Novel mutations in the CDKL5 gene in complex genotypes associated with West syndrome with variable phenotype: First description of somatic mosaic state
“…Recently, both germline mosaicism and somatic mosaicism have also been reported as important mechanisms for early‐onset EE (Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010). Examples of somatic mosaicism include KCNQ2 mutations in neonatal EE (Milh et al, 2015), CDKL5 mutations in West syndrome (Jdila et al, 2017; Kato et al, 2015; Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010), paternal gonadal mosaicism of SCN1A mutations in Dravet syndrome (Depienne et al, 2010; Morimoto et al, 2006), and STXBP1 ‐related Ohtahara syndrome (Saitsu et al, 2010). Hence, through deep sequencing, we identified that 22.7% (5/22) of the “ de novo mutations in Sanger sequencing” are not really DNMs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, each gene is individually responsible for less than 1% of EE cases (Noebels, 2015; Ottman et al, 2010), implying complex genotypic heterogeneity of ISs. Besides the germline mutations, somatic mosaicism has recently emerged as an important cause of EE or ISs (Depienne et al, 2010; Jdila et al, 2017; Kato et al, 2015; Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010; Milh et al, 2015; Saitsu et al, 2010).…”
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
“…Recently, both germline mosaicism and somatic mosaicism have also been reported as important mechanisms for early‐onset EE (Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010). Examples of somatic mosaicism include KCNQ2 mutations in neonatal EE (Milh et al, 2015), CDKL5 mutations in West syndrome (Jdila et al, 2017; Kato et al, 2015; Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010), paternal gonadal mosaicism of SCN1A mutations in Dravet syndrome (Depienne et al, 2010; Morimoto et al, 2006), and STXBP1 ‐related Ohtahara syndrome (Saitsu et al, 2010). Hence, through deep sequencing, we identified that 22.7% (5/22) of the “ de novo mutations in Sanger sequencing” are not really DNMs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, each gene is individually responsible for less than 1% of EE cases (Noebels, 2015; Ottman et al, 2010), implying complex genotypic heterogeneity of ISs. Besides the germline mutations, somatic mosaicism has recently emerged as an important cause of EE or ISs (Depienne et al, 2010; Jdila et al, 2017; Kato et al, 2015; Masliah‐Plachon et al, 2010; Milh et al, 2015; Saitsu et al, 2010).…”
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
“…Genomic DNA was extracted from peripheral blood leukocytes using phenol– chloroform standard procedures (Lewin and Stewart‐Haynes, 1992; Jdila et al, 2017).…”
The impairment of alternative splicing of exon 19 and the lack of a part of the proteasome signal due to c.2788insG mutation could disrupt the dynamic regulation of isoform levels especially hCDKL5_5 and hCDKL5_1 during pre and postnatal neurodevelopment and then could cause pathogenic phenotype. Signal peptidase I serine active site seems to modulate hCDKL5_5 movements between nucleus and cytoplasm. We noticed that the resulting phenotypes from truncated mutations among the C-terminal domain of hCDKL5 are almost similar and are always severe.
“…About 30% of TS patients present with IS (Saxena and Sampson, 2015). Of course, IS can occur in association with many disease states besides TS and FCD, including, but not limited to, lissencephaly (Herbst et al, 2016), Down syndrome (Daniels et al, 2019), mutations in the CDKL5 gene (Jdila et al, 2017), mutations of the STXBP1 gene (Li et al, 2018), and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (Inoue et al, 2014). In this review, we attempt to illuminate the possible physiological mechanisms of epileptic spasms in general -mechanisms that may occur as a convergent pathology secondary to a range of primary identified pathologies.…”
Infantile spasms (IS) and seizures with focal onset have different clinical expressions, even when electroencephalography (EEG) associated with IS has some degree of focality. Oddly, identical pathology (with, however, age-dependent expression) can lead to IS in one patient vs. focal seizures in another or even in the same, albeit older, patient. We therefore investigated whether the cellular mechanisms underlying seizure initiation are similar in the two instances: spasms vs. focal. We noted that in-common EEG features can include (i) a background of waves at alpha to delta frequencies; (ii) a period of flattening, lasting about a second or more – the electrodecrement (ED); and (iii) often an interval of very fast oscillations (VFO; ~70 Hz or faster) preceding, or at the beginning of, the ED. With IS, VFO temporally coincides with the motor spasm. What is different between the two conditions is this: with IS, the ED reverts to recurring slow waves, as occurring before the ED, whereas with focal seizures the ED instead evolves into an electrographic seizure, containing high-amplitude synchronized bursts, having superimposed VFO. We used in vitro data to help understand these patterns, as such data suggest cellular mechanisms for delta waves, for VFO, for seizure-related burst complexes containing VFO, and, more recently, for the ED. We propose a unifying mechanistic hypothesis – emphasizing the importance of brain pH – to explain the commonalities and differences of EEG signals in IS versus focal seizures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.