4.6 Article

Co-inheritance of a PKD1 mutation and homozygous PKD2 variant: a potential modifier in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 38, 期 3, 页码 180-190

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2007.01913.x

关键词

channel activity; mutation; PKD; polycystins

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), which is caused by mutations in polycystins 1 (PC1) and 2 (PC2), is one of the most commonly inherited renal diseases, affecting similar to 1 : 1000 Caucasians. Materialas and methods We screened Greek ADPKD patients with the denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) assay and direct sequencing. Results We identified a patient homozygous for a nucleotide change c.1445T > G, resulting in a novel homozygous substitution of the non-polar hydrophobic phenylalanine to the polar hydrophilic cysteine in exon 6 at codon 482 (p.F482C) of the PKD2 gene and a de-novo PKD1 splice-site variant IVS21-2delAG. We did not find this PKD2 variant in a screen of 280 chromosomes of healthy subjects, supporting its pathogenicity. The proband's parents did not have the PKD1 mutation. Real-time PCR of the PKD2 transcript from a skin biopsy revealed 20-fold higher expression in the patient than in a healthy subject and was higher in the patient's peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) than in those of her heterozygote daughter and a healthy subject. The greater gene expression was also supported by Western blotting. Inner medullar collecting duct (IMCD) cells transfected with the mutant PKD2 mouse gene presented a perinuclear and diffuse cytoplasmic localization compared with the wild type ER localization. Patch-clamping of PBMCs from the p.F482C homozygous and heterozygous subjects revealed lower polycystin-2 channel function than in controls. Conclusions We report for the first time a patient with ADPKD who is heterozygous for a de novo PKD1 variant and homozygous for a novel PKD2 mutation.

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

4.6
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