Table 3.
Somatic Mutation Pattern of Ig Gene Rearrangements from EBER+ Cells of AILD
| Deletions and duplications | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rearrangements | No. ofrearrangements analyzed | Frequency of nonsensemutations | Percentage ofall mutations | Total(No.) | Destructive(No.) | Replacement/silent mutations in framework regions |
| % | ||||||
| Potentially functional | ||||||
| Unique cells (n = 39) | 55 | 0.2 (1/515) | 0.6 | 3 | 2 | 1.3 (143/110) |
| Clones without ongoing mutation (n = 8) | 12 | 0.0 (0/143) | 0.7 | 1 | 0 | 1.1 (36/33) |
| Clones with ongoing mutation (n = 12) | 78 | 6.5(16/247) 7.7 (19/247) | 6.4 | 17 | 11 | 2.7 (70/26) |
| Memory B cells | − | 0.0 | 0.2 | − | − | 1.0–1.6 |
| Nonfunctional | ||||||
| This study | 151 | 5.2 (27/522) | 3.5 | 19 | 14 | 2.5 (190/75) |
| Literature | − | 4.8 | 6.0 | 20 | 20 | 3.0 |
For clones only Ig gene rearrangements amplified at least two times are considered.