4.5 Article

DFNB16 is a frequent cause of congenital hearing impairment: implementation of STRC mutation analysis in routine diagnostics

期刊

CLINICAL GENETICS
卷 87, 期 1, 页码 49-55

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cge.12332

关键词

chromosome 15q15; 3; congenital hearing impairment; deafness-infertility syndrome (DIS); DFNB16; non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL); STRC

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [HA 1374/7-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing attention has been directed toward assessing mutational fallout of stereocilin (STRC), the gene underlying DFNB16. A major challenge is due to a closely linked pseudogene with 99.6% coding sequence identity. In 94 GJB2/GJB6-mutation negative individuals with non-syndromic sensorineural hearing loss (NSHL), we identified two homozygous and six heterozygous deletions, encompassing the STRC region by microarray and/or quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysis. To detect smaller mutations, we developed a Sanger sequencing method for pseudogene exclusion. Three heterozygous deletion carriers exhibited hemizygous mutations predicted as negatively impacting the protein. In 30 NSHL individuals without deletion, we detected one with compound heterozygous and two with heterozygous pathogenic mutations. Of 36 total patients undergoing STRC sequencing, two showed the c.3893A>G variant in conjunction with a heterozygous deletion or mutation and three exhibited the variant in a heterozygous state. Although this variant affects a highly conserved amino acid and is predicted as deleterious, comparable minor allele frequencies (MAFs) (around 10%) in NSHL individuals and controls and homozygous variant carriers without NSHL argue against its pathogenicity. Collectively, six (6%) of 94 NSHL individuals were diagnosed with homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations causing DFNB16 and five (5%) as heterozygous mutation carriers. Besides GJB2/GJB6 (DFNB1), STRC is a major contributor to congenital hearing impairment.

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

4.5
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