4.5 Article

SKOR1 has a transcriptional regulatory role on genes involved in pathways related to restless legs syndrome

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 28, 期 11, 页码 1520-1528

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-020-0670-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institute of Health Research [RN254517-332736]
  2. Fonds de Recherche du Quebec-Sante
  3. Canada's Research Chair in Neurogenetics
  4. Wilder Penfield Chair in Neuroscience

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a common sleep-related sensory-motor disorder. It is characterized by uncomfortable sensations in the legs during the evening or at night. The symptoms can be partially relieved by movement, so typically affected individual needs to walk during rest time; this interferes with sleep. GWAS have identified 19 RLS-associated loci. Among the first to be reported and most significant and robustly replicated reports are variants in theSKOR1noncoding regions. SKOR1 is highly expressed in the CNS of humans and mice. Skor1 acts as a corepressor of Lbx1 transcription factor in mice and these two genes act together to regulate the cell fate of interneurons in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. Based on this data we investigated the regulatory role of SKOR1 using a global RNA-sequencing approach in human cell lines whereSKOR1was either overexpressed or silenced. For this work we generated and validated a new poly-clonal anti-SKOR1. Pathway and gene set enrichment analyses of the differentially expressed genes showed, among others, enrichment of genes involved in neurodevelopment and iron metabolism, two RLS relevant pathways that were previously found to be enriched in the latest RLS GWAS meta-analysis. Analysis of our different datasets further supports and highlights the regulatory role of SKOR1, which when dysregulated might represent a key pathogenic element of RLS. A better understanding of SKOR1 and its activity could open new avenues of investigation for the development of a much-needed therapy.

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

4.5
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