Skip to main content
Human Genome Variation logoLink to Human Genome Variation
. 2019 Jan 8;6:3. doi: 10.1038/s41439-018-0034-6

Novel mutations in the RS1 gene in Japanese patients with X-linked congenital retinoschisis

Hiroyuki Kondo 1,, Kazuma Oku 1, Satoshi Katagiri 2, Takaaki Hayashi 2, Tadashi Nakano 2, Akiko Iwata 3, Kazuki Kuniyoshi 3, Shunji Kusaka 3, Atsushi Hiyoshi 4, Eiichi Uchio 4, Mineo Kondo 5, Noriko Oishi 6, Shuhei Kameya 6, Atsushi Mizota 7, Nobuhisa Naoi 8, Shinji Ueno 9, Hiroko Terasaki 9, Takeshi Morimoto 10, Masayoshi Iwaki 11, Kazutoshi Yoshitake 12, Daisuke Iejima 12, Kaoru Fujinami 13, Kazushige Tsunoda 13, Kei Shinoda 14, Takeshi Iwata 12
PMCID: PMC6325138  PMID: 30652005

Abstract

X-linked congenital retinoschisis (XLRS) is an inherited retinal disorder characterized by reduced central vision and schisis of the macula and peripheral retina. XLRS is caused by mutations in the RS1 gene. We have identified 37 different mutations in the RS1 gene, including 12 novel mutations, in 67 Japanese patients from 56 XLRS families. We present clinical features of these patients in relation to the associated mutations.

Subject terms: Mutation, Medical genetics


X-linked congenital retinoschisis (XLRS) is an inherited retinal disorder that affects central vision and manifests in early childhood1. XLRS is the most common inherited retinal disorder; its highest reported prevalence is 14 per 10,000 individuals in Finland1. XLRS is characterized by foveal retinoschisis, which occurs in nearly 100% of patients, whereas peripheral schisis is present in 50% of XLRS patients1. Neuronal dysfunction, manifested as a reduction in the b-wave/a-wave ratio of dark-adapted electroretinograms (DA-ERGs), is also a characteristic of XLRS, although the detection rate for this sign has varied2,3. Clinical diagnosis is not easily determined in certain cases because of the wide range of phenotypes, which may include macular and retinal degeneration and secondary complications such as vitreous hemorrhage and retinal detachment; thus, genetic diagnosis is helpful.

XLRS is caused by mutations in the RS1 gene4, which encodes retinoschisin, a 24-kDa retina-specific protein secreted by photoreceptors and bipolar cells. Retinoschisin functions as a cell adhesion protein that maintains the synaptic structure of the retina5. To date, according to the Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD; 2018.2 version, https://portal.biobase-international.com), 251 different mutations in this gene are known to cause XLRS. Because of variations in phenotypes among and within families, the genotype–phenotype relationship has not yet been definitively established 6,7.

We conducted a multicenter observational study at 12 institutions located throughout Japan; this study was approved by the ethics committee of each institution. Signed written informed consent was obtained from all participants or their parents.

Sixty-seven Japanese patients from 56 families with XLRS were studied (Table 1). All patients were male, and their average age was 19.1 years (range: 2 months to 57 years). XLRS was diagnosed based on retinal findings, including the presence of foveal schisis with or without peripheral schisis and a reduced b-wave/a-wave ratio on dark-adapted ERGs as well as family history1. The 56 patients included 14 patients with familial XLRS and 42 patients with sporadic XLRS. Medical records were reviewed for all patients who had been identified as carriers of mutations in the RS1 gene.

Table 1.

Mutations in the RS1 gene and clinical features in patients with congenital retinoschisis

