PURPOSE: To examine the difference in expression of retinitis pigmentosa from mutations at codon 23 and codon 347 or rhodopsin; to report a novel mutation in rhodopsin. METHODS: Goldmann perimetry (solid angle of I4e isopter) and electroretinographic amplitudes (square root transform of a response ratio) were analyzed for 24 patients with mutations at codon 347 (15 with Pro347Ala, 2 with Pro347Gln, 6 with Pro347Leu, and 1 with a novel Pro347Cys change) and 41 patients with mutations at codon 23 (6 with Pro23Ala; 35 with Pro23His). RESULTS: When all patients with mutations at codons 347 and 23 were compared, loss of visual fields was significantly worse in patients with codon 347 changes (P =.0003). Only rod responses of the electroretinograms were significantly different between the two groups (P =.048). Specific comparison of Pro347Ala with Pro23Ala using regression analysis demonstrated significant differences in severity between codon 23 and codon 347 patients for b-wave amplitudes of rod (P =.0069), cone (P =.039) and maximum combined response (P =.049). The solid angle of the I4e isopter was also significantly different (P =.025) between the groups after controlling for age. Modeling age by group for Pro347Ala comparison produced an R(2) of.44. CONCLUSION: We reconfirmed that rhodopsin-related retinitis pigmentosa from mutations involving codon 347 produces a more severe phenotype than that involving codon 23. Accurate modeling of disease was shown to be possible by incorporating the effects of a patient's age and specific genotype. Therefore, both of these variables must be considered in prognostic counseling and subject recruitment for future therapeutic trials.
PURPOSE: To examine the difference in expression of retinitis pigmentosa from mutations at codon 23 and codon 347 or rhodopsin; to report a novel mutation in rhodopsin. METHODS: Goldmann perimetry (solid angle of I4e isopter) and electroretinographic amplitudes (square root transform of a response ratio) were analyzed for 24 patients with mutations at codon 347 (15 with Pro347Ala, 2 with Pro347Gln, 6 with Pro347Leu, and 1 with a novel Pro347Cys change) and 41 patients with mutations at codon 23 (6 with Pro23Ala; 35 with Pro23His). RESULTS: When all patients with mutations at codons 347 and 23 were compared, loss of visual fields was significantly worse in patients with codon 347 changes (P =.0003). Only rod responses of the electroretinograms were significantly different between the two groups (P =.048). Specific comparison of Pro347Ala with Pro23Ala using regression analysis demonstrated significant differences in severity between codon 23 and codon 347 patients for b-wave amplitudes of rod (P =.0069), cone (P =.039) and maximum combined response (P =.049). The solid angle of the I4e isopter was also significantly different (P =.025) between the groups after controlling for age. Modeling age by group for Pro347Ala comparison produced an R(2) of.44. CONCLUSION: We reconfirmed that rhodopsin-related retinitis pigmentosa from mutations involving codon 347 produces a more severe phenotype than that involving codon 23. Accurate modeling of disease was shown to be possible by incorporating the effects of a patient's age and specific genotype. Therefore, both of these variables must be considered in prognostic counseling and subject recruitment for future therapeutic trials.
Authors: Edwin M Stone; Xunda Luo; Elise Héon; Byron L Lam; Richard G Weleber; Jennifer A Halder; Louisa M Affatigato; Jacqueline B Goldberg; Alexander Sumaroka; Sharon B Schwartz; Artur V Cideciyan; Samuel G Jacobson Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-12-28 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Sanae Sakami; Tadao Maeda; Grzegorz Bereta; Kiichiro Okano; Marcin Golczak; Alexander Sumaroka; Alejandro J Roman; Artur V Cideciyan; Samuel G Jacobson; Krzysztof Palczewski Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Ishaq A Viringipurampeer; Cheryl Y Gregory-Evans; Andrew L Metcalfe; Emran Bashar; Orson L Moritz; Kevin Gregory-Evans Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: K T Oh; D M Oh; R G Weleber; E M Stone; A Parikh; J White; K A Deboer-Shields; L Streb; C Vallar Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Vera L Bonilha; Mary E Rayborn; Brent A Bell; Meghan J Marino; Craig D Beight; Gayle J Pauer; Elias I Traboulsi; Joe G Hollyfield; Stephanie A Hagstrom Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Jasvir Kaur; Stine Mencl; Ayse Sahaboglu; Pietro Farinelli; Theo van Veen; Eberhart Zrenner; Per Ekström; François Paquet-Durand; Blanca Arango-Gonzalez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 3.240