4.2 Review

Mutation screening of the CDKL5 gene in cryptogenic infantile intractable epilepsy and review of clinical sensitivity

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 432-438

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2011.01.005

关键词

Cyclin-dependent kinase-like 5 gene; Epilepsy; Mental retardation; Sensitivity; Thailand

资金

  1. Thailand Research Fund [MRG5080334]
  2. Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University [50/361-007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purposes: To perform CDKL5 mutation screening in Thai children with cryptogenic infantile intractable epilepsy and to determine the clinical sensitivity of CDKL5 screening when different inclusion criteria were applied. Methods: Children with cryptogenic infantile intractable epilepsy were screened for CDKL5 mutation using multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and DNA sequencing. The clinical sensitivity was reviewed by combining the results of studies using similar inclusion screening criteria. Results: Thirty children (19 girls and 11 boys) with a median seizure onset of 7 months were screened. Almost a half had infantile spasms and one fifth had stereotypic hand movements. A novel c.2854C>T (p.R952X) was identified in an ambulatory girl who had severe mental retardation, multiple types of seizures without Rett-like features. Her mother had a mild intellectual disability, yet her grandmother and half sister were normal despite having the same genetic alteration (random X-inactivation patterns). The pathogenicity of p.R952X identified here was uncertain since healthy relatives and 6 female controls also harbor this alteration. The clinical sensitivity of CDKL5 mutation screening among females with Rett-like features and negative MECP2 screening was 7.8% while the clinical sensitivity among females having cryptogenic intractable seizures with an onset before the ages of 12, 6 and 3 months were 4.7, 11.6 and 14.3%, respectively. (C) 2011 European Paediatric Neurology Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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