4.4 Review

CTSC and Papillon-Lefevre syndrome: detection of recurrent mutations in Hungarian patients, a review of published variants and database update

期刊

MOLECULAR GENETICS & GENOMIC MEDICINE
卷 2, 期 3, 页码 217-228

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.61

关键词

Aggressive periodontitis; CTSC gene; Haim-Munk syndrome; Papillon-Lefevre syndrome

资金

  1. European Union
  2. State of Hungary
  3. European Social Fund 'National Excellence Program' [TAMOP-4.2.4.A/2-11/1-20120001]
  4. Hungarian Scientific Research Foundation (OTKA) [PD104782]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Papillon-Lefevre syndrome (PLS; OMIM 245000) is an autosomal recessive condition characterized by palmoplantar hyperkeratosis and periodontitis. In 1997, the gene locus for PLS was mapped to 11q14-21, and in 1999, variants in the cathepsin C gene (CTSC) were identified as causing PLS. To date, a total of 75 different disease-causing mutations have been published for the CTSC gene. A summary of recurrent mutations identified in Hungarian patients and a review of published mutations is presented in this update. Comparison of clinical features in affected families with the same mutation strongly confirm that identical mutations of the CTSC gene can give rise to multiple different phenotypes, making genotype-phenotype correlations difficult. Variable expression of the phenotype associated with the same CTSC mutation may reflect the influence of other genetic and/or environmental factors. Most mutations are missense (53%), nonsense (23%), or frameshift (17%); however, in-frame deletions, one splicing variant, and one 5' untranslated region (UTR) mutation have also been reported. The majority of the mutations are located in exons 57, which encodes the heavy chain of the cathepsin C protein, suggesting that tetramerization is important for cathepsin C enzymatic activity. All the data reviewed here have been submitted to the CTSC base, a mutation registry for PLS at http://bioinf.uta.fi/CTSCbase/.

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