table 1.

Molecular characterization and clinical diagnosis of the patients included in the study

Gene Exon Nucleotide substitution Amino acid substitution Disorder Number of patients
PTPN11 2 c.124A>G T42A NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.172A>G N58D NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.174C>G N58K NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.184T>G Y62D NS 4
PTPN11 3 c.188A>G Y63C NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.214G>T A72S NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.228G>T E76D NS 1
PTPN11 3 c.236A>G Q79R NS 1
PTPN11 7 c.836A>C Y279S LS 2
PTPN11 7 c.836A>C Y279C LS 1
PTPN11 8 c.922A>G N308D NS 4
PTPN11 8 c.923A>G N308S NS 3
PTPN11 12 c.1381G>A A461T LS 1
PTPN11 12 c.1403C>T T468M LS 4
PTPN11 13 c.1472C>T P491L NS 2
PTPN11 13 c.1492C>T R498W LS 1
PTPN11 13 c.1528C>G Q510E LS 2
SOS1 11 c.1301_2GG>AA G434K NS 1
SOS1 11 c.1649T>C L550P NS 1
SOS1 11 c.1654A>G R552G NS 3
SOS1 11 c.1656G>C R552S NS 1
SOS1 14 c.2104T>C Y702H NS 1
SOS1 15 c.2186G>T W729L NS 1
NRAS 3 c.179G>A G60E NS 1
RAF1 7 c.768G>T R256S NS 1
RAF1 7 c.770C>T S257L NS 2
RAF1 7 c.779C>G T260R NS 1
BRAF 6 c.722C>G T241R NS 1
BRAF 6 c.735A>T L245F CFCS 1
BRAF 11 c.1406G>A G469E CFCS 1
BRAF 12 c.1501G>A E501K CFCS 1
BRAF 15 c.1801A>C K601Q CFCS 1
HRAS 1 c.34G>A G12S CS 3
HRAS 1 c.38G>A G13D CS 1
SHOC2 1 c.4A>G S2G NS/LAH 2
MEK2 2 c.186_197del K63_E66del CFCS 1
CBL 9 c.1259G>A R420Q NS 1
Open in a new tab

CFCS = Cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome; CS = Costello syndrome; LS = LEOPARD syndrome; NS = Noonan syndrome; NS/LAH = Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair.

Familial cosegregation of the trait and mutation was documented in 8 families (14% of genotyped cases), including 4/20 NS cases and 1/11 LS cases with PTPN11 mutations, 2/8 cases with SOS1 mutations, and in the single case with CBL mutation. In 6 of the 8 families, the mutated allele was transmitted by the affected mother.

Clinical data were reviewed by analyzing available clinical records. Information was collected on pregnancy, delivery, growth parameters at birth, clinical features, including major and minor anomalies or defects depicted by cerebral ultrasound examination or MRI, 2-dimensional color-Doppler echocardiography, renal ultrasonography, audiological evaluation by BSERA, neurological assessment for hypotonia and developmental delay. Facial dysmorphism was considered to be marked, in the presence of 6 or more features, including hypertelorism, downslanting palpebral fissures, epicanthal folds, short broad nose, deeply grooved philtrum, high wide peaks of the lip vermilion, micrognathia, low-set and/or posteriorly angulated ears with thick helices, and low posterior hairline, while they were considered mild in the presence of 5 or less features [Allanson et al., 2010]. Clinical diagnosis before and after genetic testing was recorded.

Results

The clinical features recorded in the mutation-positive subjects with RASopathy are summarized in table 2. Mean age at the time of clinical diagnosis was 4.7 months. The comparison of clinical diagnosis before genetic testing and after molecular diagnosis is reported in table 3. Mildly or markedly expressed facial anomalies were found in all patients (fig. 1). Newborns/infants with CS had coarse facial appearance. Additional clinical features invariably documented in each RASopathy included: (1) polyhydramnios and short neck/pterygium in CS; (2) weight below the <3rd centile in NS/LAH, CS, and RAF1 mutation-positive NS; (3) thoracic anomalies in BRAF mutation-positive CFCS; (4) congenital heart defects (CHD) in NS and LS; (5) developmental anomalies in NS/LAH, CFCS, and CS; (6) feeding difficulties in patients with NS/LAH, and CS; (7) laryngomalacia in RAF1 mutation-positive NS; (8) hair anomalies in patients with NS/LAH.

