2018
DOI: 10.1002/mus.26073
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Duchenne muscular dystrophy caused by a novel deep intronic DMD mutation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Table 2 and Figure 1, the largest group consisted of point mutations (Type 1), a type of pseudoexon‐creating mutation that has been previously identified and well‐characterized (Baskin et al, 2011; Bovolenta et al, 2008; Cagliani et al, 2004; Ginsberg et al, 2018; Gonorazky et al, 2016; Greer et al, 2015; Gurvich et al, 2008; Jones et al, 2019; Khelifi et al, 2011; Madden et al, 2009; Magri et al, 2011; Oshima et al, 2009; Zaum et al, 2017). In this cohort, we found eight Type 1a point mutations that created splice donor or acceptor sites (Figure 1a–h), two Type 1a point mutations that removed a decoy splice acceptor site (Figure 1i,j), one Type 1b that creation/disruption an exon splice enhancer/silencer motif (Figure 1k) leading to the utilization of cryptic splice donor and acceptor signals, and a novel class of two Type 1c point mutations that created splice acceptor sites (Figure 1l,m) leading to the formation of pseudo 3ʹ‐terminal exons.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in Table 2 and Figure 1, the largest group consisted of point mutations (Type 1), a type of pseudoexon‐creating mutation that has been previously identified and well‐characterized (Baskin et al, 2011; Bovolenta et al, 2008; Cagliani et al, 2004; Ginsberg et al, 2018; Gonorazky et al, 2016; Greer et al, 2015; Gurvich et al, 2008; Jones et al, 2019; Khelifi et al, 2011; Madden et al, 2009; Magri et al, 2011; Oshima et al, 2009; Zaum et al, 2017). In this cohort, we found eight Type 1a point mutations that created splice donor or acceptor sites (Figure 1a–h), two Type 1a point mutations that removed a decoy splice acceptor site (Figure 1i,j), one Type 1b that creation/disruption an exon splice enhancer/silencer motif (Figure 1k) leading to the utilization of cryptic splice donor and acceptor signals, and a novel class of two Type 1c point mutations that created splice acceptor sites (Figure 1l,m) leading to the formation of pseudo 3ʹ‐terminal exons.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been estimated that 30-40% of DMD mutations are de novo [8,16,24]. Every year, new mutations appear, such as complex genomic rearrangements [25], deep intronic mutations that alter splicing patterns [26], etc. These novel, low-frequency mutations in non-hot spot sites demand more accurate diagnostic techniques for individualized management of DMD.…”
Section: Diagnosis Techniques Targeting Mutated Exonsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But no causative alterations were found. Past studies have suggested that deep intronic mutation or splicing mutation with a gene could have deleterious effect, causing human genetic diseases . The further related tests have to be performed in order to identify the pathogenic mutations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Past studies have suggested that deep intronic mutation or splicing mutation with a gene could have deleterious effect, causing human genetic diseases. [13][14][15][16] The further related tests have to be performed in order to identify the pathogenic mutations. Interestingly, when we carried out mRNA analysis two insertion abnormal transcripts were identified in two Chinese families affected with dystrophinopathy.…”
Section: Casementioning
confidence: 99%