Caryologia. International Journal of Cytology, Cytosystematics and Cytogenetics 78(1): 59-66, 2025 Firenze University Press https://riviste.fupress.net/index.php/caryologiaCaryologia International Journal of Cytology, Cytosystematics and Cytogenetics ISSN 0008-7114 (print) | ISSN 2165-5391 (online) | DOI: 10.36253/caryologia-3030 Citation: Rocha, R. B., Benzaquem, D. C., Passos, P. S., Silva, E. K. C., Carvalho, N. D. M., Neves, D. B. S., Silva, P. R. L., & Fantin, C. (2025). Cytogenetic diagnosis of patients with suspected premature ovarian failure in Manaus, Brazil. Caryologia 78(1): 59-66. doi: 10.36253/caryologia-3030 Received: September 20, 2024 Accepted: June 21, 2025 Published: October 1, 2025 © 2025 Author(s). This is an open access, peer-reviewed article pub- lished by Firenze University Press (https://www.fupress.com) and distrib- uted, except where otherwise noted, under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License for content and CC0 1.0 Uni- versal for metadata. Data Availability Statement: All rel- evant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. Competing Interests: The Author(s) declare(s) no conflict of interest. Cytogenetic diagnosis of patients with suspected premature ovarian failure in Manaus, Brazil Ruan Barboza Rocha1, Denise Corrêa Benzaquem1, Paloma de Sousa Passos1, Evellyn Karine Cruz da Silva1, Natália Dayane Moura Car- valho2, Daria Barroso Serrão das Neves3, Paula Rita Leite da Silva3, Cleiton Fantin1,* 1 Laboratório de Citogenética Humana, Universidade do Estado do Amazonas, Manaus, Brasil 2 Instituto de Saúde e Biotecnologia, Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Coari, Brasil 3 Departamento de Ginecologia, Universidade do Estado do Amazonas, Manaus, Brasil *Corresponding author. Email: cfantin@uea.edu.br Abstract. Premature ovarian failure (POF) is a clinical syndrome that is characterized by loss of ovarian function in women of childbearing age and generally occurs before the age of 40. Genetic causes account for about 20 to 25% of cases of POF. However, in many cases, the origin of the condition remains idiopathic. The objective of this study was to perform cytogenetic research in a group of patients affected by POF in order to identify the type and frequency of chromosomal alterations. Fifteen patients were referred to the Human Cytogenetics Laboratory of the Amazonas State Univer- sity (UEA) by gynecology specialists from two public health institutions in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil, for chromosomal analysis. The analysis was performed via periph- eral blood lymphocyte culture using the GTG banding method. The karyotypes were assembled with the help of the GeneAll-HD® software and the results were interpreted according to the ISCN 2016 standards. Of the fifteen patients analyzed, nine (60%) had no chromosomal abnormalities, while six (40%) exhibited chromosomal abnor- malities. Of the alterations identified, three patients (20%) presented numerical alter- ations of the X chromosome with mosaicism, two patients (13%) showed autosomal numerical alterations involving chromosomes 15 and 21, both with mosaicism, and one patient (7%) exhibited a structural alteration in the form of terminal deletion of the long arm of the X chromosome. The results obtained in this study have the poten- tial to improve the accuracy of the diagnosis, assist in medical decisions, provide ade- quate prognoses and facilitate reproductive management through genetic counseling. Keywords: Premature Ovarian Failure, G-band karyotype, chromosomal alterations, X chromosome, medical diagnosis. INTRODUCTION Premature ovarian failure (POF) is a clinical syndrome that is defined by the loss of ovarian function in women of childbearing age, generally before https://riviste.fupress.net/index.php/caryologia https://doi.org/10.36253/caryologia-3030 https://doi.org/10.36253/caryologia-3030 https://www.fupress.com https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode mailto:cfantin@uea.edu.br 60 Ruan Barboza Rocha et al. the age of 40. The main symptoms of POF are menstrual disorders such as amenorrhea or oligomenorrhea, as well as having high levels of gonadotropins and low levels of estradiol. These symptoms result in hypoestrogenic and hypergonadotropic clinical pictures (Goswami and Con- way 2005; Eshre 2016; Chon 2021). The first reports of this syndrome were made in 1942 by Fuller Albright, who named the condition “primary ovarian failure” (Albright 1942). The overall incidence of POF is estimated to be approximately 1% in women aged under 40 and 0.1% in women under 30 (Rahman and Panay 2021). In the mid and long term, this condition can cause an increase in cardiovascular diseases, a decrease in bone mineral den- sity with a risk of osteoporosis, and a progressive decline in fertility with neurological effects, resulting in a gener- al reduction in the woman’s life expectancy (Podfigurna- Stopa et al. 2016; Wesevich 2020). The etiology of POF is highly heterogeneous and causes can be genetic, autoimmune, metabolic, infec- tious and iatrogenic (Jiao et al. 2012; Qin 2015). Genetic causes account for approximately 20 to 25% of patients with POF (Ayed et al. 2014; Qin 2015; Luo et al. 2023). The most common genetic cause of POF is alterations involving the X chromosome. These changes can be of the numerical type, such as monosomy X, trisomy X, mosaicism X, or structural changes, such as deletions X, X-autosome translocations and isochromosomes (Hol- land 2001; Baronchelli et al. 2011). In the diagnosis of POF, a complete gynecologi- cal evaluation is carried out with physical, biochemical and imaging examinations, which mainly include the measurement of high gonadotropin levels and low estra- diol levels in patients under the age of 40 years who have symptoms of oligomenorrhea or amenorrhea lasting at least 4 months. The specialist can ascertain this condi- tion when examining women with menstrual disorders. In cases of secondary amenorrhea, it is necessary to exclude pregnancy by examining serum levels of beta- hCG. After confirming the diagnosis of POF through physical and biochemical examinations, due to its heter- ogeneity, it becomes necessary to request complementary examinations, such as cytogenetic analyses including karyotyping, in order to determine the etiology (Eshre 2016; Jankowska 2017). Cytogenetic and molecular investigations of these alterations have allowed us to identify two critical regions in the long arm of the X chromosome, in Xq13- q21 and Xq26-27 (Powell et al. 1994; Sala et al. 1997). Although chromosomal alterations primarily involve the X chromosome, an increasing number of alterations involving autosomal chromosomes have been reported in the literature (Goswami and Conway 2005). Chro- mosomal abnormalities have long been recognized as a frequent cause of POF, with widely varying percentages reported in the literature in both primary and secondary amenorrhea, thus suggesting the need for cytogenetic analyses (Lakhal et al. 2010; Ceylaner et al. 2010; Kalan- tari et al. 2013; Ayed et al 2014). Nonetheless, in most cases, the etiopathogenesis of this condition still remains idiopathic (Rudnicka et al. 2018). Given the strong impact of the disease on the qual- ity of life of these women, it is important to highlight the value of cytogenetic investigations, including karyotyp- ing, which can be requested for women affected by POF, in order to detect the presence of chromosomal altera- tions that may be associated with this condition (Di-Bat- tista 2020). In Brazil, most studies involving the cytoge- netic diagnosis in women affected with POF are concen- trated in the southern and southeastern regions of the country and cytogenetic investigations related to POF in the state of Amazonas have not yet been carried out. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to conduct cytogenetic analyses in patients affected by this condi- tion. The results obtained have the potential to offer crucial information to the medical and scientific com- munity of the northern region of Brazil. These findings not only fill a gap in current knowledge, but also have the potential to drive the development of more effective prevention and treatment strategies for POF. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients A prospective study was conducted in patients with suspected premature ovarian failure who were seen at two public health institutions in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil: the department of Climacteric, Gynecology and Mastol- ogy in the Araújo Lima outpatient clinic at the Getúlio Vargas University Hospital (HUGV), and the department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at the Codajás Polyclinic. The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: patients treated by the Unified Health System (SUS) in Manaus, Amazonas, and affected by POF according to the guidelines of the European Society of Human Repro- duction and Embryology ESHRE (Eshre 2016). Criteria for diagnosis of POF included: (I) primary or secondary oligo/amenorrhea for at least four consecutive months before the age of 40. (II) high levels of FSH >25 IU/mL and low levels of estradiol <20 pg/mL in the blood, (III) in two dosages more than 4 weeks apart. Patients with conditions known to induce POF, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy and ovarian surgery, were excluded. 61Cytogenetic diagnosis of patients with suspected premature ovarian failure in Manaus, Brazil The study was approved by the Ethics Commit- tee of the Universidade do Estado do Amazonas (UEA), under CAAE number 95704617.0.0000.5016. The par- ticipation of the patients was voluntary and an informed consent form was signed by all the participants. A total of 15 patients were referred to the Human Cytogenetics Laboratory of the Universidade do Estado do Amazonas, where 5 mL of peripheral blood was collected by veni- puncture with a disposable sterile syringe for subsequent culture of lymphocytes. Cytogenetic analysis The karyotype analysis was performed using periph- eral blood lymphocyte cultures following the methodol- ogy described by Moorhead et al. (1960), with modifi- cations. The GTG-banding technique was performed according to Seabright (1973), with modifications. The resolution obtained was 400-500 bands per genome. The karyotype was determined using an