PURPOSE: To assess the frequency of RPGR and RP2 mutations in a set of 85 patients with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP) and to compare the visual function of patients with mutations in RPGR versus RP2. METHODS: Eighty-five unrelated patients with XLRP were ascertained, mainly from North America. The single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) and a direct sequencing technique were used to screen their DNA for mutations in the coding region and splice sites of RPGR and RP2. The Snellen visual acuities, visual field areas, and 0.5-Hz and 30-Hz electroretinograms (ERGs) were measured in male patients. The visual function parameters were compared using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: A wide spectrum of mutations was found in both genes, including missense, nonsense, splice-site, and frameshift mutations. Twenty putative pathogenic mutations in RPGR, 15 of which were novel, were found in 22 patients (26%), whereas 6 mutations in RP2, 4 of which were novel, were found in 6 patients (7%). A high fraction of the mutations in both genes affected amino acid residues within or adjacent to presumed functional domains. Comparison of visual function between comparably aged patients with mutations in RPGR versus RP2 showed that, on average, patients with RPGR mutations have lower ERG amplitudes and smaller visual field areas. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations in RPGR and RP2 genes together account for approximately 33% of cases of XLRP in North America. Patients with RPGR mutations have less overall retinal function on average than those with RP2 mutations, on the basis of measurements of visual field areas and full-field ERG amplitudes.
PURPOSE: To assess the frequency of RPGR and RP2 mutations in a set of 85 patients with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP) and to compare the visual function of patients with mutations in RPGR versus RP2. METHODS: Eighty-five unrelated patients with XLRP were ascertained, mainly from North America. The single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) and a direct sequencing technique were used to screen their DNA for mutations in the coding region and splice sites of RPGR and RP2. The Snellen visual acuities, visual field areas, and 0.5-Hz and 30-Hz electroretinograms (ERGs) were measured in male patients. The visual function parameters were compared using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: A wide spectrum of mutations was found in both genes, including missense, nonsense, splice-site, and frameshift mutations. Twenty putative pathogenic mutations in RPGR, 15 of which were novel, were found in 22 patients (26%), whereas 6 mutations in RP2, 4 of which were novel, were found in 6 patients (7%). A high fraction of the mutations in both genes affected amino acid residues within or adjacent to presumed functional domains. Comparison of visual function between comparably aged patients with mutations in RPGR versus RP2 showed that, on average, patients with RPGR mutations have lower ERG amplitudes and smaller visual field areas. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations in RPGR and RP2 genes together account for approximately 33% of cases of XLRP in North America. Patients with RPGR mutations have less overall retinal function on average than those with RP2 mutations, on the basis of measurements of visual field areas and full-field ERG amplitudes.
Authors: Qihong Zhang; Joseph C Giacalone; Charles Searby; Edwin M Stone; Budd A Tucker; Val C Sheffield Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Thiran Jayasundera; Kari E H Branham; Mohammad Othman; William R Rhoades; Athanasios J Karoukis; Hemant Khanna; Anand Swaroop; John R Heckenlively Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2010-07
Authors: Maria Fernanda Abalem; Cynthia X Qian; Kari Branham; Dana Schlegel; Abigail T Fahim; Naheed W Khan; John R Heckenlively; K Thiran Jayasundera Journal: Ophthalmic Genet Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 1.803
Authors: Kari Branham; Mohammad Othman; Matthew Brumm; Athanasios J Karoukis; Pelin Atmaca-Sonmez; Beverly M Yashar; Sharon B Schwartz; Niamh B Stover; Karmen Trzupek; Dianna Wheaton; Barbara Jennings; Maria Laura Ciccarelli; K Thiran Jayasundera; Richard A Lewis; David Birch; Jean Bennett; Paul A Sieving; Sten Andreasson; Jacque L Duncan; Gerald A Fishman; Alessandro Iannaccone; Richard G Weleber; Samuel G Jacobson; John R Heckenlively; Anand Swaroop Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Dror Sharon; Michael A Sandberg; Vivian W Rabe; Melissa Stillberger; Thaddeus P Dryja; Eliot L Berson Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2003-10-16 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Richard Guyon; Susan E Pearce-Kelling; Caroline J Zeiss; Gregory M Acland; Gustavo D Aguirre Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2007-07-11 Impact factor: 2.367