4.6 Article

Genitourinary Defects Associated with Genomic Deletions in 2p15 Encompassing OTX1

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107028

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [K12 DK0083014]
  2. Multidisciplinary K12 Urologic Research (KURe) Career Development Program
  3. National Institute of Kidney and Digestive Diseases [R01DK078121]
  4. Signature Genomics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Normal development of the genitourinary (GU) tract is a complex process that frequently goes awry. In male children the most frequent congenital GU anomalies are cryptorchidism (1-4%), hypospadias (1%) and micropenis (0.35%). Bladder exstrophy and epispadias complex (BEEC) (1:47000) occurs less frequently but significantly impacts patients' lives. Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) identified seven individuals with overlapping deletions in the 2p15 region (66.0 kb-5.6 Mb). Six of these patients have GU defects, while the remaining patient has no GU defect. These deletions encompass the transcription factor OTX1. Subjects 2-7 had large de novo CNVs (2.39-6.31 Mb) and exhibited features similar to those associated with the 2p15p16.1 and 2p15p14 microdeletion syndromes, including developmental delay, short stature, and variable GU defects. Subject-1 with BEEC had the smallest deletion (66 kb), which deleted only one copy of OTX1. Otx1-null mice have seizures, prepubescent transient growth retardation and gonadal defects. Two subjects have short stature, two have seizures, and six have GU defects, mainly affecting the external genitalia. The presence of GU defects in six patients in our cohort and eight of thirteen patients reported with deletions within 2p14p16.1 (two with deletion of OTX1) suggest that genes in 2p15 are important for GU development. Genitalia defects in these patients could result from the effect of OTX1 on pituitary hormone secretion or on the regulation of SHH signaling, which is crucial for development of the bladder and genitalia.

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