PURPOSE: Bestrophin-1 gene (BEST1) mutations are responsible for a broad spectrum of human retinal phenotypes, jointly called bestrophinopathies. Canine multifocal retinopathy (cmr), caused by mutations in the dog gene ortholog, shares numerous phenotypic features with human BEST1-associated disorders. The purpose of this study was the assessment of molecular consequences and pathogenic outcomes of the cmr1 (C(73)T/R(25)X) premature termination and the cmr2 (G(482)A/G(161)D) missense mutation of the canine model compared with the C(87)G/Y(29)X mutation observed in human patients. METHODS: Dogs carrying the BEST1 mutation were introduced into a breeding colony and used to produce either carrier or affected offspring. Eyes were collected immediately after euthanatization at the disease-relevant ages and were harvested for expression studies. In parallel, an in vitro cell culture model system was developed and compared with in vivo RESULTS: The results demonstrate that cmr1 and human C(87)G-mutated transcripts bypass the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay machinery, suggesting the AUG proximity effect as an underlying transcriptional mechanism. The truncated protein, however, is not detectable in either species. The in vitro model accurately recapitulates transcriptional and translational expression events observed in vivo and, thus, implies loss of bestrophin-1 function in cmr1-dogs and Y(29)X-affected patients. Immunofluorescence microscopy of cmr2 mutant showed mislocalization of the protein. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular evaluation of cmr mutations in vivo and in vitro constitutes the next step toward elucidating genotype-phenotype interactions concerning human bestrophinopathies and emphasizes the importance of the canine models for studying the complexity of the BEST1 disease mechanism.
PURPOSE:Bestrophin-1 gene (BEST1) mutations are responsible for a broad spectrum of human retinal phenotypes, jointly called bestrophinopathies. Canine multifocal retinopathy (cmr), caused by mutations in the dog gene ortholog, shares numerous phenotypic features with humanBEST1-associated disorders. The purpose of this study was the assessment of molecular consequences and pathogenic outcomes of the cmr1 (C(73)T/R(25)X) premature termination and the cmr2 (G(482)A/G(161)D) missense mutation of the canine model compared with the C(87)G/Y(29)X mutation observed in humanpatients. METHODS:Dogs carrying the BEST1 mutation were introduced into a breeding colony and used to produce either carrier or affected offspring. Eyes were collected immediately after euthanatization at the disease-relevant ages and were harvested for expression studies. In parallel, an in vitro cell culture model system was developed and compared with in vivo RESULTS: The results demonstrate that cmr1 and human C(87)G-mutated transcripts bypass the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay machinery, suggesting the AUG proximity effect as an underlying transcriptional mechanism. The truncated protein, however, is not detectable in either species. The in vitro model accurately recapitulates transcriptional and translational expression events observed in vivo and, thus, implies loss of bestrophin-1 function in cmr1-dogs and Y(29)X-affected patients. Immunofluorescence microscopy of cmr2 mutant showed mislocalization of the protein. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular evaluation of cmr mutations in vivo and in vitro constitutes the next step toward elucidating genotype-phenotype interactions concerning humanbestrophinopathies and emphasizes the importance of the canine models for studying the complexity of the BEST1 disease mechanism.
Authors: G M Acland; G D Aguirre; J Ray; Q Zhang; T S Aleman; A V Cideciyan; S E Pearce-Kelling; V Anand; Y Zeng; A M Maguire; S G Jacobson; W W Hauswirth; J Bennett Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: J M Seddon; M A Afshari; S Sharma; P S Bernstein; S Chong; A Hutchinson; K Petrukhin; R Allikmets Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: F Krämer; K White; D Pauleikhoff; A Gehrig; L Passmore; A Rivera; G Rudolph; U Kellner; M Andrassi; B Lorenz; K Rohrschneider; A Blankenagel; B Jurklies; H Schilling; F Schütt; F G Holz; B H Weber Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Weng Tao; Rong Wen; Moses B Goddard; Sandy D Sherman; Pam J O'Rourke; Paul F Stabila; William J Bell; Brenda J Dean; Konrad A Kauper; Veronica A Budz; William G Tsiaras; Gregory M Acland; Sue Pearce-Kelling; Alan M Laties; Gustavo D Aguirre Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Michael J Pianta; Tomas S Aleman; Artur V Cideciyan; Janet S Sunness; Yuanyuan Li; Betsy A Campochiaro; Peter A Campochiaro; Donald J Zack; Edwin M Stone; Samuel G Jacobson Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Adiv A Johnson; Karina E Guziewicz; C Justin Lee; Ravi C Kalathur; Jose S Pulido; Lihua Y Marmorstein; Alan D Marmorstein Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Rebecca E H Whiting; Jacqueline W Pearce; Leilani J Castaner; Cheryl A Jensen; Rebecca J Katz; Douglas H Gilliam; Martin L Katz Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2015-02-16 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Karina E Guziewicz; Divya Sinha; Néstor M Gómez; Kathryn Zorych; Emily V Dutrow; Anuradha Dhingra; Robert F Mullins; Edwin M Stone; David M Gamm; Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia; Gustavo D Aguirre Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Karina E Guziewicz; Barbara Zangerl; András M Komáromy; Simone Iwabe; Vincent A Chiodo; Sanford L Boye; William W Hauswirth; William A Beltran; Gustavo D Aguirre Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ann E Cooper; Saija Ahonen; Jessica S Rowlan; Alison Duncan; Eija H Seppälä; Päivi Vanhapelto; Hannes Lohi; András M Komáromy Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alan D Marmorstein; Adiv A Johnson; Lori A Bachman; Cynthia Andrews-Pfannkoch; Travis Knudsen; Benjamin J Gilles; Matthew Hill; Jarel K Gandhi; Lihua Y Marmorstein; Jose S Pulido Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 4.379