4.7 Article

A genetic modifier of symptom onset in Pompe disease

期刊

EBIOMEDICINE
卷 43, 期 -, 页码 553-561

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.03.048

关键词

Modifying factor; Pompe disease; Lysosomal storage disease; Pre-mRNA splicing; c.510C > T

资金

  1. Sophia Children's Hospital Foundation (SSWO) [S17-32]
  2. Metakids [2016-063]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Neonatal screening for Pompe disease is complicated by difficulties in predicting symptom onset in patients with the common c.-32-13T>G (IVS I) variant/null ( i.e. fully deleterious) acid a-glucosidase (GAA) genotype. This splicing variant occurs in 90% of Caucasian late onset patients, and is associated with a broad range of symptom onset. Methods: We analyzed a cohort of 143 compound heterozygous and 10 homozygous IVS1 patients, and we assessed ages at symptom onset, the presence of cis-acting single nucleotide variants (SNVs), and performed splicing analysis and enzyme activity assays. Findings: In compound heterozygous IVS1 patients, the synonymous variant c.510C>T was uniquely present on the IVS1 allele in 9/33 (27%) patients with childhood onset, but was absent from 110 patients with onset in adulthood. GAA enzyme activity was lower in fibroblasts from patients who contained c510C>T than it was in patients without c.510C>T. By reducing the extent of leaky wild-type splicing, c.510C>T modulated aberrant splicing caused by the IVS1 variant. The deleterious effect of c.510C>T was also found in muscle cells, the main target cells in Pompe disease. In homozygous IVS1 patients, the c.510C>T variant was absent in 4/4 (100%) asymptomatic individuals and present in 3/6 (50%) symptomatic patients. In cells from homozygous IVS1 patients, c.510C>T caused reduced leaky wild-type splicing. Interpretation: c.510C>T is a genetic modifier in compound heterozygous and homozygous IVS1 patients. This finding is important for neonatal screening programs for Pompe disease. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.7
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