4.6 Article

Genetic Factors in Rasmussen's Encephalitis Characterized by Whole-Exome Sequencing

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.744429

关键词

Rasmussen's encephalitis (RE); seizure; genetic factors; whole-exome sequencing; singe nucleotide variants

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81972979, U1902210]
  2. Support Project of High-level Teachers in Beijing Municipal Universities in the Period of 13th Five-year Plan [IDHT20190510]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rasmussen's encephalitis (RE) is a rare chronic neurological disorder characterized by unihemispheric brain atrophy and epileptic seizures. This study identified genetic factors for the first time in RE, suggesting that patients have congenital abnormalities in adaptive immunity and are susceptible to harmful factors.
Rasmussen's encephalitis (RE) is a rare chronic neurological disorder characterized by unihemispheric brain atrophy and epileptic seizures. The mechanisms of RE are complex. Adaptive immunity, innate immunity and viral infection are all involved in the development of RE. However, there are few studies on the role of genetic factors in the mechanisms of RE. Thus, the objective of this study was to reveal the genetic factors in the mechanisms of RE. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed in 15 RE patients. Ten patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), which is a common and frequently intractable seizure disorder, were used as the controls. Thirty-one non-silent single nucleotide variants (SNVs) affecting 16 genes were identified in the RE cases. The functions of the genes with SNVs were associated with antigen presentation, antiviral infection, epilepsy, schizophrenia and nerve cell regeneration. Genetic factors of RE were found first in this study. These results suggest that RE patients have congenital abnormalities in adaptive immunity and are susceptible to some harmful factors, which lead to polygenic abnormal disease.

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

4.6
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