4.4 Article

Keratin 9 L164P mutation in a Chinese pedigree with epidermolytic palmoplantar keratoderma, cytokeratin analysis, and literature review

Journal

MOLECULAR GENETICS & GENOMIC MEDICINE
Volume 7, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.977

Keywords

cytokeratin; EPPK; intermediate filament; KRT9; mutation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81100187]
  2. National Key Technologies RAMP
  3. D Program of China [2016YFC1000702]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Epidermolytic palmoplantar keratoderma (EPPK) is characterized by hyperkeratotic lesions on palms and soles. The disorder is caused by mutations of keratin 9 (KRT9) or KRT1 gene. Methods Epidermolytic palmoplantar keratoderma was diagnosed by physical examination and histopathological analysis in a five-generation Chinese family. Mutation was screened by Sanger sequencing. The palmar expression of multiple cytokeratins were analyzed by tape-stripping and Real-time PCR. Literatures of EPPK with additional symptoms were reviewed. Results Affected family members showed diffuse palmoplantar keratosis, with knuckle pads, friction-related lesions and a novel additional symptom of palmar constriction. A heterozygous mutation of c.T491C (p.L164P) of KRT9 was found within the helix initiation motif. The hydrophobic effect was decreased and the initiation of coiled-coil conformation was delayed. The KRT16/KRT6 expression were significantly increased in the patients, especially on the right, indicating activation of stress-response and wound-healing cytokeratins. There were also increased KRT9/KRT2, unchanged KRT10/KRT1, and undetectable KRT14/KRT5 expression. The genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity of EPPK with additional symptoms were summarized by literature review. Conclusion The p.L164P mutation of KRT9 caused EPPK with a novel symptom of palmar constriction. The expression of multiple cytokeratins was altered in EPPK patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available