optical microscope (Coleman® Trinocular N126T-Infinito Plano Led), with 30 metaphases per patient being analyzed and, in cases of suspected mosaicism, this number was increased to 50 metaphases. The metaphases were photographed using ScopeImage software (version 9.0) and karyotyped using GeneAll-HD software. The results obtained from the GTG-banding were interpreted according to the norms present in the International System for Human Cytoge- netic Nomenclature ISCN (McGowan-Jordan 2016). Statistical analysis Statistical analyses were performed based on data obtained from patient records, which were compiled and analyzed using Microsoft Excel® software. The relative frequency of the following parameters were obtained: distribution of the results of the normal and altered kar- yotypes involved (autosomal or sexual); and were rela- tive to the frequency of chromosomal analyses in POF patients. RESULTS Between April 2022 and February 2023, chromo- somal analyses were conducted at the Laboratory of Human Cytogenetics (UEA) in 15 patients suspected of premature ovarian failure (POF). The results revealed that nine of these patients (60%) presented a normal karyotype 46,XX, without any numerical or structur- al chromosomal alterations, representing the majority of the cases analyzed. However, in six patients (40%), numerical or structural chromosomal alterations involv- ing autosomal chromosomes and the X chromosome were identified (Table 1). The prevalence of chromosomal alterations found in patients with POF was as follows: 20% of the patients presented numerical alterations of the monosomy type of the X chromosome with mosaicism, while 13% dem- onstrated numerical alterations in autosomal chromo- somes, including pairs 15 and 21, both with mosaicism (Figure 1). In addition, 7% of patients exhibited a struc- tural alteration characterized by a terminal deletion in the long arm of the X chromosome (Figure 2). DISCUSSION According to Chen et al. (2023), the cytogenetic analy- sis of blood lymphocytes, using the karyotype, is an impor- tant tool in the detection of chromosomal alterations, both numerical and structural, and plays a crucial role in under- standing the underlying genetic causes of POF. This work is the first cytogenetic study using periph- eral blood of a population of women affected by POF in the northern region of Brazil, since most studies involv- ing cytogenetic diagnosis in women with POF are per- formed in the southern and southeastern regions of the country. In our study, six patients with POF were iden- tified as having numerical or structural chromosomal alterations involving both autosomal chromosomes and the X chromosome, with these alterations representing 40% of the total number of cases. Table 1. Chromosomal abnormalities found in patients with POF. Nº Age Alterations Chromosome Karyotype 001 19 Numerical-Monosomy-Mosaic Sexual 45,X[4]/46,XX[46] 002 36 Numerical-Monosomy-Mosaic Sexual 45,X[3]/46,XX[47] 003 37 Numerical-Monosomy-Mosaic Sexual 45,X[4]/46,XX[46] 004 34 Numerical-Monosomy-Mosaic Autosomal 45,XX,-15[6]/46,XX[44] 005 34 Numerical-Monosomy-Mosaic Autosomal 45,XX,-21[5]/46,XX[45] 006 22 Structural-Deletion-Non-mosaic Sexual 46,X,del(X)(q22-24;qter) 62 Ruan Barboza Rocha et al. One study conducted in patients affected by POF who were submitted to karyotype examinations in a public community genetics service in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, demonstrated that 41 (29%) of the 141 confirmed cases presented numerical and struc- tural alterations related to the X chromosome (Rosa et al. 2008). In another retrospective study involving 43 women affected by POF, conducted in public genetic ser- vices of the southern region of the country, Besson et al. (2023) identified, mainly in the X chromosome, numeri- cal and structural chromosomal alterations in 14 (32.6%) of the participating women. Our results also resemble those of a Turkish cytoge- netic study involving women affected by POF, which identified a prevalence of chromosomal alterations in 39 (52%) of the 75 participating patients (Ceylaner et al. 2010). On the other hand, in another Turkish cytoge- netic study, a lower prevalence of numerical and struc- tural chromosomal alterations involving both autosomal chromosomes and the X chromosome was identified in 44 (25%) of the 175 cases analyzed in women with POF (Geckinli et al. 2014). In an Egyptian cytogenetic study involving 30 women with POF, it was observed that sev- en cases (23.3%) had chromosomal alterations, including numerical and structural alterations in the X chromo- some (Issa and Elhady 2022). In a Chinese cytogenetic study, chromosomal altera- tions were present in 64 (12.1%) of the 531 cases of POF analyzed (Jiao et al. 2012). In addition, a study involving Tunisian women with POF showed that 10.8% (108) of the 1,000 patients submitted to karyotype analysis had chromosomal alterations, mainly numerical ones of the X chromosome (Lakhal et al. 2010). Significant differenc- es in the percentage of chromosomal alterations identi- fied in various studies involving POF may be associated with ethnicity (Luborsky 2003). Luborsky et al. (2003) conducted a multi-ethnic