4.7 Article

Loss of exon identity is a common mechanism of human inherited disease

Journal

GENOME RESEARCH
Volume 21, Issue 10, Pages 1563-1571

Publisher

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1101/gr.118638.110

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ellison Medical Research Foundation
  2. U.S. National Institutes of Health [R01GM085121]
  3. BIOBASE GmbH

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is widely accepted that at least 10% of all mutations causing human inherited disease disrupt splice-site consensus sequences. In contrast to splice-site mutations, the role of auxiliary cis-acting elements such as exonic splicing enhancers (ESE) and exonic splicing silencers (ESS) in human inherited disease is still poorly understood. Here we use a top-down approach to determine rates of loss or gain of known human exonic splicing regulatory (ESR) sequences associated with either disease-causing mutations or putatively neutral single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We observe significant enrichment toward loss of ESEs and gain of ESSs among inherited disease-causing variants relative to neutral polymorphisms, indicating that exon skipping may play a prominent role in aberrant gene regulation. Both computational and biochemical approaches underscore the relevance of exonic splicing enhancer loss and silencer gain in inherited disease. Additionally, we provide direct evidence that both SRp20 (SRSF3) and possibly PTB (PTBP1) are involved in the function of a splicing silencer that is created de novo by a total of 83 different inherited disease mutations in 67 different disease genes. Taken together, we find that similar to 25% (7154/27,681) of known mis-sense and nonsense disease-causing mutations alter functional splicing signals within exons, suggesting a much more widespread role for aberrant mRNA processing in causing human inherited disease than has hitherto been appreciated.

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