4.2 Article

A novel TP53 germline inframe deletion identified in a Spanish series of Li-fraumeni syndrome suspected families

期刊

FAMILIAL CANCER
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 567-575

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10689-017-9990-0

关键词

TP53; Mutation; Li-Fraumeni syndrome; Dominant negative

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [ISCIII-RTICC-RD2012/0036/0006, CB-161200301]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is an autosomal dominant, inherited tumor predisposition syndrome associated with heterozygous germline mutations in the TP53 gene. The molecular diagnosis of LFS is important to develop strategies for early detection and access to the genetic counseling. Our study evaluated germline TP53 mutations in Spanish families with a history suggestive of LFS. Germline TP53 alterations in 22 families with a history suggestive of LFS were evaluated by Sanger sequencing and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Loss of heterozygosity analysis and immunohistochemistry of the protein in the tumor were performed in order to evaluate the pathogenicity of a novel alteration detected. A total of seven TP53 mutations were detected, six point mutations (4 missense and 2 nonsense) and a novel inframe deletion. 93% of mutation carriers developed at least one malignancy (mainly breast cancer and sarcomas), with a mean age at diagnosis of the first tumor of 30.2 years. Two missense mutations acted as dominant-negative. The novel inframe mutation c.437_445del was located in the DNA-binding domain. This mutation segregated with cancer in the family, and both high expression of the protein and loss of the wild-type TP53 allele were detected in the tumor of the carrier. We have found a novel inframe deletion in TP53 that likely results in the loss of p53 function and acts in a non-dominant negative way, although further studies are necessary to clarify this issue. The identification of novel TP53 alterations is crucial for a personalized cancer-risk management of the Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

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

4.2
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