4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

The prevalence of digenic mutations in patients with normosmic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and Kallmann syndrome

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 96, Issue 6, Pages 1424-U428

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.046

Keywords

Digenic mutations; idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism; Kallmann syndrome

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [HD33004, R29 HD033004, R01 HD033004-12A1, R01 HD033004] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the prevalence of digenic mutations in patients with idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (IHH) and Kallmann syndrome (KS). Design: Molecular analysis of DNA in IHH/KS patients. Setting: Academic medical center. Patient(s): Twenty-four IHH/KS patients with a known mutation (group 1) and 24 IHH/KS patients with no known mutation (group 2). Intervention(s): DNA from IHH/KS patients was subjected to polymerase chain reaction-based DNA sequencing of the 13 most common genes (KAL1, GNRHR, FGFR1, KISSIR, TAC3, TACR3, FGF8, PROKR2, PROK2, CHD7, NELF, GNRH1, and WDR11). Main Outcome Measure(s): The identification of mutations absent in >= 188 ethnically matched controls. Both SIFT (sorting intolerant fromtolerant) and conservation among orthologs provided supportive evidence for pathologic roles. Result(s): In group 1, 6 (25%) of 24 IHH/KS patients had a heterozygous mutation in a second gene, and in group 2, 13 (54.2%) of 24 had a mutation in at least one gene, but none had digenic mutations. In group 2, 7 (29.2%) of 24 had a mutation considered sufficient to cause the phenotype. Conclusion(s): When the 13 most common IHH/KS genes are studied, the overall prevalence of digenic gene mutations in IHH/KS was 12.5%. In addition, approximately 30% of patients without a known mutation had a mutation in a single gene. With the current state of knowledge, these findings suggest that most IHH/KS patients have a monogenic etiology. (Fertil Steril (R) 2011; 96: 1424-30. (C) 2011 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available