↓ Skip to main content

Identification of novel mutations by targeted exome sequencing and the genotype-phenotype assessment of patients with achromatopsia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Identification of novel mutations by targeted exome sequencing and the genotype-phenotype assessment of patients with achromatopsia
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12967-015-0694-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fen-Fen Li, Xiu-Feng Huang, Jie Chen, Xu-Dong Yu, Mei-Qin Zheng, Fan Lu, Zi-Bing Jin, De-Kang Gan

Abstract

Achromatopsia (ACHM) is a severe congenital autosomal recessive retinal disorder caused by loss of cone photoreceptors. Here, we aimed to determine the underlying genetic lesions and phenotypic correlations in two Chinese families with ACHM. Medical history and clinical evaluation were obtained from both families. Targeted exome sequencing (TES) was performed on 201 disease-causing genes of inherited retinal dystrophies to screen for ACHM causative mutations in the two probands. The compound heterozygous mutations in CNGA3 (c.1074G > A, p.W358X; c.1706G > A, p.R569H) were identified in the first proband, and a novel homozygous mutation (c.968C > A, p.A323D) was detected in the other pedigree. The proposed topological model of the CNGA3 polypeptide suggested that the missense mutations primarily affected the transmembrane helix 5 and the cGMP-binding domain, respectively. Crystal structure modeling of the cyclic nucleotide-gated cation channel α-3 (CNGA3) protein encoded by the CNGA3 gene revealed an abnormal combined structure generated by R569H. We firstly used the TES approach to identify genetic alterations in patients with ACHM. We uncovered three mutations in CNGA3, including one novel mutation. Our results not only expand the genotypic spectrum for CNGA3 mutations, but also demonstrate that the TES approach is a valuable tool for molecular diagnosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Researcher 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 9 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,163
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,947
of 3,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,804
of 283,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#80
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,279 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.