Table 2.

Clinical features in 57 patients with molecularly confirmed RASopathy

Gene phenotype PTPN11 NS PTPN11 LS SOS1 NS RAF1 NS SHOC2 NS/LAH NRAS NS CBL NS BRAF NS BRAF CFCS MEK2 CFCS HRAS CS
Number of patients 20 11 8 4 2 1 1 1 4 1 4
Sex 14 m,6 f 4 m,7 f 5 m,3 f 2 m,2 f 1 m.1 f 1 f 1 f 1 f 3 m, 1 f 1 m 4 m
Polyhydramnios 8/20 (40%) 5/11 (45%) 6/8 (75%) 3/4 (75%) 0 0 0 0 1/4 (25%) 0 4/4 (100%)
Prenatal/neonatal lymphatic anomalies 11/20 (55%) 3/11 (27%) 2/8 (25%) 0 0 0 0 0 2/4 (50%) 1 2/4 (50%)
High birth weight (>97th centile) 6/20 (30%) 4/11 (36%) 5/8 (63%) 1/4 (25%) 1/2 (50%) 1 0 1 2/4 (50%) 0 3/4 (75%)
Weight <3rd centile (at observation) 12/20 (60%) 7/11 (64%) 2/8 (25%) 4/4 (100%) 2/2 (100%) 0 0 1 2/4 (50%) 1 4/4 (100%)
Length <3rd centile (at observation) 14/20 (70%) 4/11 (36%) 2/8 (25%) 3/4 (75%) 2/2 (100%) 1 0 1 1/4 (25%) 1 4/4 (100%)
Median age at observation, months 5 3 6 1 5 2 6 9 5 2 2
Facial anomalies 20/20 (100%) 11/11 (100%) 8/8 (100%) 4/4 (100%) 2/2 (100%) 1 1 1 4/4 (100%) 1 4/4 (100%)
 Marked facial phenotype 12/20 (60%) 4/11 (36%) 6/8 (75%) 2/4 (50%) 1/2 (50%) 1 1 0 3/4 (75%) 1 4/4 (100%)
 Mild facial phenotype 8/20 (40%) 7/11 (64%) 2/8 (25%) 2/4 (50%) 1/2 (50%) 0 0 1 1/4 (25%) 0 0
 Protruding tongue 5/20 (25%) 2/11 (18%) 7/8 (88%) 3/4 (75%) 2/2 (100%) 1 0 0 2/4 (50%) 0 4/4 (100%)
Short neck/pterygium 13/20 (65%) 4/11 (36%) 7/8 (88%) 3/4 (75%) 1/2 (50%) 1 1 0 3/4 (75%) 1 4/4 (100%)
Thorax anomalies 12/20 (60%) 8/11 (73%) 7/8 (88%) 3/4 (75%) 1/2 (50%) 1 0 1 4/4 (100%) 1 2/4 (50%)
Congenital heart defect 20/20 (100%) 11/11 (100%) 8/8 (100%) 4/4 (100%) 2/2 (100%) 1 1 1 3/4 (75%) 1 3/4 (75%)
 Pulmonary valve stenosis 14/20 (70%) 3/11 (27%) 7/8 (88%) 1/4 (25%) 0 1 0 1 2/4 (50%) 1 1/4 (25%)
 Atrial septal defect 3/20 (15%) 1/11 (9%) 3/8 (38%) 1/4 (25%) 1/2 (50%) 0 0 0 1/4 (25%) 0 0
 Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy 0 9/11 (82%) 1/8 (13%) 4/4 (100%) 1/2 (50%) 1 0 0 2/4 (50%) 1 2/4 (50%)
 Mitral valve anomaly 1/20 (5%) 3/11 (27%) 0 2/4 (50%) 1/2 (50%) 1 1 0 1/4 (25%) 0 1/4 (25%)
 Atrioventricular canal 2/20 (10%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 Ventricular septal defect 2/20 (10%) 0 1/8 (13%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 Aortic coarctation 1/20 (5%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 Tetralogy of Fallot 0 0 0 1/4 (25%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Renal anomaly 3/20 (15%) 2/11 (18%) 0 2/4 (50%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cryptorchidism (males) 11/14 (79%) 1/4 (25%) 4/5 (80%) 1/2 (50%) 0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2/3 (67%) 1 2/4 (50%)
Developmental anomalies 10/20 (50%) 5/10 (50%) 1/8 (13%) 2/4 (50%) 2/2 (100%) 1 1 1 4/4 (100%) 1 4/4 (100%)
 Mild motor delay 8/20 (40%) 4/10 (40%) 1/8 (13%) 1/4 (25%) 1/2 (50%) 0 1 1 1/4 (25%) 0 0
 Moderate/severe motor delay 2/20 (10%) 1/10 (10%) 0 1/4 (25%) 1/2 (50%) 1 0 0 3/4 (75%) 1 4/4 (100%)
 Epilepsy 1/20 (5%) 0 0 0 1/2 (50%) 0 0 1 1/4 (25%) 0 1/4 (25%)
 Cerebral anomalies 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1/4 (25%) 0 1/4 (25%)
Ocular anomalies 0 3/11 (27%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 3/4 (75%) 1 2/4 (50%)
Retinal coloboma 0 1/11 (9%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/4 (25%) 0 0
Microphthalmia (unilateral) 0 1/11 (9%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Iris heterochromia 0 1/11 (9%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nystagmus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/4 (50%) 0 1
Cataract 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Deafness 0 1/11 (9%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feeding difficulties 13/20 (65%) 6/11 (55%) 0 3/4 (75%) 2/2 (100%) 0 0 1 3/4 (75%) 1 4/4 (100%)
Laryngomalacia 0 0 0 4/4 (100%) 0 0 0 0 1/4 (25%) 1 2/4 (50%)
Hair features 2/20 (10%) 3/11 (27%) 2/8 (25%) 1/4 (25%) 2/2 (100%) 1 1 0 3/4 (75%) 1 2/4 (50%)
 Curly hair 0 3/11 (27%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 Thin/absent hair 2/20 (10%) 0 2/8 (25%) 1/4 (25%) 2/2 (100%) 1 1 0 3/4 (75%) 1 2/4 (50%)
Skin features 3/20 (15%) 9/11 (82%) 4/8 (50%) 1/4 (25%) 2/2 (100%) 0 1 0 4/4 (100%) 1 1/4 (25%)
 Keratosis pilaris 0 0 4/8 (50%) 0 1/2 (50%) 0 1 0 4/4 (100%) 1 0
 Eczema 0 0 2/8 (25%) 0 2/2 (100%) 0 0 0 2/4 (50%) 1 1/4 (25%)
 Cafe-au-lait spot 3/20 (15%) 9/11 (82%) 0 1/4 (25%) 0 0 1 0 2/4 (50%) 0 0
 Lentigines 0 2/11 (18%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Familial segregation 4/20 (20%) 1/11 (9%) 2/8 (25%) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Open in a new tab

