4.5 Article

Identification of 23 TGFBR2 and 6 TGFBR1 Gene Mutations and Genotype-phenotype Investigations in 457 Patients with Marfan Syndrome Type I and II, Loeys-Dietz Syndrome and Related Disorders

Journal

HUMAN MUTATION
Volume 29, Issue 11, Pages E284-E295

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/humu.20871

Keywords

Marfan syndrome; Loeys-Dietz Syndrome; TGFBR1; TGFBR2; genotype-phenotype; TAAD

Funding

  1. GIS-Maladies Rares
  2. Universite Versailles Saint Quentin (Legs de Melle Bonnevie) [ANR-05-PCOD-014]
  3. Assistance publique-Hopitaux de Paris [CIRC 2007]
  4. French Society of Cardiology
  5. French Federation of Cardiology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

TGFBR1 and TGFBR2 gene mutations have been associated with Marfan syndrome types 1 and 2, Loeys-Dietz syndrome and isolated familial thoracic aortic aneurysms or dissection. In order to investigate the molecular and clinical spectrum of TGFBR2 mutations we screened the gene in 457 probands suspected of being affected with Marfan syndrome or related disorders that had been referred to our laboratory for molecular diagnosis. We identified and report 23 mutations and 20 polymorphisms. Subsequently, we screened the TGFBR1 gene in the first 74 patients for whom no defect had been found, and identified 6 novel mutations and 12 polymorphisms. Mutation-carrying probands displayed at referral a large clinical spectrum ranging from the Loeys-Dietz syndrome and neonatal Marfan syndrome to isolated aortic aneurysm. Furthermore, a TGFBR1 gene mutation was found in a Shprintzen-Goldberg syndrome patient. Finally, we observed that the yield of mutation detection within the two genes was very low : 4.8% for classical MFS, 4.6% for incomplete MFS and 1% for TAAD in the TGFBR2 gene; 6.2%, 6.2% and 7% respectively in the TGFBR1 gene; in contrast to LDS, where the yield was exceptionally high (87.5%). (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available