HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: jcp.2006.042010v1 60/11/1244    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kingston, J. Articles by Worwood, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kingston, J. Articles by Worwood, M.

Heteroduplex analysis for the three common HFE variants: methodology, reliablity and analysis of over 5000 requests for testing

¹ Department of Haematology, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff
² Department of Haematology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff
³ Department of Haematology, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, Wales

Correspondence to:
Professor Mark Worwood, Department of Haematology, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN; worwood{at}cf.ac.uk

Objective: To describe the analysis of over 5300 patient samples for the HFE genotype.

Methods: Blood samples received from hospitals in England, Wales and Ireland were analysed with a single, multiplex PCR using heteroduplex generators for the C282Y, H63D and S65C variants of the HFE gene. PCR products labelled with fluorescent dyes were analysed by capillary electrophoresis. Genotype frequencies were analysed according to the reasons given for testing.

Results: Analysis of 400 samples sent in duplicate revealed one error that was associated with reporting rather than the methodology. Of 5327 samples received, 1122 were for family testing, 2470 for diagnostic testing and in 1735 cases no reason was given. Overall, homozygosity for C282Y was found in 14% of samples received for family testing and in 16% of the remaining samples. Clinical indications such as "liver disease" were of little predictive value for homozygosity for C282Y, but this increased if a raised serum ferritin concentration or transferrin saturation was indicated. When the diagnosis was iron overload, 39% of subjects tested were homozygous for C282Y. Compound heterozygosity (C282Y/H63D) was more frequent than in the general population but the frequency was not further increased in subjects for whom there was a diagnosis of iron overload. The frequencies of heterozygosity for H63D or S65C and homozygosity for H63D were not significantly increased in any group compared with the general population frequency.

Conclusion: These results demonstrate the reliability of the methodology and confirm the difficulty of identifying genetic haemochromatosis purely on the basis of clinical suspicion that haemochromatosis may be responsible for liver disease, diabetes or arthritis.

Abbreviations: HH, hereditary haemochromatosis; ?HH, suspected haemochromatosis