4.3 Article

Intrafamilial clinical variability in individuals carrying the CHCHD10 mutation Gly66Val

期刊

ACTA NEUROLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 133, 期 5, 页码 361-366

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ane.12470

关键词

CHCHD10; clinical variability; proximal sensorimotor neuropathy; spinal muscular atrophy

资金

  1. Paivikki and Sakari Sohlberg's Foundation
  2. Samfundet Folkhalsan
  3. Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund
  4. Finska Lakaresallskapet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives - Mutations in the CHCHD10 gene, which encodes a mitochondrially targeted protein, have emerged as an important cause of motor neuron disease and frontotemporal lobar degeneration. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical variability in a large family carrying the p.Gly66Val mutation of the CHCHD10 gene. This mutation has recently been reported to cause late-onset spinal muscular atrophy (SMAJ) or sensorimotor axonal Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy (CMT2) in the Finnish population. Materials and methods - Nine affected members of an extended Finnish pedigree were included in the study. Detailed clinical and neurophysiological examinations were performed. The CHCHD10 p.Gly66Val mutation was examined by Sanger sequencing. Results - The heterozygous p.Gly66Val mutation was present in all affected individuals from whom a DNA sample was available. The clinical phenotype varied from proximal sensorimotor neuropathy to spinal muscular atrophy and in one case resembled motor neuron disease ALS at its early stages. The age of onset varied from 30 to 73 years. Conclusions - Our data demonstrate that even within the same family, the p.Gly66Val variant can cause variable phenotypes ranging from CMT2-type axonal neuropathy to spinal muscular atrophy, which may also present as an ALS-like disease. The spectrum of CHCHD10-related neuromuscular disease has widened rapidly, and we recommend keeping the threshold for genetic testing low particularly when dominant inheritance or mitochondrial pathology is present.

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

4.3
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