4.5 Review

ABCA12 Mutations and Autosomal Recessive Congenital Ichthyosis: A Review of Genotype/Phenotype Correlations and of Pathogenetic Concepts

期刊

HUMAN MUTATION
卷 31, 期 10, 页码 1090-1096

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/humu.21326

关键词

ABCA12; congenital ichthyosiform erythroderma; harlequin ichthyosis; lamellar ichthyosis

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan [Kiban B 20390304]
  2. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan [H22-Nanchi-Ippan-177]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutations in ABCA12 have been described in autosomal recessive congenital ichthyoses (ARCI) including harlequin ichthyosis (HI), congenital ichthyosiform erythroderma (CIE), and lamellar ichthyosis (LI). HI shows the most severe phenotype. CIE and LI are clinically characterized by fine, whitish scales on a background of erythematous skin, and large, thick, dark scales over the entire body without serious background erythroderma, respectively. To date, a total of 56 ABCA12 mutations have been reported in 66 ARCI families including 48 HI, 10 LI, and 8 CIE families of African, European, Pakistani/Indian, and Japanese origin (online database: http://www.derm-hokudai. jp/ABCA12/). A total of 62.5% of reported ABCA12 mutations are expected to lead to truncated proteins. Most mutations in HI are truncation mutations and homozygous or compound heterozygous truncation mutations always results in HI phenotype. In CIE families, at least one mutation on each allele is typically a missense mutation. Combinations of missense mutations in the first ATP-binding cassette of ABCA12 underlie the LI phenotype. ABCA12 is a keratinocyte lipid transporter associated with lipid transport in lamellar granules, and loss of ABCA12 function leads to a defective lipid barrier in the stratum corneum, resulting in an ichthyotic phenotype. Recent work using mouse models confirmed ABCA12 roles in skin barrier formation. Hum Mutat 31:1090-1096, 2010. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据