4.7 Article

Mutations in WNT10B Are Identified in Individuals with Oligodontia

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 99, 期 1, 页码 195-201

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.05.012

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wenzhou Medical University Research Fund
  2. Beijing Collaborative Innovative Research Center for Cardiovascular Diseases [PXM2014_014226_000002]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81110114]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tooth agenesis is one of the most common developmental anomalies in humans. Oligodontia, a severe form of tooth agenesis, is genetically and phenotypically a heterogeneous condition. Although significant efforts have been made, the genetic etiology of dental agenesis remains largely unknown. In the present study, we performed whole-exome sequencing to identify the causative mutations in Chinese families in whom oligodontia segregates with dominant inheritance. We detected a heterozygous missense mutation (c.632G > A [p.Arg211Gln]) in WNT10B in all affected family members. By Sanger sequencing a cohort of 145 unrelated individuals with non-syndromic oligodontia, we identified three additional mutations (c.569C > G [p.Pro190Arg], c.786G > A [p.Trp262*], and c.851T > G [p.Phe284Cys]). Interestingly, analysis of genotype-phenotype correlations revealed that mutations in WNT10B affect the development of permanent dentition, particularly the lateral incisors. Furthermore, a functional assay demonstrated that each of these mutants could not normally enhance the canonical Wnt signaling in HEPG2 epithelial cells, in which activity of the TOPFlash luciferase reporter was measured. Notably, these mutant WNT10B ligands could not efficiently induce endothelial differentiation of dental pulp stem cells. Our findings provide the identification of autosomal-dominant WNT10B mutations in individuals with oligodontia, which increases the spectrum of congenital tooth agenesis and suggests attenuated Wnt signaling in endothelial differentiation of dental pulp stem cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据