epidemiological study and identified variations in the occurrence of POF, with the largest differences observed in Caucasian, African Amer- ican and Hispanic women. Thus, the prevalence of POF may present ethnical differences, as well as regional ones due to lifestyle and environmental factors, which still need to be more fully investigated (Ishizuka 2021). In our study, we identified that the highest preva- lence of chromosomal abnormalities was of X chromo- some monosomy, with a low frequency of mosaicism in three patients, representing 20% of the cases analyzed. The result obtained here is in line with what was found in a study that investigated women with POF and identi- fied a 21.9% prevalence of chromosomal alterations with the presence of low frequency mosaicism of the X chro- mosome in the cases analyzed (Gersak and Veble 2011). The most common chromosomal alteration in a cytogenetic study involving 179 Iranian women was X-chromosome mosaicism, which was present in 27.77% of cases (Kalantari 2013). It is said in the literature that karyotypes 45,X, with or without mosaicism, in numeri- cal alterations of the X chromosome, can manifest them- selves clinically with symptoms of primary or secondary amenorrhea (Turkyilmaz 2022). X-chromosome mosai- cism is usually associated with sexual development and abnormal reproductive performance in women, resulting in infertility, recurrent miscarriages and cases of POF (Gersak and Veble 2011). The results confirm previous observations and emphasize the critical role of alterations involving the X chromosome, with low frequency mosaicism, as one of the possible etiologies of POF (Ceylaner et al. 2010). Two intact X chromosomes are essential for the main- tenance of ovarian function, since many genes that are likely involved in ovarian function escape X inactivation Figure 1. Frequency of the results from the karyotypic analyses in POF patients. Figure 2. Karyotype with deletion on the long arm of the X chro- mosome, 46,X,del(X)(q22-24;qter). 63Cytogenetic diagnosis of patients with suspected premature ovarian failure in Manaus, Brazil and are necessary for normal ovarian function, devel- opment, and maintenance (Davison 1999; Zinn 2001). In addition, low-frequency mosaicism involving the X chromosome can influence the survival rate and acceler- ate the aging of ovarian cells through different mecha- nisms, including a decrease in the number of germ cells or acceleration of their postnatal destruction and early oocyte atresia (Neves et al. 2020; Issa and Elhady 2022). Other numerical alterations of the monosomy type, involving autosomal chromosomes 15 and 21, were observed in our study. The alterations were found in two nulliparous patients (34-year-old monozygotic twin sisters), representing 13% of the cases. In both cases, a low-frequency mosaicism was observed. The literature describes that POF is related to familial occurrence in about 12% to 15% of cases (Van Kasteren et al. 1999; Ferrarini et al. 2013; Franić et al. 2016; Rudnicka et al. 2018). To date, in the literature, there have been no reports of patients with POF who presented the absence of autosomal chromosomes 15 or 21 in their karyotypes. However, Hosseini et al. (2011), reported a case of a 27-year-old Iranian woman affected by POF who pre- sented a balanced translocation between autosomal chromosomes 15 and 21. The literature describes the occurrence of partial deletion of 21q in a case of a wom- an affected by POF (Zeng 2019). Another case of POF was reported in a 36-year-old woman, in which cytoge- netic analyses revealed the presence of a supernumerary marker, which was characterized by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and comparative genomic hybridi- zation (array CGH). The marker was derived from chro- mosome 15 and contained only heterochromatic mate- rial (Bertini 2012). Another study identified a patient with POF who had an autosomal mosaicism involving trisomy 21 (Baronchelli et al. 2011). Other autosomal chromosome-related changes have been identified in patients with POF; in a study conduct- ed by Issa et al. (2022), reciprocal translocations between the X chromosome and chromosome 9 were found. In another study, conducted by Jiao et al. (2012), a Robert- sonian translocation between chromosomes 13 and 14 was identified in women affected by POF. Regarding the structural alterations identified in the present study, we found one patient (7%) who presented a terminal deletion in the long arm of an X chromo- some in all the metaphases examined. Similar findings were observed in a cytogenetic study in women affected by POF in Egypt, which identified a terminal deletion in the long arm on one of the X chromosomes, in the absence of mosaicism in all the metaphases analyzed (Issa and Elhady 2022). The complete or partial absence of an X chromosome, as seen in Turner syndrome, leads to ovarian dysgenesis characterized by primary amenor- rhea and phenotypic features such as short stature (Gos- wami and Conway 2005; Portnoi et al. 2006). However, terminal deletions of the chromosome Xq are among the most common cytogenetic alterations. Two critical regions associated with POF have been defined in