4.7 Article

Genome-wide copy number variation analysis in a Chinese autism spectrum disorder cohort

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep44155

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81330027, 81525007, 31671114, 31400919, 81301172, 31301023]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2015M570684]
  3. Innovation-driven project of Central South University [2016CX038]
  4. New Xiangya Talent Project of the Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University [JY201518]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) describes a group of neurodevelopmental disorders with high heritability, although the underlying genetic determinants of ASDs remain largely unknown. Large-scale whole-genome studies of copy number variation in Han Chinese samples are still lacking. We performed a genome-wide copy number variation analysis of 343 ASD trios, 203 patients with sporadic cases and 988 controls in a Chinese population using Illumina genotyping platforms to identify CNVs and related genes that may contribute to ASD risk. We identified 32 rare CNVs larger than 1 Mb in 31 patients. ASD patients were found to carry a higher global burden of rare, large CNVs than controls. Recurrent de novo or case-private CNVs were found at 15q11-13, Xp22.3, 15q13.1-13.2, 3p26.3 and 2p12. The de novo 15q11-13 duplication was more prevalent in this Chinese population than in those with European ancestry. Several genes, including GRAMD2 and STAM, were implicated as novel ASD risk genes when integrating whole-genome CNVs and whole-exome sequencing data. We also identified several CNVs that include known ASD genes (SHANK3, CDH10, CSMD1) or genes involved in nervous system development (NYAP2, ST6GAL2, GRM6). Besides, our study also implicated Contactins-NYAPs-WAVE1 pathway in ASD pathogenesis. Our findings identify ASD-related CNVs in a Chinese population and implicate novel ASD risk genes and related pathway for further study.

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