3.9 Article

Mitochondrial haplogroup D4j specific variant m.11696G>a(MT-ND4) may increase the penetrance and expressivity of the LHON-associated m.11778G>a mutation in Chinese pedigrees

期刊

MITOCHONDRIAL DNA PART A
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 434-441

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/19401736.2015.1136304

关键词

Chinese; haplogroup; Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy; mitochondrial DNA; mutation

资金

  1. National Key Technologies R&D Program from the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China [2012BAI09B03]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [31471191, 81200724, 81400434]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) is one of the most common mitochondrial disorders. We report here the clinical, genetic and molecular analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in eight Han Chinese families carrying the known mitochondrial 11778G>A(MT-ND4) mutation. Thirty-seven (26 males/11 females) of 77 matrilineal relatives in these families exhibited the variable severity and age-at-onset of optic neuropathy. The penetrances were from 25% to 75%, with the average of 42%, and the age-at-onset for visual impairment varied from 10 to 25 years, with the average of 17 in these Chinese pedigrees. Molecular analysis of their mtDNA identified distinct sets of variants belonging to the Eastern Asian haplogroupD4j. Except the known m.11778G>A mutation, the m. 11696G>A(MT-ND4) mutation caused the substitution of an isoleucine for valineat amino acid position 313, located in a predicted transmembrane region of ND4. And, it is reported that the m. 11696G>A mutation was associated with LHON, and appeared to contribute to higher penetrance in these nine Chinese families than other Chinese families carrying only the m. 11778G>A mutation. Therefore, the mitochondrial haplogroup D4j specific m. 11696G>A mutation may act in synergy with the primary LHON-associated m.11778G>A mutation, thereby increasing the penetrance and expressivity of visual loss in these Chinese families.

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

3.9
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