Key result
A patient presenting with atypical Duchenne muscular dystrophy was found to have a coincidental pathogenic variant in FLNA, confirming the rare co-occurrence of DMD and frontometaphyseal dysplasia 1.
Case Report (n=1)
No
When a single genetic diagnosis does not fully explain a patient's atypical clinical features, expanded genetic testing is necessary to identify potential co-occurring genetic diseases.
May warrant expanded testing for atypical DMD; confirms rare FLNA co-occurrence but leaves prevalence open.
Herein, we present a rare case of co-occurring Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and frontometaphyseal dysplasia 1 (FMD1), two different X-linked diseases, in a 7-year-old boy. He presented with proximal muscle weakness and elevated creatine phosphokinase levels. A multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification study ofDMDrevealed thede novoduplications of exons 2–37, thereby confirming the diagnosis of DMD. Initial evaluation revealed atypical features, such as facial dysmorphism, multiple joint contractures, and severe scoliosis, at an early age. However, these were overlooked and were assumed to be atypical manifestations of DMD. Then, the patient's maternal cousin was diagnosed with FMD1 with pathogenic missense variant inFLNA(NM_001110556.2: c.3557C>T/p.Ser1186Leu). A family genetic test revealed that the patient and his mother had the same pathogenic variant inFLNA. The patient's atypical manifestations were considered symptoms of FMD1. Therefore, if one disease does not fully explain the patient's clinical features, an expanded genetic study is needed to detect coincidental disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2021) conducted a case report in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and Frontometaphyseal Dysplasia 1 (n=1). Genetic testing was evaluated. A patient presenting with atypical Duchenne muscular dystrophy was found to have a coincidental pathogenic variant in FLNA, confirming the rare co-occurrence of DMD and frontometaphyseal dysplasia 1.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: