4.7 Article

Diagnosis of Duchenne dystrophy by enhanced detection of small mutations

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 57, 期 4, 页码 645-650

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.57.4.645

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR00034] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine whether detection of small mutations of the dystrophin gene can be increased using an enhanced method of single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis. Background: Usual methods of DNA analysis for Duchenne dystrophy cannot identify mutations in one-third of cases. Muscle biopsy, with its inherent risks and added liability for patients with Duchenne dystrophy, becomes the sole method of diagnosis. Even with a tissue diagnosis of dystrophin deficiency, many families are excluded from carrier detection and prenatal diagnosis. Methods: Genomic DNA from a cohort of 93 patients with Duchenne dystrophy without identifiable gene mutations was screened for mutations. In each case, 22 kilobases of genomic DNA were scanned, including all 79 exons of the dystrophin gene, adjacent intronic regions, and six alternative exons 1. Results: Sixty-eight (73%) had small mutations, including 34 nonsense mutations, 27 microdeletions and insertions, and 7 splice site mutations. No missense mutations were found. One nonsense mutation in exon 59 was detected in four patients. Most mutations were new; 54 of 62 different small mutations have not been reported. Mutations were found throughout the gene: 24% in the first quartile, 31% in the second, 16% in the third, and 29% in the fourth. Conclusions: A highly sensitive single-strand conformation polymorphism method substantially increased detection of small dystrophin gene mutations and made it possible to diagnose approximately 90% of patients with Duchenne dystrophy by DNA analysis. These findings, combined with cost savings and safety issues, provide compelling reasons to consider DNA analysis as the initial diagnostic test for the suspected dystrophin-deficient patient.

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