PURPOSE: To further characterize the mutations within the CHST6 gene responsible for causing macular corneal dystrophy in a cohort of affected patients from the United States. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: Genomic DNA was extracted from buccal epithelium of 16 affected patients (14 families), 17 unaffected relatives, and 127 controls, followed by polymerase chain reaction amplification and direct sequencing of the CHST6 coding region. Subtyping of affected patients into type I and II macular corneal dystrophy was performed by measuring antigenic keratan sulfate (AgKS) serum levels. Haplotype analysis was performed in families that demonstrated common mutations. RESULTS: CHST6 coding region analysis in 10 patients identified as having type I macular corneal dystrophy revealed 10 sequence changes: eight missense mutations, four of which are novel (Met104Val, Tyr110Cys, Gln122Pro, and Leu276Pro) and four of which have been reported previously (Ser51Leu, Pro72Ser, Cys102Gly, and Leu200Arg); one novel homozygous nonsense mutation in two patients from a single family (c. 1683C>T, Gln331X); and one frameshift mutation in a heterozygous state in a single patient (c.1744_1751dupGTGCGCTG). Mutation analysis in the four patients identified as having type II macular corneal dystrophy (serum samples were not obtained from two affected patients) revealed three patients heterozygous for either the c.923G>C, c.969C>A, or c.1519T>C sequence changes. The fourth patient was compound heterozygous for c.969C>A and c.1291T>G. None of these changes was observed in 127 control individuals. Haplotype analysis using microsatellite markers flanking the CHST6 gene did not reveal a common founder for the Leu200Arg (1291T>G) missense mutation, present in five families, identifying this position as a mutation hot-spot. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of previously unreported mutations in the coding region of the CHST6 gene are associated with type I macular corneal dystrophy in a cohort of patients from the United States.
PURPOSE: To further characterize the mutations within the CHST6 gene responsible for causing macular corneal dystrophy in a cohort of affected patients from the United States. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: Genomic DNA was extracted from buccal epithelium of 16 affected patients (14 families), 17 unaffected relatives, and 127 controls, followed by polymerase chain reaction amplification and direct sequencing of the CHST6 coding region. Subtyping of affected patients into type I and II macular corneal dystrophy was performed by measuring antigenic keratan sulfate (AgKS) serum levels. Haplotype analysis was performed in families that demonstrated common mutations. RESULTS:CHST6 coding region analysis in 10 patients identified as having type I macular corneal dystrophy revealed 10 sequence changes: eight missense mutations, four of which are novel (Met104Val, Tyr110Cys, Gln122Pro, and Leu276Pro) and four of which have been reported previously (Ser51Leu, Pro72Ser, Cys102Gly, and Leu200Arg); one novel homozygous nonsense mutation in two patients from a single family (c. 1683C>T, Gln331X); and one frameshift mutation in a heterozygous state in a single patient (c.1744_1751dupGTGCGCTG). Mutation analysis in the four patients identified as having type II macular corneal dystrophy (serum samples were not obtained from two affected patients) revealed three patients heterozygous for either the c.923G>C, c.969C>A, or c.1519T>C sequence changes. The fourth patient was compound heterozygous for c.969C>A and c.1291T>G. None of these changes was observed in 127 control individuals. Haplotype analysis using microsatellite markers flanking the CHST6 gene did not reveal a common founder for the Leu200Arg (1291T>G) missense mutation, present in five families, identifying this position as a mutation hot-spot. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of previously unreported mutations in the coding region of the CHST6 gene are associated with type I macular corneal dystrophy in a cohort of patients from the United States.
Authors: Jayne S Weiss; H U Møller; Walter Lisch; Shigeru Kinoshita; Anthony J Aldave; Michael W Belin; Tero Kivelä; Massimo Busin; Francis L Munier; Berthold Seitz; John Sutphin; Cecilie Bredrup; Mark J Mannis; Christopher J Rapuano; Gabriel Van Rij; Eung Kweon Kim; Gordon K Klintworth Journal: Cornea Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 2.651
Authors: Sameer S Chopra; Ignaty Leshchiner; Hatice Duzkale; Heather McLaughlin; Monica Giovanni; Chengsheng Zhang; Nathan Stitziel; Joyce Fingeroth; Robin M Joyce; Matthew Lebo; Heidi Rehm; Dana Vuzman; Richard Maas; Shamil R Sunyaev; Michael Murray; Christopher A Cassa Journal: Mol Genet Genomic Med Date: 2015-05-10 Impact factor: 2.183
Authors: Nadia Carstens; Susan Williams; Saadiah Goolam; Trevor Carmichael; Ming Sin Cheung; Stine Büchmann-Møller; Marc Sultan; Frank Staedtler; Chao Zou; Peter Swart; Dennis S Rice; Arnaud Lacoste; Kim Paes; Michèle Ramsay Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 2.103
Authors: Afia Sultana; Gordon K Klintworth; Eugene J-M A Thonar; Geeta K Vemuganti; Chitra Kannabiran Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2009-02-09 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Yasutaka Hayashida; Tomoya O Akama; Nicola Beecher; Philip Lewis; Robert D Young; Keith M Meek; Briedgeen Kerr; Clare E Hughes; Bruce Caterson; Akira Tanigami; Jun Nakayama; Michiko N Fukada; Yasuo Tano; Kohji Nishida; Andrew J Quantock Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-08-25 Impact factor: 11.205