4.6 Article

Mutation analysis of BEST1 in Japanese patients with Best's vitelliform macular dystrophy

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 99, Issue 11, Pages 1577-1582

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-306830

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [25462738]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25462738] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To describe the clinical and genetic features of Japanese patients with Best's vitelliform macular dystrophy (BVMD). Patients and methods This study examined 22 patients, including 16 probands from 16 families with BVMD. Comprehensive ophthalmic examinations were performed, including dilated funduscopy, full-field electroretinography (ERG) and electro-oculography (EOG). BEST1 mutation analysis was performed by Sanger sequencing. Results All 16 probands exhibited characteristic BVMD fundus appearances, abnormal EOG, and normal ERG responses with the exception of one diabetic retinopathy proband. Genetic analysis identified 12 BEST1 variants in 13 probands (81%). Of these, 10 variants (p.T2A, p.R25W, p.F80L, p.V81M, p.A195V, p.R218H, p.G222E, p.V242M, p.D304del and p.E306D) have been previously reported in BVMD, while two variants (p.S7N and p.P346H) were novel, putative disease-causing variants. Single BEST1 variants were found in 12 probands. The one proband with compound heterozygous variants (p.S7N and p.R218H) exhibited typical BVMD phenotypes (pseudohypopyon stage and vitelliruptive stage in the right and left eyes, respectively). Conclusions Twelve different variants, two of which (p.S7N and p.P346H) were novel, were identified in the 13 Japanese families with BVMD. Compound heterozygous variants were found in one proband exhibiting a typical BVMD phenotype. Our results suggest that BEST1 variants do play a large role in Japanese patients with BVMD.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available