4.6 Article

Novel missense mutations (p.T596M and p.P1797H) in NOTCH1 in patients with bicuspid aortic valve

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.05.046

关键词

NOTCH1; bicuspid aortic valve; valve calcification; missense mutations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenital cardiac malformation, occurring in 1-2% of the population. In a recent report, mutations in NOTCH1 a signaling and transcriptional regulator have been shown to cause BAV in two families. This study provides data on systematic sequencing in search for novel mutations in NOTCH1 gene in a large sample BAV. For the first time, we report results of a systematic mutation-analysis based on DNA-sequencing of all coding exons and adjacent splice consensus sequences of NOTCH1 gene. Our analyses revealed 57 NOTCH1 sequence variants. Twenty-one variants are located within exons and 36 within intronic or 5'-UTR sequences. Thirty-five variants were described previously as polymorphisms. The remaining 22, however, were neither listed in public SNP databases nor in the literature and were therefore considered novel. Seventeen variants were found only once (MAF = 1%), of these 15 were novel. Two sequence variants led to amino acid substitutions (p.T596M and p.P1797H) and are located in highly conserved regions of the NOTCH1 protein. In addition, these two mutations could not be detected in at least 327 healthy controls by using RFLP-analysis. The functional relevance of the other 13 novel and rare variants could not be proven without further functional examination. In this study, we provide a new evidence that the mutations in the NOTCH1 f gene may trigger the underlying mechanism causing the valve calcification, especially in BAV. In conclusion, NOTCH1 gene mutations do not only play a role in familiar BAV, but can also be observed in approximately 4% of sporadic cases. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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