Chen Jian-Min, Férec Claude, Cooper David N
Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, U613, Brest, France.
Hum Mutat. 2009 Oct;30(10):1435-48. doi: 10.1002/humu.21088.
Data from diverse organisms suggests that transient hypermutability is a general mutational mechanism with the potential to generate multiple synchronous mutations, a phenomenon probably best exemplified by closely spaced multiple mutations (CSMMs). Here we have attempted to extend the concept of transient hypermutability from somatic cells to the germline, using human inherited disease-causing multiple mutations as a model system. Employing stringent criteria for data inclusion, we have retrospectively identified numerous potential examples of pathogenic CSMMs that exhibit marked similarities to the CSMMs reported in other systems. These examples include (1) eight multiple mutations, each comprising three or more components within a sequence tract of <100 bp; (2) three possible instances of "mutation showers"; and (3) numerous highly informative "homocoordinate" mutations. Using the proportion of CpG substitution as a crude indicator of the relative likelihood of transient hypermutability, we present evidence to suggest that CSMMs comprising at least one pair of mutations separated by < or =100 bp may constitute signatures of transient hypermutability in human genes. Although this analysis extends the generality of the concept of transient hypermutability and provides new insights into what may be considered a novel mechanism of mutagenesis underlying human inherited disease, it has raised serious concerns regarding current practices in mutation screening.
来自不同生物体的数据表明,瞬时高突变性是一种普遍的突变机制,有可能产生多个同步突变,紧密间隔的多个突变(CSMMs)可能是这一现象的最佳例证。在此,我们试图将瞬时高突变性的概念从体细胞扩展到生殖系,以人类遗传性致病多重突变为模型系统。采用严格的数据纳入标准,我们回顾性地鉴定出许多致病性CSMMs的潜在例子,这些例子与其他系统中报道的CSMMs表现出明显的相似性。这些例子包括:(1)8个多重突变,每个突变在<100 bp的序列片段内包含三个或更多个组分;(2)3个可能的“突变簇”实例;以及(3)许多信息丰富的“同坐标”突变。以CpG替换的比例作为瞬时高突变性相对可能性的粗略指标,我们提供的证据表明,包含至少一对间隔<或=100 bp的突变的CSMMs可能构成人类基因中瞬时高突变性的特征。尽管这一分析扩展了瞬时高突变性概念的普遍性,并为可能被视为人类遗传性疾病潜在新诱变机制的研究提供了新见解,但它也引发了对当前突变筛查实践的严重担忧。