4.7 Article

KCNJ2 mutation results in Andersen syndrome with sex-specific cardiac and skeletal muscle phenotypes

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 71, 期 3, 页码 663-668

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/342360

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL/HD04300, HL46681, P01 HL046681, HL61006] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [F32-GM20415, F32 GM020415] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NINDS NIH HHS [R37 NS032387, NS32387, R01 NS032387] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evaluation of candidate loci culminated in the identification of a heterozygous missense mutation (R67W) in KCNJ2, the gene encoding the inward-rectifying potassium current, Kir2.1, in 41 members of a kindred in which ventricular arrhythmias (13 of 16 female members [81%]) and periodic paralysis (10 of 25 male members [40%]) segregated as autosomal dominant traits with sex-specific variable expressivity. Some mutation carriers exhibited dysmorphic features, including hypertelorism, small mandible, syndactyly, clinodactyly, cleft palate, and scoliosis, which, together with cardiodysrhythmic periodic paralysis, have been termed Andersen syndrome. However, no individual exhibited all manifestations of Andersen syndrome, and this diagnosis was not considered in the proband until other family members were examined. Other features seen in this kindred included unilateral dysplastic kidney and cardiovascular malformation (i. e., bicuspid aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve with coarctation of the aorta, or valvular pulmonary stenosis), which have not been previously associated. Nonspecific electrocardiographic abnormalities were identified in some individuals, but none had a prolonged QT interval. Biophysical characterization of R67W demonstrated loss of function and a dominant-negative effect on Kir2.1 current. These findings support the suggestion that, in addition to its recognized role in function of cardiac and skeletal muscle, KCNJ2 plays an important role in developmental signaling.

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