Investigation of the Role of Copy Number Variation In the Pathogenesis of Type 1 Von Willebrand Disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 2218 Introduction: Type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD) results from a partial quantitative deficiency of von Willebrand factor (VWF). Three multicentre studies were recently conducted to elucidate the molecular and clinical features of type 1 VWD; undertaken in the European Union (EU), Canada and the UK. All three successfully identified genetic alterations likely to cause type 1 VWD, but failed to identify a genetic cause in approximately 30–40% of patients. To date, relatively little is known regarding the extent to which large-scale deletions or duplications of VWF contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 VWD due to the difficulty in identifying such events in heterozygous individuals. The aim of this initial investigation, on behalf of the TS Zimmerman Program for the Molecular and Clinical Biology of VWD (ZPMCB-VWD) and the EU study on VWD (EU-VWD), was to ascertain whether copy number variation (CNV) within VWF contributes to type 1 VWD phenotype in a cohort of index cases (IC) recruited by the EU study. Methods: Twenty-five mutation-negative IC and a further seven IC, in which the identified mutation did not explain the VWD phenotype, were investigated. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), a well established technique based on sequence-specific probe hybridization to genomic DNA, was used to screen for CNV within VWF, utilizing a recently released VWF MLPA kit (P011-A1/P012-A1; MRC-Holland). In addition, five healthy control individuals (HC) were also screened. Fragment size analysis on an ABI 3730 DNA sequencer was followed by calculation of copy number ratios for each exon-specific amplicon in comparison with HC. Results: Analysis highlighted heterozygous CNV in 7/32 IC; five deletions and two apparent duplications. Regarding the deletions; three were the recently described in-frame deletion of exons 4 and 5 (p.Asp75_Gly178del; Sutherland et al., 2009), the other two patients both had a novel deletion of exons 32–34. Interestingly, the exon 32–34 deletion was also predicted to be in-frame (p.Arg1819_Cys1948delinsSer) and in both IC was associated with abnormal multimers (AbM) and low VWF:Ag (32 and 12 IU/dL respectively) and VWF:RCo (23 and 11 IU/dL respectively) levels. Deletions in all five cases segregated with disease phenotype. The two apparent duplications of exon 2 were both shown to be false positive results following further investigation with a new version of the MLPA kit (P011-B1/P012-B1). Conclusions: CNV of VWF has been shown to contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 VWD. MLPA analysis of VWF has identified a previously described and a novel heterozygous deletion, both of which result in in-frame deletion of the VWF protein. The analysis also demonstrates that care must be taken when analyzing MLPA data to avoid false positive results. This adds to the mutations detected in the EU cohort, bringing the number to 113/150 IC (75%). Furthermore, MLPA analysis has increased the overall mutation detection rate in EU IC with AbM to 100%. These findings suggest that CNV is a significant contributor to mutation spectrum in type 1 VWD. Application of MLPA to the wider ZPMCB-VWD and EU-VWD patient cohorts will enable ascertainment of the contribution of large deletion/duplication events to all types of VWD pathogenesis. Disclosures: Vijzelaar: MRC-Holland b.v.: Employment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».