3.8 Article

Mutation analysis in congenital long QT syndrome -: A case with missense mutations in KCNQ1 and SCN5A

期刊

GENETIC TESTING
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 57-61

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC PUBL
DOI: 10.1089/109065703321560958

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Long QT Syndrome (LQTS) is a cardiac disease characterized by a prolonged QT interval on a surface electrocardiogram (ECG) and by clinical symptoms such as seizures, syncope, and cardiac sudden death. At present, causal mutations of LQTS have been identified in five cardiac ion-channel genes. Because a causal mutation is usually unique to a specific family and can be located in any region of any of these five genes, a mutation analysis effort may require screening of the complete coding regions of each of these genes. The causative nature of a detected mutation can then be determined either by family history or by functional studies, such as the electrophysiological signature of the mutation. Here we describe a mutation analysis of an LQTS patient who carries two heterozygous missense mutations in two different LQTS genes. The first mutation identified, A572D in SCN5A, was not linked with clinical LQTS features in the two other mutation carriers in the family; neither was it identified in 90 healthy controls. Therefore, this mutation most likely has either a mild effect on cardiac ion-channel function or represents a very rare polymorphism. The second mutation, V254M in KCNQ1, co-segregated with higher QT intervals and symptoms in other family members, and was previously reported in another LQTS family. Because the clinical LQTS symptoms are most pronounced in the proband, a combined effect of both mutations cannot be excluded, although no functional data are available to support such an hypothesis. We conclude that, for newly presented LQTS cases, a mutation analysis strategy should routinely screen the complete coding region of all LQTS genes, followed by an evaluation of the identified mutation(s) in conjunction with family or functional data.

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

3.8
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