4.7 Article

Biallelic Variants in EPHA2 Identified in Three Large Inbred Families with Early-Onset Cataract

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms221910655

关键词

cataract; EPHA2; hereditary congenital cataract; exome sequencing; inbred population; tyrosine kinase receptor; Eph receptor

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH)-National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) [R01DC016295]
  2. Higher Education Commission of Pakistan, NRPU [8128]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hereditary congenital cataract (HCC) is clinically and genetically heterogeneous, with cataracts segregating in a recessive manner in three families with variability related to age of onset. Exome sequencing identified a novel EPHA2 variant in LUCC03 and a known variant in the other families. Computational modeling predicted that the variants cause misfolding of EPHA2. This study provides insights into the molecular and phenotypic landscape of EPHA2-related HCC.
Hereditary congenital cataract (HCC) is clinically and genetically heterogeneous. We investigated HCC that segregates in three inbred families (LUCC03, LUCC16, and LUCC24). Ophthalmological examinations revealed cataracts with variability related to the age of onset segregating in a recessive manner in these families. Exome sequencing of probands identified a novel homozygous c.2710delG;p.(Val904Cysfs*36) EPHA2 variant in LUCC03 and a known homozygous c.2353G > A;p.(Ala785Thr) EPHA2 variant in the other two recessive families. EPHA2 encodes a transmembrane tyrosine kinase receptor, which is primarily involved in membrane-transport, cell-cell adhesion, and repulsion signaling processes. Computational structural modeling predicts that substitution of a threonine for an alanine p.(Ala785Thr) results in the formation of three new hydrogen bonds with the neighboring residues, which causes misfolding of EPHA2 in both scenarios. Insights from our study will facilitate counseling regarding the molecular and phenotypic landscape of EPHA2-related HCC.

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