4.5 Article

Novel mutations in the small leucine-rich repeat protein/proteoglycan (SLRP) genes in high myopia

期刊

HUMAN MUTATION
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 336-344

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/humu.20444

关键词

high myopia; FMOD; LUM; OPTC; PRELP; SLRP; sequence variations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The importance of the genetic component in high myopia. has been well established in population and family studies, but only a few candidate genes have been explored to date. The extracellular matrix small leucine,rich repeat proteins/proteoglycans (SLRPs) regulate collagen fibril diameter and spacing. Given their role in extracellular matrix assembly and expression in the eye, they are likely to regulate its shape and size. Analysis of 85 English and 40 Finnish subjects with high myopia (refractive error of -6 diopters [131 or greater) resulted in 23 sequence variations in four SLRP genes, LUM, FMOD, PRELP, and OPTC. We observed higher number of variations in OPTC in English patients than in controls (p = 0.042), and a possibly protective variation in LUM (c.893-105G > A) with p-value of 0.0043. Two intronic variations, six nonsynonymous and one synonymous amino acid changes, were not found in any of the nonmyopic controls. Five changes were detected in opticin, Thrl77Arg, Arg229His, Arg325Trp, Gly329Ser, and Arg330His, and all but one (Arg229His) were shown to cosegregate with high myopia in families with incomplete penetrance. A homology model for opticin revealed that Arg229His and Arg325Trp are likely to disrupt the protein structure, and PolyPhen analysis suggested that Thrl77Arg, Arg325Trp, and Gly329Ser changes may be damaging. A Leu199Pro change in lumican and Gly147Asp and Arg324Thr variations in fibromodulin are located in the highly conserved leucine-rich repeat (LRR) domains. This study provides new insight into the genetics of high myopia, suggesting that sequence variations in the SLRP genes expressed in the eye may be among the genetic risk factors underlying the pathogenesis of high myopia.

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

4.5
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