Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonsyndromic craniosynostosis is one of the most common anomalies treated by craniofacial surgeons. Despite optimal surgical management, nearly half of affected children have subtle neurocognitive deficits. Whereas timing and type of surgical intervention have been studied, the possibility of genetic influence on neurodevelopment in nonsyndromic craniosynostosis patients remains unexplored. METHODS: The authors performed whole-exome sequencing for 404 case-parent trios with sporadic nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the burden of de novo mutations in cases compared to both expectation and 1789 healthy control trios. Individuals with and without each mutation class were analyzed, and the presence or absence of various types of neurodevelopmental delay were recorded alongside demographic information. RESULTS: The authors identified a highly significant burden of damaging de novo mutations in mutation-intolerant [probability of loss of function intolerance (pLI) >0.9] genes in nonsyndromic craniosynostosis probands (p = 5.9 × 10-6). Children with these mutations had a two-fold higher incidence of neurodevelopmental delay (p = 0.001) and a more than 20-fold greater incidence of intellectual disability (p = 7.2 × 10-7), and were 3.6-fold more likely to have delays that persisted past 5 years of age (p = 4.4 × 10-4) in comparison with children with nonsyndromic craniosynostosis without these mutations. Transmitted loss of function mutations in high-pLI genes also conferred a 1.9-fold greater risk of neurodevelopmental delay (p = 4.5 ×10-4). CONCLUSIONS: These findings implicate genetic lesions concurrently impacting neurodevelopment and cranial morphogenesis in the pathoetiology of nonsyndromic craniosynostosis and identify a strong genetic influence on neurodevelopmental outcomes in affected children. These findings may eventually prove useful in determining which children with nonsyndromic craniosynostosis are most likely to benefit from surgical intervention. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.