pre- vious studies on X chromosome rearrangements: Xq13- Xq21 and Xq23-Xq27; these regions have been charac- terized for ovarian development and function (Persani 2009; Beke et al. 2013; Barros 2020; Besson et al. 2023). Previous studies have shown that deletion of both the short arm and the long arm of the X chromosome can result in primary or secondary amenorrhea (Sybert and McCauley 2004). These observations suggest that genes that are important for normal ovarian function are located on both arms of the X chromosome (Cordts 2010). The high frequency of chromosomal alterations found in the present study emphasizes the importance of rou- tine cytogenetic (karyotyping) tests in the investigation of patients affected with POF, for diagnostic definition and adequate genetic counseling for patients and their families. However, even in the face of normal karyotyping results, the possibility of genetic alterations cannot be ruled out, since possible mutations in different genes can cause POF. The most common single-gene cause that results in this condition is pre-mutation of the FMR1 gene, located on the long arm of the X chromosome. This mutation is based on increased expansion of CGG trinucleotide repeats from 55 to 199 in the untranslated region. Patients with this pre-mutation have an increased risk of developing POF (Jin 2012; Rudnicka et al. 2018). Therefore, a more detailed investigation is necessary for these patients and should involve tests using molecu- lar techniques for diagnostic confirmation. CONCLUSION POF continues to be a serious medical problem and significantly affects the patient’s life. In most cases, its etiopathology remains unexplained. The relationship between chromosomal alterations and some cases of POF is clearly demonstrated in the present study. The cytogenetic findings highlight the importance of chro- mosomal analysis via conventional cytogenetics in the investigation of this condition. In most cases, it was pos- sible to identify both numerical (20%) and structural (7%) chromosomal alterations, mainly involving the X chromosome, including low frequency mosaicism, which is directly associated with this condition. In addition, it was possible to detect numerical alterations of the monosomy type involving autosomal 64 Ruan Barboza Rocha et al. chromosomes (13%) referring to pairs 15 and 21. This information is fundamental in clinical practice for the correct diagnosis, adequate prognosis and reproductive management through genetic counseling. Such results aim to contribute to medical decision-making during its diagnosis and help direct a multidisciplinary therapeutic approach by specialists. Early diagnosis of POF is extremely important for maintaining the physical and mental health of these patients, as it can provide etiological explanation, help in the prevention of bone and cardiovascular health, and guide fertility options. Thus, the diagnosis repre- sents a fundamental milestone in promoting the qual- ity of life of these patients. These findings are essential to the understanding of POF and may have significant implications in the diagnosis and management of this condition. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by the Fundação de Amp- aro à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas (FAPEAM) and the Coordenacão de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nív- el Superior (CAPES). REFERENCES Albright F, Smith PH, Fraser R. 1942. A syndrome char- acterized by primary ovarian insufficiency and decreased stature: Report of 11 cases with a digres- sion on hormonal control of axillary and pubic hair. Am J Med Sci. 204(5):625–648. https://doi. org/10.1097/00000441-194211000-00001. Ayed W, Amouri A, Hammami W, Kilani O, Turki Z, Harzallah F, Bouayed-Abdelmoula N, Chemkhi I, Zhioua F, Slama CB, et al. 2014. Cytogenetic abnor- malities in Tunisian women with premature ovar- ian failure. C R Biol. 337(12):691–694. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.crvi.2014.09.003. Baronchelli S, Conconi D, Panzeri E, Bentivegna A, Redaelli S, Lissoni S, Saccheri F, Villa N, Crosti F, Sala E, et al. 2011. Cytogenetics of premature ovar- ian failure: an investigation on 269 affected women. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2011(1):370195. https://doi. org/10.1155/2011/370195. Barros F, Carvalho F, Barros A, Dória S, et al. 2020. Premature ovarian insufficiency: clinical orienta- tions for genetic testing and genetic counseling. Porto Biomed J. 5(3):e62. https://doi.org/10.1097/j. pbj.0000000000000062. Beke A, Piko H, Haltrich I, Csomor J, Matolcsy A, Fekete G, Rigo J, Karcagi V, et al. 2013. Molecular cytoge- netic analysis of Xq critical regions in premature ovarian failure. Mol Cytogenet. 6(1):62. https://doi. org/10.1186/1755-8166-6-62. Bertini V, Viola D, Vitti P, Simi P, Valetto A, et al. 2012. An idic(15) associated with POF (premature ovarian failure): Molecular cytogenetic definition of a case and review of the literature. Gene. 503(1):123–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2012.04.071. Besson M da R, Taiarol M dos S, Fernandes EB, Ghior- zi IB, Nunes MR, Zen PRG, Rosa RFM, et al. 2023. Chromosomal abnormalities detected by karyotyping among patients with secondary amenorrhea: a retro- spective study. Sao Paulo Med J. 141(5). https://doi. org/10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0426.r1.14012023. Geckinli, Toksoy, Sayar, Soylemez, Yesil, Aydın, Kara- man, Devranoglu, et al. 2014. Prevalence of X-ane- uploidies, X-structural abnormalities and 46,XY sex reversal in Turkish women with primary amenor- rhea or premature ovarian insufficiency. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 182:211–215. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.09.033. Ceylaner G, Altinkaya SO, Mollamahmutoglu L, Cey- laner S, et al. 2010. Genetic abnormalities in Turk- ish women with premature ovarian failure. Int J Gynecol Amp Obstet. 110(2):122–124. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.03.023. Chen M, Jiang H, Zhang C. 2023. Selected Genetic Fac- tors Associated with Primary Ovarian Insufficiency. Int J Mol Sci. 24(5):4423. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijms24054423. Chon SJ, Umair Z, Yoon MS. 2021. Premature Ovar- ian Insufficiency: Past, Present, and Future. Front Cell Dev Biol. 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fcell.2021.672890. Cordts EB, Christofolini DM, dos Santos AA, Bianco B, Barbosa CP, et al. 2010. Genetic aspects of prema- ture ovarian failure: a literature review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 283(3):635–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00404-010-1815-4. Davison RM, Davis CJ, Conway GS. 1999. The X chro- mosome and ovarian failure. Clin Endocrinol. 51(6):673–679. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365- 2265.1999.00926.x. Di-Battista A, Moysés-Oliveira M, Melaragno MI. 2020. Genetics of premature ovarian insufficiency and the association with X-autosome translocations. Repro- duction. 160(4):R55—R64. https://doi.org/10.1530/ rep-20-0338. ESHRE. 2016. Guideline: management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency. Hum Reprod. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000441-194211000-00001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000441-194211000-00001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2014.09.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2014.09.003 https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/370195 https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/370195 https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pbj.0000000000000062 https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pbj.0000000000000062 https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-8166-6-62 https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-8166-6-62 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2012.04.071 https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0426.r1.14012023 https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0426.r1.14012023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.09.033 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.09.033 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.03.023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.03.023 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054423 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054423 https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.672890 https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.672890 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1815-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1815-4 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.1999.00926.x https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.1999.00926.x https://doi.org/10.1530/rep-20-0338 https://doi.org/10.1530/rep-20-0338 65Cytogenetic diagnosis of patients with suspected premature ovarian failure in Manaus, Brazil 31(5):926–937. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/ dew027. Ferrarini E, Russo L, Fruzzetti F, Agretti P, De Marco G, Dimida A, Gianetti E, Simoncini T, Simi P, Bal- dinotti F, et al. 2013. Clinical characteristics and genetic analysis in women with premature ovar- ian insufficiency. Maturitas. 74(1):61–67. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.09.017. Franić D. et al. 2016. Genetic Etiology of Primary Prema- ture Ovarian Insufficiency. Acta Clin Croat. 629–635. https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2016.55.04.14. Gersak K, Veble A. 2011. Low-level X chromosome mosa- icism in women with sporadic premature ovarian failure. Reprod Biomed Online. 22(4):399–403. htt- ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.01.002. Goswami D, Conway GS. 2005. Premature ovarian fail- ure. Hum Reprod Update. 11(4):391–410. https://doi. org/10.1093/humupd/dmi012. Holland CM. 2001. 47,XXX in an Adolescent with Pre- mature Ovarian Failure and Autoimmune Disease. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 14(2):77–80. https://doi. org/10.1016/s1083-3188(01)00075-4. Hosseini S, Vahid Dastjerdi M, Asgari Z, Samiee H, et al. 2011. Premature ovarian failure in a woman with a bal- anced 15;21 translocation: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-1947-5-250. Ishizuka B. 2021. Current Understanding of the Etiology, Symptomatology, and Treatment Options in Prema- ture Ovarian Insufficiency (POI). Front Endocrinol. 