4.5 Article

Missense variant in CCDC22 causes X-linked recessive intellectual disability with features of Ritscher-Schinzel/3C syndrome

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 633-638

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.109

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ritscher-Schinzel syndrome (RSS)/3C (cranio-cerebro-cardiac) syndrome (OMIM#220210) is a rare and clinically heterogeneous developmental disorder characterized by intellectual disability, cerebellar brain malformations, congenital heart defects, and craniofacial abnormalities. A recent study of a Canadian cohort identified homozygous sequence variants in the KIAA0196 gene, which encodes the WASH complex subunit strumpellin, as a cause for a form of RSS/3C syndrome. We have searched for genetic causes of a phenotype similar to RSS/3C syndrome in an Austrian family with two affected sons. To search for disease-causing variants, whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed on samples from two affected male children and their parents. Before WES, CGH array comparative genomic hybridization was applied. Validation of WES and segregation studies was done using routine Sanger sequencing. Exome sequencing detected a missense variant (c.1670A > G; p.(Tyr557Cys)) in exon 15 of the CCDC22 gene, which maps to chromosome Xp11.23. Western blots of immortalized lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) from the affected individual showed decreased expression of CCDC22 and an increased expression of WASH1 but a normal expression of strumpellin and FAM21 in the patients cells. We identified a variant in CCDC22 gene as the cause of an X-linked phenotype similar to RSS/3C syndrome in the family described here. A hypomorphic variant in CCDC22 was previously reported in association with a familial case of syndromic X-linked intellectual disability, which shows phenotypic overlap with RSS/3C syndrome. Thus, different inactivating variants affecting CCDC22 are associated with a phenotype similar to RSS/3C syndrome.

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