4.4 Article

Mutation Spectrum of NF1 and Clinical Characteristics in 78 Korean Patients With Neurofibromatosis Type 1

期刊

PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 447-453

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2013.02.004

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is one of the most common autosomal dominant disorders in humans. NF1 is caused by mutations of the NF1 gene. Mutation detection is complex owing to the large size of the NF1 gene, the presence of pseudogenes, and the great variety of mutations. Also, few probable genotype-phenotype correlations have been found in NF1. In this study 78 Korean patients from 60 families were screened for NF1 mutations. Mutation analysis of the entire coding region and flanking splice sites was carried out and included the use of a combination of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, multiplex ligation probe amplification, or fluorescence in situ hybridization. Mutation spectrum and genotype-phenotype relationship were assessed. Fifty-two distinct NF1 mutations were identified in 60 families. The mutations included 30 single base substitutions (12 missense and 18 nonsense), 11 missplicing mutations, seven small insertion or deletions, and four gross deletions. Sixteen (30.8%) mutations were novel; c.1A>G, c.2033_2034insC, c.2540T>C, c.4537C>T, c.5546G>A, c.6792C>A, and c.6792C>G were recurrently identified. The mutations were evenly distributed across exon 1 through intron 47 of NF1, and no mutational hot spots were found. A genotype-phenotype analysis suggests that there is no clear relationship between specific mutations and clinical features. This analysis revealed a wide spectrum of NF1 mutations in Korean patients. As technologies advance in molecular genetics, the mutation detection rate will increase. Considering that 30.8% of detected mutations were novel, exhaustive mutation analysis of NF1 may be an important tool in early diagnosis and genetic counseling. (c) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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