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.626924. Issa NM, Elhady GM. 2022. Cytogenetic abnormali- ties in a sample of females with premature ovarian failure. Middle East Fertil Soc J. 27(1). https://doi. org/10.1186/s43043-022-00098-3. Jankowska K. 2017. Premature ovarian failure. Menopausal Rev. 2:51–56. https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2017.68592. Jiao X, Qin C, Li J, Qin Y, Gao X, Zhang B, Zhen X, Feng Y, Simpson JL, Chen Z-J, et al. 2012. Cytogenetic analysis of 531 Chinese women with premature ovar- ian failure. Hum Reprod. 27(7):2201–2207. https:// doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des104. Jin M, Yu Y, Huang H. 2012. An update on primary ovar- ian insufficiency. Sci China Life Sci. 55(8):677–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11427-012-4355-2. Kalantari H, Madani T, Zari Moradi S, Mansouri Z, Almadani N, Gourabi H, Mohseni Meybodi A et al. 2013. Cytogenetic analysis of 179 Iranian women with premature ovarian failure. Gynecol Endocrinol. 29(6):588–591. https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.201 3.788625. Lakhal B, Braham R, Berguigua R, Bouali N, Zaouali M, Chaieb M, Veitia RA, Saad A, Elghezal H, et al 2010. Cytogenetic analyses of premature ovarian failure using karyotyping and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in a group of 1000 patients. Clin Genet. 78(2):181–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1399-0004.2009.01359.x. Luborsky JL, Meyer P, Sowers MF, Gold EB, Santoro N, et al. 2003. Premature menopause in a multi-ethnic population study of the menopause transition. Hum Reprod. 18(1):199–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/ humrep/deg005. Luo W, Ke H, Tang S, Jiao X, Li Z, Zhao S, Zhang F, Guo T, Qin Y, et al. 2023. Next-generation sequencing of 500 POI patients identified novel responsible mono- genic and oligogenic variants. J Ovarian Res. 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01104-6. McGowan-Jordan J, Simons A, Schmid M, editors. 2016. ISCN 2016: An international system for human cytogenomic nomenclature (2016). S. Karger AG. htt- ps://doi.org/10.1159/isbn.978-3-318-06861-0. Moorhead PS, Nowell PC, Mellman WJ, Battips DM, Hungerford DA, et al. 1960. Chromosome prepara- tions of leukocytes cultured from human periph- eral blood. Exp Cell Res. 20(3):613–616. https://doi. org/10.1016/0014-4827(60)90138-5. Neves AR, Pais AS, Ferreira SI, Ramos V, Carvalho MJ, Estevinho A, Matoso E, Geraldes F, Marques Car- reira I, Águas F, et al. 2021. Prevalence of cytogenetic abnormalities and FMR1 gene premutation in a Por- tuguese population with premature ovarian insuf- ficiency. Acta Med Port. 34(9):580–585. https://doi. org/10.20344/amp.13490. Persani L, Rossetti R, Cacciatore C, Bonomi M, et al. 2009. Primary ovarian insufficiency: X chromosome defects and autoimmunity. J Autoimmun. 33(1):35– 41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2009.03.004. Podfigurna-Stopa A, Czyzyk A, Grymowicz M, Smolarc- zyk R, Katulski K, Czajkowski K, Meczekalski B, et al. 2016. Premature ovarian insufficiency: the context of long-term effects. J Endocrinol Invest. 39(9):983– 990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-016-0467-z. Portnoi MF, Aboura A, Tachdjian G, Bouchard P, Dewailly D, Bourcigaux N, Fridman R, Christin- Maitre S, et al. 2006. Molecular cytogenetic studies of Xq critical regions in premature ovarian failure patients. Hum Reprod. 21(9):2329–2334. https://doi. org/10.1093/humrep/del174. Powell CM, Taggart RT, Drumheller TC, Wangsa D, Qian C, Nelson LM, White BJ, et al. 1994. Molecular and cytogenetic studies of an X;autosome transloca- tion in a patient with premature ovarian failure and review of the literature. Am J Med Genet. 52(1):19– 26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320520105. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew027 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew027 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.09.017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.09.017 https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2016.55.04.14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.01.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.01.002 https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmi012 https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmi012 https://doi.org/10.1016/s1083-3188(01)00075-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/s1083-3188(01)00075-4 https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-1947-5-250 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.626924 https://doi.org/10.1186/s43043-022-00098-3 https://doi.org/10.1186/s43043-022-00098-3 https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2017.68592 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des104 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des104 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11427-012-4355-2 https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2013.788625 https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2013.788625 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2009.01359.