Family no Patient ID Kinship Age Famial/ sporadic Mutation Ocular features
Exon/intron Nucleotide change (NM_000330.3) Amino acid change Novel/ reported (ID) Visual acuity Refraction of spherical equivalent (D) Retinoschisis Electroretinogram Comment
Foveal Peripheral ERG a-amplitude (μV) b/a ratio Light intensity (cds/m2)
1 KS0001 Proband 4mo Sporadic 1 c.35T>C p.Leu12Pro Novel 0.02/NA −0.375/+0.375 −/ +  +/+ 46/38.3 0.61/0.66 30 B) Vx
2 F111 Proband 2 Sporadic 1 c.38T>C p.Leu13Pro rs104894935 NA/NA NA/NA + / +  +/+ NA/NA NA/NA R) VH
3 J0968 Proband 36 Sporadic 1 c.49G>T p.Glu17* Novel 0.8/0.3 + 0.625/−0.375 + / +  −/− 312.5/226 0.78/0.93 3
4 RS30-1 Proband 8 Sporadic 2–3 exon2-3 del Novel 0.3/0.3 + 4/ + 3.625 + / +  + / +  227/167 0.91/0.95 30 L) Vx
5 J0913 Proband 6 Sporadic IVS2 c.78+2T>C USD Novel 0.5/0.7 + 1.125/ + 0.75 + / +  + / +  267.5/NA 0.56/NA 200
6 RS13-1 Proband 4 Familial 3 exon3 del Undetermined 0.4/0.2 + 5.5/ + 2 +/ +  + / +  490/416 1.11/0.97 b L) VH, Vx, B) retinal fold
6 RS13-2 Sibling 11 Familial 3 exon3 del Undetermined 1.2/1.2 + 0.75/ + 0.75 +/ +  −/− NA/NA NA/NA
7 RS14-1 Proband 3 Sporadic 3 c.98G>A p.Trp33* CM141023a 0.6/0.06 + 5.25/ + 6.5 + / +  + /+ 345/274 0.96/1.2 b
8 RS01-1 Proband 16 Familial 3 c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly Novel 0.5/0.02 0/−7.5 + / +  + /+ 467/360 0.55/0.7 3 L) VH
8 RS01-2 Sibling 23 Familial 3 c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly Novel 0.5/0.5 + 0.5/ + 0.5 −/− −/− 314/331 0.3/0.25 3
8 RS01-3 Sibling 20 Familial 3 c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly Novel 0.4/0.4 −0.25/0 + / +  + /+ 375/374 0.58/0.47 3
9 RS11-1 Proband 12 Familial 3 c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly Novel 0.05/0.8 + 2/−0.25 + / +  + /+ 383/403 0.74/0.83 3 R) Retinal hole
9 RS11-2 Sibling 7 Familial 3 c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly Novel 0.4/0.3 + 0.5/−0.25 + / +  −/ +  457/401 0.9/0.76 3
10 J0381 Proband 17 Sporadic 3 c.185_186insT p.Glu62Aspfs*24 Novel 0.3/0.3 −3/−2.5 +/ +  −/− 129/146 1.11/1.16 3
11 J0673 Proband 13 Sporadic 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.8/0.7 −2/−2 + / +  + /+ 185/195 0.79/0.76 3
12 J1033 Proband 13 Sporadic 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.5/0.9 −1/−0.5 + / +  −/− 229/252 1.31/1.28 3
13 J1062 Proband 32 Sporadic 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.5/0.4 −2.375/ + 0.875 + / +  + /+ 119.6/134.3 0.76/0.86 3
14 RS04-1 Proband 16 Familial 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.3/0.15 −1.75/−2.5 + / +  + /+ 362/344 0.55/0.67 200
14 RS04-1 Sibling 9 Familial 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.7/0.06 −1.25/NA + / +  + /+ NA/NA NA/NA
15 KINKI-113 Proband 50 Sporadic 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.2/0.2 −2.75/−1.625 N/N N/N 370/370 0.78/0.8 30
16 NMSCHH011-01 Sibling 42 Familial 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 CF/0.2 NA/ + 0.25 N/ +  N/+ NA/344.5 NA/0.76 10
16 NMSCHH011-02 Proband 47 Familial 4 c.214G>A p.Glu72Lys rs104894928 0.15/0.3 + 0.25/ + 0.75 −/− + /+ 308/243 1.07/1.18 10
17 RS12-1 Proband 3 Sporadic 4 c.218C>T p.Ser73Leu Novel NA/NA NA/NA + / +  −/+ ~0/~0 NA/NA L) retinal degeneration
18 J0256 Proband 18 Sporadic 4 c.266A>G p.Tyr89Cys rs61752060 0.4/0.08 + 0.75/ + 1.5(IOL) + / +  + /+ 250/168 0.72/0.61 3 L) Vx, IOL
19 J1224 Proband 6 Sporadic 4 c.266A>G p.Tyr89Cys rs61752060 0.08/0.5 + 6/ + 6 + / +  + /- NA/NA NA/NA
