| Literature DB >> 29868776 |
Michael S Nahorski1, Sateesh Maddirevula2, Ryosuke Ishimura3, Saud Alsahli2, Angela F Brady4, Anaïs Begemann5, Tsunehiro Mizushima6, Francisco J Guzmán-Vega7, Miki Obata3, Yoshinobu Ichimura3, Hessa S Alsaif2, Shams Anazi2, Niema Ibrahim2, Firdous Abdulwahab2, Mais Hashem2, Dorota Monies2,8, Mohamed Abouelhoda2,8, Brian F Meyer2,8, Majid Alfadhel9, Wafa Eyaid9, Markus Zweier5, Katharina Steindl5, Anita Rauch5,10, Stefan T Arold7, C Geoffrey Woods1, Masaaki Komatsu3, Fowzan S Alkuraya2,8,11.
Abstract
The post-translational modification of proteins through the addition of UFM1, also known as ufmylation, plays a critical developmental role as revealed by studies in animal models. The recent finding that biallelic mutations in UBA5 (the E1-like enzyme for ufmylation) cause severe early-onset encephalopathy with progressive microcephaly implicates ufmylation in human brain development. More recently, a homozygous UFM1 variant was proposed as a candidate aetiology of severe early-onset encephalopathy with progressive microcephaly. Here, we establish a locus for severe early-onset encephalopathy with progressive microcephaly based on two families, and map the phenotype to a novel homozygous UFM1 mutation. This mutation has a significantly diminished capacity to form thioester intermediates with UBA5 and with UFC1 (the E2-like enzyme for ufmylation), with resulting impaired ufmylation of cellular proteins. Remarkably, in four additional families where eight children have severe early-onset encephalopathy with progressive microcephaly, we identified two biallelic UFC1 mutations, which impair UFM1-UFC1 intermediate formation with resulting widespread reduction of cellular ufmylation, a pattern similar to that observed with UFM1 mutation. The striking resemblance between UFM1- and UFC1-related clinical phenotype and biochemical derangements strongly argues for an essential role for ufmylation in human brain development. The hypomorphic nature of UFM1 and UFC1 mutations and the conspicuous depletion of biallelic null mutations in the components of this pathway in human genome databases suggest that it is necessary for embryonic survival, which is consistent with the embryonic lethal nature of knockout models for the orthologous genes.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29868776 PMCID: PMC6022668 DOI: 10.1093/brain/awy135
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain ISSN: 0006-8950 Impact factor: 13.501
Summary of the clinical features of patients with UFM1 and UFC1 mutations
| ID | 12DG0178 | 12DG1577 | 14DG0050 | 16DG1614 | MDL-17-3196 | MDL-17-3892 | 17DG0828 | ID76366 | UK1 | UK2 | 10DG0945 | 10DG0946 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gene | ||||||||||||
| Mutation | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.317C>T p.(Thr106Ile) | c.68G>A p.(Arg23Gln) | c.241C>T p.(Arg81Cys) | c.241C>T p.(Arg81Cys) | c.241C>T p.(Arg81Cys) | c.241C>T p.(Arg81Cys) |
| Age | 16 years | 23 years | 3 years | 5 years | 5 years | 31 months | 8 years | 4 years | 13 months | 13 months | 2 years | 1 year |
| Gender | F | F | F | F | F | F | F | M | F | M | M | M |
| Microcephaly | + | + | - | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Short Stature | + | + | - | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Underweight | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| GDD | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Seizures | + | - | - | + | + | - | - | + | + | + | + | + |
GDD = global developmental delay; F = female; M = male.
aMicrocephaly was always secondary i.e. postnatal.