CFCS = Cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome; CS = Costello syndrome; LS = LEOPARD syndrome; NS = Noonan syndrome; NS/LAH = Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair.

Table 3.

Comparison of clinical diagnoses before and after genetic testing

Mutated gene Pre-test clinical diagnosis Post-test clinical diagnosis Patients
PTPN11 NS NS 20
NS LS 7
LS LS 4
SOS1 NS NS 8
RAF1 NS NS 4
SHOC2 NS NS/LAH 1
NS-like NS/LAH 1
NRAS NS NS 1
CBL NS NS 1
BRAF NS-like CFCS 3
CFCS CFCS 1
NS NS 1
MEK2 CFCS CFCS 1
HRAS Costello Costello 3
NS-like Costello 1
Open in a new tab

CFCS = Cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome; NS = Noonan syndrome; LS = LEOPARD syndrome; NS/LAH = Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair; NS-like = Noonan-like syndrome.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Faces of infants with RASopathies. The panels show representative facial features occurring in newborns and infants with Noonan syndrome caused by PTPN11, RAF1, SOS1 and NRAS mutations (a–d), LEOPARD syndrome due to a PTPN11 mutation (e), Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair resulting from the c.A>G change in SHOC2 (f), cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome due to BRAF (g) and MEK2 (h) mutations, and Costello syndrome caused by the c.34G>A HRAS mutation (i).

