4.6 Article

Progressive myoclonic epilepsy as an adult-onset manifestation of Leigh syndrome due to m.14487T>C

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.157354

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel [OZR1216-OZR1145]
  2. University of Antwerp and FWO [G. 0666.06, G. 0399.08]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: m. 14487T>C, a missense mutation (p. M63V) affecting the ND6 subunit of complex I of the mitochondrial respiratory chain, has been reported in isolated childhood cases with Leigh syndrome (LS) and progressive dystonia. Adult-onset phenotypes have not been reported. Objectives: To determine the clinical-neurological spectrum and associated mutation loads in an extended m. 14487T>C family. Methods: A genotype-phenotype correlation study of a Belgian five-generation family with 12 affected family members segregating m. 14487T>C was carried out. Clinical and mutation load data were available for nine family members. Biochemical analysis of the respiratory chain was performed in three muscle biopsies. Results: Heteroplasmic m. 14487T>C levels (36-52% in leucocytes, 97-99% in muscle) were found in patients with progressive myoclonic epilepsy (PME) and dystonia or progressive hypokinetic-rigid syndrome. Patients with infantile LS were homoplasmic (99-100% in leucocytes, 100% in muscle). We found lower mutation loads (between 8 and 35% in blood) in adult patients with clinical features including migraine with aura, Leber hereditary optic neuropathy, sensorineural hearing loss and diabetes mellitus type 2. Despite homoplasmic mutation loads, complex I catalytic activity was only moderately decreased in muscle tissue. Interpretation: m. 14487T>C resulted in a broad spectrum of phenotypes in our family. Depending on the mutation load, it caused severe encephalopathies ranging from infantile LS to adult-onset PME with dystonia. This is the first report of PME as an important neurological manifestation of an isolated mitochondrial complex I defect.

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

4.6
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