4.1 Article

Identification of the variant Ala335Val of MED25 as responsible for CMT2B2: molecular data, functional studies of the SH3 recognition motif and correlation between wild-type MED25 and PMP22 RNA levels in CMT1A animal models

期刊

NEUROGENETICS
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 275-287

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10048-009-0183-3

关键词

CMT; HMSN; MED25; PMP22; CMT2B2; ACID1; ARC92

资金

  1. DFG
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim foundation
  3. DGM
  4. ELAN
  5. Association Francaise contre les myopathies (AFN)
  6. University of Costa Rica [742-98-241]
  7. Swiss National Science Foundation
  8. NCCR Neural Plasticity and Repair

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease is a clinically and genetically heterogeneous disorder. All mendelian patterns of inheritance have been described. We identified a homozygous p.A335V mutation in the MED25 gene in an extended Costa Rican family with autosomal recessively inherited Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy linked to the CMT2B2 locus in chromosome 19q13.3. MED25, also known as ARC92 and ACID1, is a subunit of the human activator-recruited cofactor (ARC), a family of large transcriptional coactivator complexes related to the yeast Mediator. MED25 was identified by virtue of functional association with the activator domains of multiple cellular and viral transcriptional activators. Its exact physiological function in transcriptional regulation remains obscure. The CMT2B2-associated missense amino acid substitution p.A335V is located in a proline-rich region with high affinity for SH3 domains of the Abelson type. The mutation causes a decrease in binding specificity leading to the recognition of a broader range of SH3 domain proteins. Furthermore, Med25 is coordinately expressed with Pmp22 gene dosage and expression in transgenic mice and rats. These results suggest a potential role of this protein in the molecular etiology of CMT2B2 and suggest a potential, more general role of MED25 in gene dosage sensitive peripheral neuropathy pathogenesis.

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

4.1
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