In table 4, the prevalence of clinical features in the present series is compared to percentages found in published reports with wider age distribution.

Table 4.

Comparison of the prevalence (%) of clinical features in the present newborn/infant series with data of published reports with wider age distribution

Disorder-disease gene: NS-PTPNii
 LS-PTPN11
 NS-SOSi
 NS-RAFi
 NS/LAH-SHOC2
 CFCS-BRAF
 CS-HRAS
Reference no. in footnote: 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8
Facial anomalies 100 85 100 87 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Short neck/pterygium 65 52 36 28 88 75 75 83 50 68 75 65 100 100
Thorax anomalies 60 65 73 70 88 82 75 71 50 80 100 63 50 72
Congenital heart defect 100 83 100 71 100 86 100 93 100 80 75 86 75 63
Developmental retardation 50 41 50 20 13 15 50 55 100 83 100 100 100 100
Epilepsy 5 10 0 0 0 3 0 n.r. 50 n.r. 25 17 25 20
Short stature 70 76 36 25 25 36 75 90 100 100 25 80 100 96
Deafness 0 rare 9 20 0 0 0 n.r. 0 n.r. 0 25 0 n.r.
Feeding difficulties 65 63 55 n.r. 0 23 75 n.r. 100 n.r. 75 95 100 100
Laryngomalacia 0 n.r. 0 n.r. 0 n.r. 100 n.r. 0 n.r. 25 n.r. 50 n.r.
Hair anomalies 10 34 27 54 25 80 25 22 100 100 75 95 50 80
Keratosis pilaris 0 6 0 0 50 43 0 10 50 24 100 80 0 62
Café-au-lait spot 15 10 82 75 0 0 25 30 0 n.r. 50 20 0 n.r.
Lentigines 0 0 18 92 0 0 0 n.r. 0 n.r. 0 14 0 10
Open in a new tab

CFCS = Cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome; CS = Costello syndrome; LS = LEOPARD syndrome; n.r. = not reported; NS = Noonan syndrome; NS/LAH = Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair.

1 = present series. 2 = Tartaglia et al. [2002]; Sarkozy et al. [2003]; Zenker et al. [2004]. 3 = Digilio et al. [2002]; Legius et al. [2002]; Sarkozy et al. [2009a]. 4 = Roberts et al. [2007]; Tartaglia et al. [2007]; Zenker et al. [2007]. 5 = Pandit et al. [2007]; Razzaque et al. [2007]. 6 = Cordeddu et al. [2009], 7 = Rodriguez-Viciana et al. [2006]; Nava et al. [2007]; Sarkozy et al. [2009a]. 8 = Hennekam [2003]; Kerr et al. [2006]; Zampino et al. [2007].

Occasional findings included: (1) cerebral anomalies (corpus callosum hypoplasia and cerebellar hypoplasia, Arnold-Chiari malformation); (2) ocular anomalies (coloboma, microphthalmia, iris heterochromia, cataract, and nystagmus) (table 2).

Discussion

The retrospective analysis of clinical features in patients with molecularly confirmed RASopathies, documented during the first year of life, suggests that some characteristics can be used as hints for suspecting a RASopathy, in general, during the first months. In addition, some clinical signs may lead to the suspect of individual disorders or, within a disorder, to individually affected disease genes. Nevertheless, this is a selected cohort, so that the frequency of clinical features may not be applied for general infants with a RASopathy, but specifically for those within the first year of life. Some of the cases included in this report initially received a clinical diagnosis which was changed after the results of genetic testing (table 3). This occurred more often in patients with LS, originally classified as having NS, and in patients with BRAF mutation, which were diagnosed as having an unspecified Noonan-like syndrome.

CHD was the clinical finding leading to medical attention in patients with NS and LS, being invariably present, independently of the affected disease gene and type of mutation. Patients with CFCS and CS displayed CHD in 75% of the cases. In these infants, major reasons for the patients’ referral were either feeding difficulties (80–100%) or developmental motor delay (100%).

