4.4 Article

Characterization of common SMPD1 mutations causing types A and B Niemann-Pick disease and generation of mutation-specific mouse models

Journal

MOLECULAR GENETICS AND METABOLISM
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 152-162

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2008.08.004

Keywords

Lysosomal storage disease; Mutations; Transgenic mouse

Funding

  1. NIH [R01 HD28607, 1 S10 RR0 9145-01]
  2. National Niemann-Pick Disease Foundation
  3. NIH-NCI [5R24 CA095823-04]
  4. NSF [DBI-9724504]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Herein we describe detailed characterization of four common mutations (L302P, H421Y, R496L and Delta R608) within the acid sphingomyelinase (ASM) gene causing types A and B Niemann-Pick disease (NPD). In vitro and in situ enzyme assays revealed marked deficiencies of ASM activity in NPD cell lines homoallelic for each mutation, although Western blotting and fluorescent microscopy showed that the mutant ASM polypeptides were expressed at normal levels and trafficked to lysosomes. Co-immunoprecipitation of the polypeptides with the ER chaperone, BiP, confirmed these findings, as did in vitro expression of the mutant cDNAs in reticulocyte lysates. We further developed a computer assisted, three-dimensional model of human ASM based on homologies to known proteins, and used this model to map each NPD mutation in relation to putative substrate binding, hydrolysis and zinc-binding domains. Lastly, we generated transgenic mice expressing the R496L and Delta R608 mutations on the complete ASM knock-out background (ASMKO), and established breeding colonies for the future evaluation of enzyme enhancement therapies. Analysis of these mice demonstrated that the mutant ASM transgenes were expressed at high levels in the brain, and in the case of the Delta R608 mutation, produced residual ASM activity that was significantly above the ASMKO background. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available