Figure 1UFM1-related clinical phenotype. (A) Pedigree of Family 1 with UFM1 mutation. (B and C) Images from Family 1 exhibiting lack of major facial dysmorphism. (D and E) Pes cavus as a result of abnormal tone in Patients 10DG0945 and 10DG0946, respectively (Family 1). (F) Genome-wide homozygosity mapping revealed a single critical locus. Blue box indicates haplotype (Chr13:36292810-42302880) identical by descent. (G) Pedigree of Family 2 with UFM1 mutation. (H) Facial image of Patient UK1 (Family 2) showing full cheeks. (I and J) Peripheral oedema of Patients UK1 and UK2 (Family 2). (K and L) Brain MRI of Patient UK1 showing cerebellar hypoplasia and thin corpus callosum and frontal cortical polymicrogyria. (M) Schematic diagram of UFM1 protein representing ubiquitin-fold modifier 1 domain with the mutation indicated. The Arg81 at the mutation site is highly conserved from humans to C. elegans.
Figure 2UFC1-related clinical phenotype. (A) Pedigrees of the families with UFC1 mutation. (B) Genome-wide homozygosity plot highlighting a single critical locus from Families 1–3, who harbour the p.(Thr106Ile) mutation. Blue box indicates haplotype (Chr1:158957700-162094700) identical by descent. (C) Clinical images showing multiple joint contractures and emaciation (Patient 17DG0828). (D and E) Clinical images of younger patients suggest a progressive nature of emaciation (Patients 14DG0050 and 16DG1614, respectively). (F) Brain MRI of Patient 16DG1614 showing bilateral hyperintense signals in the basal ganglia. (G and H) Brain MRI of Patient MDL-17-3196 showing bilateral hyperintense signals in the basal ganglia in the first year that resolved in a repeated brain MRI in the fourth year of age. (I) Brain MRI of Patient ID76366 showing markedly delayed myelination. (J) Schematic diagram of UFC1 protein showing UFC1 domain and mutation site. Mutations Arg23Gln and Thr106Ile are highly conserved from humans to C. elegans.
Comparison of phenotype between this study patients with UFM1 and UFC1 mutations and those previously reported with mutations in UFM1 and UBA5
| Comparison between UFM1-UBA5-UFC1 pathway reported cases | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current cohort | ||||
| Gene | ||||
| (PubMed: 27545681, 27545674, 28965491) | ||||
| Mutation | c.317C>T; c.68G>A | c.241C>T | c.-273_-271delTCA | c.1111G>A |
| c.904C>T | ||||
| c.971_972insC | ||||
| c.778G>A | ||||
| c.1165G>T | ||||
| c.169A>G | ||||
| c.503G>A | ||||
| c.164G>A | ||||
| c.684G > A | ||||
| Number of cases | 8 | 4 | 16 | 19 |
| Failure to thrive | 100% (8/8) | 100% (4/4) | 63% (10/16) | 89% (8/9) |
| Short stature | 88% (7/8) | 100% (4/4) | 75% (12/16) | 77% (10/13) |
| Microcephaly | 88% (7/8) | 100% (4/4) | 100% (16/16) | 100% (18/18) |
| Global developmental delay | 100% (8/8) | 100% (4/4) | 100% (16/16) | 100% (19/19) |
| Seizures | 50% (4/8) | 100% (4/4) | 75% (12/16) | 84% (16/19) |
| Brain MRI | ||||
| Basal ganglia abnormality | 33% (2/6) | 0% (0/4) | 100% (16/16) | 0% (0/17) |
| Delayed CNS myelination | 17% (1/6) | 75% (3/4) | 100% (16/16) | 24% (4/17) |
| Cerebellar hypoplasia | 0% (0/6) | 75% (3/4) | 81% (13/16) | 24% (4/17) |
| Mortality | 0% (0/8) | 100% (4/4) | 56% (9/16) | 24% (4/19) |
Figure 3Hypomorphic effect of the UFM1 mutation on the UFM system. (A) Molecular basis for the effect of the UFM1R81C mutation. Top: Crystal structure of the heterodimeric complex between UFM1 (magenta and yellow) and UBA5 (cyan and green), taken from PDB id 5IAA. Bottom: Magnification of the boxed region. The view is tilted horizontally by ∼30° compared to the top panel. For clarity, only side chains of Arg81 and of Arg81-interacting residues are shown. (B) In vitro pull-down assay. Pull-down assay with GST-UBA5 and UFM1, UFM1 mutants or LC3B. GST-UBA5 conjugated with Glutathione Sepharose® 4B was incubated with purified recombinant UFM1, UFM1 mutants or LC3B. LC3B is known to interact with UBA5. The pulled-down complexes were