Anatomic types of CHD were variable in the different disorders and molecular subgroups. Pulmonary valve stenosis was more common in newborns and infants with a diagnosis of NS associated with mutations in PTPN11 and SOS1, and in CFCS subjects with BRAF mutation, while hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was significantly associated with LS-causing PTPN11 mutations and NS-causing RAF1 mutations. Such associations are in line with previously observed genotype-phenotype correlations [Tartaglia et al., 2002; Sarkozy et al., 2003; Digilio et al., 2006b, 2009; Limongelli et al., 2007; Pandit et al., 2007]. Of note, a wide spectrum of CHDs was documented in the neonatal series, including also atrioventricular canal defect, mitral anomalies, and aortic coarctation. The prevalence of CHDs in this report was slightly higher compared to published series comprising patients with a wider age distribution (table 4). This could be due to the fact that CHDs are often the first clinical symptoms attracting medical attention and suspicion of a RASopathy in the neonatal period and during infancy. On the other hand, the finding that all patients with NS displayed CHDs and facial anomalies actually means that the presence of a heart defect and some facial features suggestive of NS were necessary for making an early diagnosis of NS, while an early diagnosis can be missed in NS patients without a heart defect.

Facial features were present in all patients, being either mildly or markedly expressed. We were unable to identify a distinct pattern suggestive for any molecular subtype or disorder, with the only exception of the occurrence of ‘coarse’ appearance in infants with CS. This finding is in agreement with the conclusions of a recently published study [Allanson et al., 2010]. Protruding tongue was found in all patients with NS/LAH and CS, and in a large proportion of NS newborns and infants with a SOS1 mutation.

Feeding problems caused by failure to thrive were highly common in patients with CFCS, CS, and NS/LAH. They consisted of poor suck and slow feeding with recurrent vomiting, requiring tube feeding or gastrostomy during the first year of life. The degree of growth deficiency appears related to severity of the feeding problems and CHD, in particular in the presence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Delayed developmental milestones and hypotonia were found in approximately half of mutation-positive patients, and, in general, developmental delay was milder in babies with PTPN11 mutations, and more severe in those with CFCS and CS. Length of hospitalization and the degree of poor growth were likely related to delayed motor development, but a possible relationship with the molecular defect cannot be excluded. This is consistent with previous surveys in older patients pointing to a more severe impairment in the presence of mutations affecting the downstream components of the RAS-MAPK pathway [Cesarini et al., 2009; Pierpont et al., 2009]. Discordance in prevalence of delayed developmental milestones in different ages is found in patients with LS associated with PTPN11 mutations (table 4), with a lower occurrence in older patients.

Epilepsy was found in 40% of infants with CFCS associated with BRAF mutations, in 25% of CS individuals, and only in one case of NS due to PTPN11 mutation.

Among ocular defects, coloboma and microphthalmia were seen in patients with PTPN11 mutations, while cataract, nystagmus and visus defects occurred in CFCS patients with BRAF and MEK2 mutations and in patients with Costello syndrome.

Laryngomalacia was present in patients with RAF1 and HRAS gene mutations.

Ectodermal and skin features are hallmarks for differentiating RASopathies during childhood and adolescence (table 4). Consistent with the distinctive hair anomalies (i.e., easily pluckable, sparse, thin, slow-growing hair characterized by an anagen stage of hair follicle development and bulbs lacking internal and external root sheats) associated with the p.Ser2Gly SHOC2 substitution [Mazzanti et al., 2003; Cordeddu et al., 2009], abnormal hair features compatible with a loose anagen hair condition was invariantly observed during the first year of life in patients with the invariant SHOC2 mutation. Of note, thin, sparse and/or wispy hair occurred preferentially in association with NRAS, BRAF, MEK1, and HRAS mutations, while normal hair was generally observed in association with PTPN11, SOS1 and RAF1 mutations. Hair was often lacking in the first year of life in patients with CFCS caused by BRAF or MEK2 mutations, in which an eczematous skull skin was also present (table 4). These findings indicate that hair characteristics might significantly change with time, as in the case of CS, which is characterized by the distinctive curly and kinky hair structure observed during childhood and adulthood.

