4.4 Article

Novel Mutations of the TYMP Gene in Mitochondrial Neurogastrointestinal Encephalomyopathy: Case Series and Literature Review

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR NEUROSCIENCE
卷 71, 期 12, 页码 2526-2533

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s12031-021-01822-w

关键词

Mitochondrial neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy; MNGIE; TYMP gene; Novel mutation; Thymidine phosphorylase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MNGIE is a multi-system disorder caused by TYMP gene mutations, with affected Iranian patients diagnosed between the ages of 18 and 49. This study identified five novel mutations in the TYMP gene, confirming the autosomal recessive inheritance pattern of MNGIE in the Iranian population.
Mitochondrial neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy (MNGIE) is a multi-system disorder caused by several homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations, mostly in the nuclear gene of TYMP. Our current knowledge on the underlying pathology of the disease is derived through the study of about 200 cases of different ethnicities. Clinical presentations include severe cachexia, weakness, ptosis, diplopia, abdominal cramps or digestive tract disorders, hearing impairment, and paresthesia. Herein, we aim to present five novel mutations of the nuclear gene of TYMP in six Iranian patients diagnosed with MNGIE. In our population, age at the time of diagnosis was 18 to 49 years, while the onset of the symptoms varied from 13 to 20 years. We detected two pathogenic non-frameshift nonsense premature stop codon mutations (c.1013C > A, and c.130C > T), one variant of uncertain significance (VUS) non-frameshift missense mutation (c.345G > T), one likely pathogenic frameshift insertion (c.801_802insCGCG), and one likely benign homozygous non-frameshift deletion (c.1176_1187del) from two siblings. Our findings also confirm the autosomal recessive inheritance pattern of MNGIE in the Iranian population. The lack of knowledge in the area of nuclear gene-modifier genes shadows the genotype-phenotype relationships of MNGIE.

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