subjected to NuPAGE® (4–12% acrylamide gradient) and Coomassie brilliant blue staining. GST-UBA5, LC3B, UFM1 and UFM1 mutants are indicated. (C and D) Immunoblot assay. Indicated constructs (0.1 µg for UBA5C250S, 0.5 µg for UFC1C116S, and 2 µg for UFM1 or mutants) were expressed in UFM1-deficient HEK293T cells. Twenty-four hours after transfection, the cell lysates were subjected to immunoblot analysis with anti-FLAG antibody. Bar graphs indicate the quantitative densitometric analyses of FLAG-UBA5-MYC-UFM1 and FLAG-UFC1-MYC-UFM1 intermediates relative to free FLAG-UBA5 and FLAG-UFC1, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using the unpaired t-test (Welch test). The data represent the means ± SE of three separate experiments. **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001. (E and F) In vitro thioester formation assay of UFM1 by UBA5 (E) and of UFM1 by UFC1 (F). The assay was conducted as described in the ‘Materials and methods’ section. Data shown are representative of three separate experiments. (G) Immunoblot analysis in case (P1: 10DG0945, Individual V1 in Fig. 1A) and control (C1: a healthy Sudanese young female) lymphoblasts. Reducing (DTT plus) and non-reducing (DTT minus) samples were prepared from lymphoblasts and subjected to immunoblot analysis for UFM1 (left), UBA5 (middle), and UFC1 (right). We used a hand-made anti-UFM1 antibody in this experiment since the commercial antibody did not recognize UFM1R81C. Bar graphs indicate the quantitative densitometric analyses of UBA5-UFM1 and UFC1-UFM1 intermediates relative to free UBA5 and UFC1, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using the unpaired t-test (Welch test). The data represent the means ± SE of three separate experiments. **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001.
Figure 4Hypomorphic effect of UFC1 mutants on the UFM system. (A) Localization of the key binding sites on UFC1. Binding sites for E1 and E3 are indicated. Boxed region shows the active site, and the coiled region for binding site to UFM1 is coloured in orange. The mutated residues Arg23 and Thr106 are highlighted in yellow and green, respectively. Encircled region shows the proximity of R23 with regions involved in binding to E1 (helix α2) and E3 (Tyr90, Pro91, Pro130; cyan). (B) Bottom: Magnification of Thr106. Residues involved in hydrophobic or polar interactions with Thr106 are shown as stick models. Colouring as in A, except for the mutant Ile106, which is shown as light grey stick model, with positions of minor clashes indicated as discs. Top: Magnification of Arg23. Colouring as in A, except for the mutant Gln23, which is shown as magenta stick model. (C) Immunoblot assay. Indicated constructs (0.5 μg for UFC1C116S, UFC1C116S/T106I or UFC1C116S/R23Q and 2 μg for UFM1) were expressed in UFC1-deficient HEK293T cells. Twenty-four hours after transfection, the cell lysates were subjected to immunoblot analysis with indicated antibodies. Bar graphs indicate the quantitative densitometric analyses of FLAG-UFC1-MYC-UFM1 intermediates relative to free FLAG-UFC1. Statistical analyses were performed using the unpaired t-test (Welch test). The data represent the means ± SE of three separate experiments. *P < 0.05. (D) In vitro thioester formation assay of UFM1 by UFC1. The assay was conducted as described in the ‘Materials and methods’ section. Data shown are representative of three separate experiments. (E) Immunoblot analysis in case (P2, P3, P4: V:1) and control (C1: a healthy Sudanese young females) lymphoblasts. Reducing (DTT plus) and non-reducing (DTT minus) samples were prepared from lymphoblasts and subjected to immunoblot analysis for UFC1 (left), and UFM1 (right). Bar graph indicates the quantitative densitometric analysis of UFC1-UFM1 intermediates relative to free UFC1. Statistical analysis was performed using the unpaired t-test (Welch test). The data represent the means ± SE of three separate experiments. **P < 0.01.