4.5 Article

Identification of a novel in-frame de novo mutation in SPTAN1 in intellectual disability and pontocerebellar atrophy

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 20, 期 7, 页码 796-800

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2011.271

关键词

intellectual disability; epilepsy; SPTAN1; pontocerebellar atrophy

资金

  1. Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR)
  2. Reseau de Genetique Medicale Appliquee (RMGA)/Fonds de la Recherche en Sante du Quebec (FRSQ)
  3. Genome Canada
  4. Genome Quebec
  5. Universite de Montreal for the Synapse
  6. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
  7. Japan Science and Technology Agency
  8. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  9. CIHR (Institute of Genetics)
  10. FRSQ
  11. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22689011, 24118001] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heterozygous in-frame mutations (p.E2207del and p.R2308_M2309dup) in the alpha-II subunit of spectrin (SPTAN1) were recently identified in two patients with intellectual disability (ID), infantile spasms (IS), hypomyelination, and brain atrophy. These mutations affected the C-terminal domain of the protein, which contains the nucleation site of the alpha/beta spectrin heterodimer. By screening SPTAN1 in 95 patients with idiopathic ID, we found a de novo in-frame mutation (p.Q2202del) in the same C-terminal domain in a patient with mild generalized epilepsy and pontocerebellar atrophy, but without IS, hypomyelination, or other brain structural defects, allowing us to define the core phenotype associated with these C-terminal SPTAN1 mutations. We also found a de novo missense variant (p.R566P) of unclear clinical significance in a patient with non-syndromic ID. These two mutations induced different patterns of aggregation between spectrin subunits in transfected neuronal cell lines, providing a paradigm for the classification of candidate variants. European Journal of Human Genetics (2012) 20, 796-800; doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2011.271; published online 18 January 2012

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