Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Diagnostic DNA testing and consent
  1. Rajith de Silva1
  1. 1Department of Neurology, Essex Centre for Neurological Sciences, Queen’s Hospital, Romford, Essex RM7 0AG, UK

    Statistics from

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    In Richard Davenport’s description of an individual with ataxia harbouring an FMR1 gene permutation in the October issue of Practical Neurology,1 the patient’s detailed family history is not explored. This may occasionally provide a clue to the diagnosis. I am seeing a late middle-aged patient with a seven year history of tremor and ataxia, whose diagnosis emerged when her daughter’s son was diagnosed with fragile X syndrome. (In a case report entitled Genetics in reverse, Chinnery et al described a similar scenario.2) In Davenport’s case, one presumes that the diagnosis was achieved by applying the newly described test on a repository of undiagnosed patients’ DNA samples. Indeed he recommends retaining (DNA) samples on patients for future “diagnostic” use. The level of consent required for retaining and testing such specimens is not specified. As exemplified by FMR1 premutation cases, the implications on future …

    View Full Text