Lentigines and café-au-lait spots were found in infants with LS-causing PTPN11 mutations, while keratosis pilaris over the face and the extensor surfaces and eczema were documented to be more common in those with SOS1, SHOC2 and BRAF mutations. Generalized neonatal ichthyosis was found in single patients with SHOC2 and MEK2 mutations. Of note, all these skin features were present in the first months of life, with the only exception of lentigines, which developed in 9 of the 11 cases with molecularly confirmed LS after the second year of life (table 4) [Digilio et al., 2006a].

In conclusion, analysis of clinical features in the present series of patients with RASopathies assessed during the first year of life suggests that the following characteristics can be useful for early prediction of the molecular subtype of the disorder: (1) anatomic type of CHD, (2) severity of feeding difficulties and developmental milestones, (3) hair and skin anomalies. In contrast, facial features are useful in making the general diagnosis of RASopathy, but are not helpful in determining the specific molecular subtype. While larger cohorts are required to attain a more accurate clinical definition of each condition during the neonatal period and infancy, the documented correlations denote that a subset of features can direct towards a prompt diagnosis, and a more effective patient management and genetic counseling.

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to the patients and families who participated in the study. This research was funded by grants from Telethon-Italy (GGP10020), ‘Associazione Italiana Sindromi di Costello e cardiofaciocutanea’ and ERA-Net for research programs on rare diseases 2009 (European network on Noonan syndrome and related disorders) to M.T.

References

  1. Allanson JE. Noonan syndrome. J Med Genet. 1987;24:9–13. doi: 10.1136/jmg.24.1.9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Allanson JE, Bohring A, Dorr H-G, Dufke A, Gillessen-Kaesbach G, et al. The face of Noonan syndrome: Does phenotype predict genotype. Am J Med Genet. 2010;152A:1960–1966. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.33518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aoki Y, Niihori T, Kawame H, Kurosawa K, Ohashi H, et al. Germline mutations in HRAS proto-oncogene cause Costello syndrome. Nat Genet. 2005;37:1038–1040. doi: 10.1038/ng1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Carta C, Pantaleoni F, Bocchinfuso G, Stella L, Vasta I, et al. Germline missense mutations affecting KRAS isoform B are associated with a severe Noonan syndrome phenotype. Am J Hum Genet. 2006;79:129–135. doi: 10.1086/504394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cesarini L, Alfieri P, Pantaloni F, Vasta I, Cerutti M, et al. Cognitive profile of disorders associated with dysregulation of the RAS/MAPK signaling cascade. Am J Med Genet. 2009;149A:140–146. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.32488. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cirstea IC, Kutsche K, Dvorsky R, Gremer L, Carta C, et al. A restricted spectrum of NRAS mutations causes Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2010;42:27–29. doi: 10.1038/ng.497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cordeddu V, Di Schiavi E, Pennacchio LA, Ma'ayan A, Sarkozy A, et al. Mutation of SHOC2 promotes aberrant protein N-myristoylation and causes Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair. Nat Genet. 2009;41:1022–1028. doi: 10.1038/ng.425. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Costello JM. A new syndrome: mental subnormality and nasal papillomata. Aust Paediatr J. 1977;13:114–118. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.1977.tb01135.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Digilio MC, Conti E, Sarkozy A, Mingarelli R, Dottorini T, et al. Grouping of multiple-lentigines/LEOPARD and Noonan syndromes on the PTPN11 gene. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;71:389–394. doi: 10.1086/341528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Digilio MC, Sarkozy A, de Zorzi A, Pacileo G, Limongelli G, et al. LEOPARD syndrome: clinical diagnosis in the first year of life. Am J Med Genet. 2006a;140A:740–746. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Digilio MC, Sarkozy A, Pacileo G, Limongelli G, Marino B, et al. PTPN11 gene mutations: linking the Gln510Glu mutation to the ‘LEOPARD syndrome phenotype’. Eur J Pediatr. 2006b;165:803–805. doi: 10.1007/s00431-006-0163-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Digilio MC, Sarkozy A, Capolino R, Chiarini Testa MB, Esposito G, et al. Costello syndrome: clinical diagnosis in the first year of life. Eur J Pediatr. 2007;167:621–628. doi: 10.1007/s00431-007-0558-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Digilio MC, Marino B, Sarkozy A, Versacci P, Dallapiccola B. The heart in Ras-MAPK pathway disorders. In: Zenker M, editor. Noonan Syndrome and Related Disorders. Basel: Karger; 2009. Monogr Hum Genet 17:109–118. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gorlin RJ, Anderson RC, Blaw M. Multiple lentigines syndrome. Am J Dis Child. 1969;117:652–662. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1969.02100030654006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Gripp KW. Tumor predisposition in Costello syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2005;137C:72–77. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.30065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hennekam RC. Costello syndrome: an overview. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2003;117C:42–48. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.10019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Kerr B, Delrue MA, Sigaudy S, Perveen R, Marche M, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlation in Costello syndrome: HRAS mutation analysis in 43 cases. J Med Genet. 2006;4:401–405. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2005.040352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Legius E, Schrander-Stumpel C, Schollen E, Pulles-Heintzberger C, Gewillig M, Fryns JP. PTPN11 mutations in LEOPARD syndrome. J Med Genet. 2002;39:571–574. doi: 10.1136/jmg.39.8.571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Limongelli G, Pacileo G, Marino B, Digilio MC, Sarkozy A, et al. Prevalence and clinical significance of cardiovascular abnormalities in patients with the LEOPARD syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:736–741. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.03.093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Martinelli S, De Luca A, Stellacci E, Rossi C, Checquolo S, et al. Heterozygous germline mutations in the CBL tumor supressor gene cause a Noonan syndrome-like phenotype. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;87:250–257. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.06.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Mazzanti L, Cacciari E, Cicognani A, Bergamaschi R, Scarano E, Forabosco A. Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair: a new syndrome? Am J Med Genet. 2003;118A:279–286. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.10923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nava C, Hanna N, Michot C, Pereira S, Pouvreau N, et al. Cardio-facio-cutaneous and Noonan syndromes due to mutations in the RAS/MAPK signaling pathway: genoype-phenotype relationships and overlap with Costello syndrome. J Med Genet. 2007;44:763–771. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2007.050450. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Niemeyer CM, Kang MW, Shin DH, Furlan I, Erlacher M, et al. Germline CBL mutations cause developmental abnormalities and predispose to juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia. Nat Genet. 2010;42:794–800. doi: 10.1038/ng.641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Niihori T, Aoki Y, Narumi Y, Neri G, Cavé H, et al. Germline KRAS and BRAF mutations in cardio-facio-cutaneous syndrome. Nat Genet. 2006;38:294–296. doi: 10.1038/ng1749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Noonan JA. Noonan syndrome. An update and review for the primary pediatrician. