4.5 Article

Welander Distal Myopathy Caused by an Ancient Founder Mutation in TIA1 Associated with Perturbed Splicing

期刊

HUMAN MUTATION
卷 34, 期 4, 页码 572-577

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/humu.22282

关键词

TIA1; founder mutation; Welander distal myopathy; splicing; cellular stress

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council
  2. Selander Foundation
  3. Uppsala University
  4. SciLifeLab
  5. Uppsala University Hospital
  6. RFI/VR SNISS Swedish National Infrastructure for large Scale Sequencing
  7. Science for Life Laboratory
  8. Swedish Society for Medical Research
  9. Uppsala Genome Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Welander distal myopathy (WDM) is an adult onset autosomal dominant disorder characterized by distal limb weakness, which progresses slowly from the fifth decade. All WDM patients are of Swedish or Finnish descent and share a rare chromosome 2p13 haplotype. We restricted the WDM-associated haplotype followed by whole exome sequencing. Within the conserved haplotype, we identified a single heterozygous mutation c.1150G>A (p.E384K) in T-cell intracellular antigen-1 (TIA1) in all WDM patients investigated (n=43). The TIA1 protein regulates splicing, and translation through direct interaction with mRNA and the p.E384K mutation is located in the C-terminal Q-rich domain that interacts with the U1-C splicing factor. TIA1 has been shown to prevent skipping of SMN2 exon 7, and we show that WDM patients have increased levels of spliced SMN2 in skeletal muscle cells when compared with controls. Immunostaining of WDM muscle biopsies showed accumulation of TIA1 and stress granulae proteins adjacent to intracellular inclusions, a typical finding in WDM. The combined findings strongly suggest that the TIA1 mutation causes perturbed RNA splicing and cellular stress resulting in WDM. The selection against the mutation is likely to be negligible and the age of the TIA1 founder mutation was calculated to approximately 1,050 years, which coincides with the epoch of early seafaring across the Baltic Sea.

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