4.7 Article

A comprehensive mutation analysis of RP2 and RPGR in a north American cohort of families with x-linked retinitis pigmentosa

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 70, 期 6, 页码 1545-1554

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/340848

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY 07961, R01 EY005235, F31 EY007003, EY 05627, P30 EY007003, EY 05235, R01 EY007961, EY 07003] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP) is a clinically and genetically heterogeneous degenerative disease of the retina. At least five loci have been mapped for XLRP; of these, RP2 and RP3 account for 10%-20% and 70%-90% of genetically identifiable disease, respectively. However, mutations in the respective genes, RP2 and RPGR, were detected in only 10% and 20% of families with XLRP. Mutations in an alternatively spliced RPGR exon, ORF15, have recently been shown to account for 60% of XLRP in a European cohort of 47 families. We have performed, in a North American cohort of 234 families with RP, a comprehensive screen of the RP2 and RPGR (including ORF15) genes and their 5 upstream regions. Of these families, 91 (39%) show definitive X-linked inheritance, an additional 88 (38%) reveal a pattern consistent with X-linked disease, and the remaining 55 (23%) are simplex male patients with RP who had an early onset and/or severe disease. In agreement with the previous studies, we show that mutations in the RP2 gene and in the original 19 RPGR exons are detected in ! 10% and 20% of XLRP probands, respectively. Our studies have revealed RPGR-ORF15 mutations in an additional 30% of 91 well-documented families with X-linked recessive inheritance and in 22% of the total 234 probands analyzed. We suggest that mutations in an as-yet-uncharacterized RPGR exon(s), intronic changes, or another gene in the region might be responsible for the disease in the remainder of this North American cohort. We also discuss the implications of our studies for genetic diagnosis, genotype-phenotype correlations, and gene-based therapy.

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