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1994;33:548–555. doi: 10.1177/000992289403300907. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Pandit B, Sarkozy A, Pennacchio LA, Carta C, Oishi K, et al. Gain-of-function RAF1 mutations cause Noonan and LEOPARD syndromes with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Nat Genet. 2007;39:1007–1012. doi: 10.1038/ng2073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Perez B, Mechinaud F, Galambrun C, Romdhane NB, Isidor B, et al. Germline mutations in the CBL gene define a new genetic syndrome with predisposition to juvenile myelomonocytic leukaemia. J Med Genet. 2010;47:686–691. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2010.076836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Pierpont EI, Pierpont ME, Mendelsohn NJ, Roberts AE, Tworog-Dube E, Seidenberg MS. Genotype differences in cognitive functioning in Noonan syndrome. Genes Brain Behav. 2009;8:275–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-183X.2008.00469.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Razzaque MA, Nishizawa T, Komoike Y, Yagi H, Furutani M, et al. Germline gain-of-function mutations in RAF1 cause Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2007;39:1013–1017. doi: 10.1038/ng2078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Reynolds JF, Neri G, Herrmann JP, Blumberg B, Coldwell JG, et al. New multiple congenital anomalies/mental retardation syndrome with cardio-facio-cutaneous involvement – the CFC syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 1986;25:413–427. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.1320250303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Roberts A, Allanson J, Jadico SK, Kavamura MI, Noonan J, et al. The cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome. J Med Genet. 2006;43:833–842. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2006.042796. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Roberts AE, Araki T, Swanson KD, Montgomery KT, Schiripo TA, et al. Germline gain-of-function mutations in SOS1 cause Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2007;39:70–74. doi: 10.1038/ng1926. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Rodriguez-Viciana P, Tetsu O, Tidyman WE, Estep AL, Conger BA, et al. Germline mutations in genes within the MAPK pathway cause cardio-facio-cutaneous syndrome. Science. 2006;311:1287–1290. doi: 10.1126/science.1124642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Sarkozy A, Conti E, Seripa D, Digilio MC, Grifone N, et al. Correlation between PTPN11 gene mutations and congenital heart defects in Noonan and LEOPARD syndromes. J Med Genet. 2003;40:704–708. doi: 10.1136/jmg.40.9.704. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sarkozy A, Carta C, Moretti S, Zampino G, Digilio MC, et al. Germline BRAF mutations in Noonan, LEOPARD, and cardiofaciocutaneous syndromes: molecular diversity and associated phenotypic spectrum. Hum Mut. 2009a;30:695–702. doi: 10.1002/humu.20955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Sarkozy A, Digilio MC, Zampino G, Dallapiccola B, Tartaglia M, Gelb BD. LEOPARD syndrome: clinical aspects and molecular pathogenesis. In: Zenker M, editor. Noonan Syndrome and Related Disorders. Basel: Kargel; 2009b. Monogr Hum Genet 17:55–65. [Google Scholar]
  37. Schubbert S, Zenker M, Rowe SL, Böll S, Klei C, et al. Germline KRAS mutations cause Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2006;38:331–336. doi: 10.1038/ng1748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Schubbert S, Bollag G, Shannon K. Deregulated Ras signalling in developmental disorders: new tricks for an old dog. Curr Opinion Genet Dev. 2007;17:15–22. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2006.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Tartaglia M, Mehler EL, Goldberg R, Zampino G, Brunner HG, et al. Mutations in PTPN11, encoding the protein tyrosine phosphatase SHP-2, cause Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2001;29:465–468. doi: 10.1038/ng772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Tartaglia M, Mehler EL, Goldberg R, Zampino G, Brunner HG, et al. PTPN11 mutations in Noonan syndrome: Molecular spectrum, genotype-phenotype correlation, and phenotypic heterogeneity. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;70:1555–1563. doi: 10.1086/340847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Tartaglia M, Pennacchio LA, Zhao C, Yadav KK, Fodale V, et al. Gain-of-function SOS1 mutations cause a distinctive form of Noonan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2007;39:75–79. doi: 10.1038/ng1939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Tartaglia M, Zampino G, Gelb BD. Noonan syndrome: Clinical aspects and molecular pathogenesis. Mol Syndromol. 2010;1:2–26. doi: 10.1159/000276766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Tidyman WE, Rauen KA. The RASopathies: developmental syndromes of Ras/MAPK pathway dysregulation. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2009;19:230–236. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2009.04.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. van der Burgt I. Noonan syndrome. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;2:4. doi: 10.1186/1750-1172-2-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Voron DA, Hatfield HH, Kalkhoff RK. Multiple lentigines syndrome. Case report and review of the literature. Am J Med. 1976;60:447–456. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(76)90764-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Zampino G, Pantaleoni F, Carta C, Cobellis G, Vasta I, et al. Diversity, parental germline origin, and phenotypic spectrum of de novo HRAS missense changes in Costello syndrome. Hum Mutat. 2007;28:265–272. doi: 10.1002/humu.20431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Zenker M, Buheitel G, Rauch R, Koenig R, Bosse K, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlations in Noonan syndrome. J Pediatr. 2004;144:368–374. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2003.11.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Zenker M, Horn D, Wieczorek D, Allanson J, Pauli S, et al. SOS1 is the second most common Noonan gene but plays no major role in cardio-facio-cutaneous syndrome. J Med Genet. 2007;44:651–656. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2007.051276. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Molecular Syndromology are provided here courtesy of Karger Publishers

RESOURCES