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2009.01359.x https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg005 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg005 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01104-6 https://doi.org/10.1159/isbn.978-3-318-06861-0 https://doi.org/10.1159/isbn.978-3-318-06861-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4827(60)90138-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4827(60)90138-5 https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.13490 https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.13490 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2009.03.004 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-016-0467-z https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del174 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del174 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320520105 66 Ruan Barboza Rocha et al. Qin Y, Jiao X, Simpson JL, Chen ZJ, et al. 2015. Genetics of primary ovarian insufficiency: new developments and opportunities. Hum Reprod Update. 21(6):787– 808. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmv036. Rahman R, Panay N. 2021. Diagnosis and management of premature ovarian insufficiency. Best Pract Amp Res Clin Endocrinol Amp Metab. 35(6):101600. htt- ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2021.101600. Rosa RFM, Dibi RP, Picetti J dos S, Rosa RCM, Zen PRG, Graziadio C, Paskulin GA, et al. 2008. Amenor- réia e anormalidades do cromossomo X. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 30(10). https://doi.org/10.1590/ s0100-72032008001000006. Rudnicka E, Kruszewska J, Klicka K, Kowalczyk J, Grymowicz M, Skórska J, Pięta W, Smolarczyk R, et al. 2018. Premature ovarian insufficiency – aetio- pathology, epidemiology, and diagnostic evalua- tion. Prz Menopauzalny. 17(3):105–108. https://doi. org/10.5114/pm.2018.78550. Sala C, Arrigo G, Torri G, Martinazzi F, Riva P, Larizza L, Philippe C, Jonveaux P, Sloan F, Labella T, et al. 1997. Eleven X chromosome breakpoints associ- ated with premature ovarian failure (POF) map to a 15-Mb YAC contig spanning Xq21. Genom- ics. 40(1):123–131. https://doi.org /10.1006/ geno.1996.4542. Seabright M. 1973. High resolution studies on the pat- tern of induced exchanges in the human karyo- type. Chromosoma. 40(4):333–346. https://doi. org/10.1007/bf00399426. Sybert VP, McCauley E. 2004. Turner’s Syndrome. New Engl J Med. 351(12):1227–1238. https://doi. org/10.1056/nejmra030360. Turkyilmaz A, Alavanda C, Ates EA, Geckinli BB, Polat H, Gokcu M, Karakaya T, Cebi AH, Soylemez MA, Guney Aİ, et al. 2022. Whole-exome sequencing reveals new potential genes and variants in patients with premature ovarian insufficiency. J Assist Reprod Genet. 39(3):695–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10815-022-02408-0. Van Kasteren YM, Hundscheid RDL, Smits APT, Crem- ers FPM, van Zonneveld P, Braat DDM, et al. 1999. Familial idiopathic premature ovarian failure: an overrated and underestimated genetic disease? Hum Reprod. 14(10):2455–2459. https://doi.org/10.1093/ humrep/14.10.2455. Wesevich V, Kellen AN, Pal L. 2020. Recent advances in understanding primary ovarian insufficiency. F1000Research. 9:1101. https://doi.org/10.12688/ f1000research.26423.1. Zeng J, Huang W, Huang M, Wang Z. 2019. The first report showing de novo partial 21q monosomy in an adult woman with occult primary ovarian insuf- ficiency (POI). Clin Chem Lab Med (CCLM). 57(9):e230-e233. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018- 1271. Zinn AR. 2001. The X Chromosome and the Ovary. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 8(1_suppl):S34—S36. https://doi. org/10.1177/1071557601008001s11. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmv036 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2021.101600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2021.101600 https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-72032008001000006 https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-72032008001000006 https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2018.78550 https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2018.78550 https://doi.org/10.1006/geno.1996.4542 https://doi.org/10.1006/geno.1996.4542 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00399426 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00399426 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra030360 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra030360 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02408-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02408-0 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/14.10.2455 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/14.10.2455 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26423.1 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26423.1 https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-1271 https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-1271 https://doi.org/10.1177/1071557601008001s11 https://doi.org/10.1177/1071557601008001s11