20 Teik1051 Proband 49 Sporadic 4 c.266A>G p.Tyr89Cys rs61752060 0.1/0.1 + 5/ + 6 −/− + /+ 309.5/137 0.59/0.53 10 L) retinal degeneration
21 Teik1103 Proband 10 Sporadic 4 c.266A>G p.Tyr89Cys rs61752060 0.03/0.6 + 2.75/ + 0.25 + / +  −/− 38.3/35.1 1.25/1.12 3
22 KINKI-107-1 Proband 26 Familial 4 c.267T>A p.Tyr89* rs61752061 0.4/0.3 + 3/ + 2.75 + / +  + /+ 420/400 0.71/0.7 30
22 KINKI-107-2 Sibling 25 Familial 4 c.267T>A p.Tyr89* rs61752061 0.3/0.3 −0.5/−1 + / +  −/− 300/280 1.27/1.29 30
23 RS21-1 Proband 11 Sporadic 4 c.285delG p.Trp96Glyfs*30 Novel 0.2/0.6 −1.5/0.75 + / +  + /+ 503/na 0.75/NA 200 R) Vx
24 RS16-1 Proband 6 Sporadic 4 c.301G>C p.Ala101Pro rs61752066 0.5/0.7 + 0.75/ + 1 + / +  −/− NA/345 NA/0.63 10 B) ODRL
25 RS17-1 Proband 4 Sporadic 4 c.304C>T p.Arg102Trp rs61752067 0.03/0.15 NA/ + 3.125 + / +  + /+ 301/289 0.83/1.06 b
26 RS31-1 Proband 3 Familial 4 c.304C>T p.Arg102Trp rs61752067 0.4/NA + 1.375/NA + / +  + /+ 346/349 0.96/0.96 200 L) Vx
26 RS31-2 Sibling 2mo Familial 4 c.304C>T p.Arg102Trp rs61752067 NA/NA NA/NA + / +  −/− NA/NA NA/NA
27 Teik1153 Proband 45 Sporadic 4 c.304C>T p.Arg102Trp rs61752067 0.032/0.5 + 6/ + 2 1/ +  −/− 146.5/304 0.69/0.62 b
28 J1330 Proband 5 Sporadic 4 c.305G>A p.Arg102Gln rs61752068 0.4/0.4 + 9.5/ + 8 + / +  + /+ 462/607.8 0.79/0.74 200
29 RS23-1 Proband 1 Familial 4 c.305G>A p.Arg102Gln rs61752068 0.7/0.06 + 6.625(IOL)/ + 5(IOL) + / +  + /+ 43.8/43.8 0.55/0.69 200 L) Vx, IOL
29 RS23-2 Sibling 4 Familial 4 c.305G>A p.Arg102Gln rs61752068 0.3/0.12 NA/NA + / +  + /+ NA/NA NA/NA
30 RS08-1 Proband 2 Sporadic 4 c.326G>C p.Gly109Ala Novel 0.2/0.3 + 2.25/ + 2.75 + / +  + /+ 184/208 0.87/0.77 b R) VH, Vx
31 MIYA003-1 proband 16 Familial 4 c.330T>A p.Cys110* rs1801161 0.7/1.2 −0.5/0 + /+ −/− 377.8/302.3 0.78/0.72 3 B) retinal fold, Vx, glaucoma
31 MIYA003-2 Sibling 14 Familial 4 c.330T>A p.Cys110* rs1801161 0.9/0.7 −0.25/ + 0.75 + /+ −/− 87.8/83 0.77/0.74 3
32 RS18-1 Proband 8 Familial 5 c.404G>A p.Gly135Glu Novel 0.4/0.3 + 4.475/ + 4.625 + / +  −/− NA/NA NA/NA
33 J0690 Proband 25 Familial 5 c.417G>T p.Gln139His Novel 0.3/0.4 −0.75/ + 0.25 −/− −/− NA/NA NA/NA B) ODRL
34 J0852 Proband 7 Sporadic 5 c.422G>A p.Arg141His rs61752159 0.7/0.4 + 1.5/ + 1.875 + / +  −/− NA/NA NA/NA
35 MIE52 Proband 53 Familial 5 c.438G>C p.Glu146Asp rs61753163 0.5/0.4 −0.5/0 −/− −/− 270/294 0.81/0.71 30 B) macular degeration
36 J0892 Proband 19 Sporadic IVS5 c.522+1G>A USD rs281865348 0.4/0.3 + 4.25/ + 4.625 + / +  + /+ 172.1/130.6 0.45/0.5 3
37 NHO1025 Proband 54 Sporadic IVS5 c.523-1G>A USD Novel 0.2/0.15 −3.5/−4.125 + / +  −/− 343.25/391.25 0.9/0.93 10
38 RS25-1 Proband 8 Sporadic 6 c.544C>T p.Arg182Cys rs61753171 0.1/1.2 + 2.625/−0.125 + / +  + /+ 283/318 0.74/0.85 200 R) Vx
39 RS26-1 Proband 3mo Sporadic 6 c.544C>T p.Arg182Cys rs61753171 0.5/0.2 + 1(IOL)/−1(IOL) + / +  + /+ 175.5/200.8 0.69/0.64 30 R) Vx IOL
40 RS27-1 Proband 9mo Sporadic 6 c.544C>T p.Arg182Cys rs61753171 0.3/0.3 −0.25/−2.75(aphakia) + / +  + /+ NA/NA NA/NA L) Vx
41 J1461 Proband 38 Sporadic 6 c.544C>T p.Arg182Cys rs61753171 0.4/0.4 −6.5/−7.125 + / +  + /+ 360.5/348.3 0.78/0.68 200
42 KIN Proband 33 Sporadic 6 c.574C>T p.Pro192Ser rs61753174 0.8/0.9 −0.225/−0.25 + / +  −/− 290/280 0.86/0.82 30
43 RS07-1 Proband 16 Sporadic 6 c.589C>T p.Arg197Cys rs281865354 0.1/0.09 + 10/ + 9 −/− + /+ 292/237 1/0.47 200
44 MIE49 Proband 43 Sporadic 6 c.589C>T p.Arg197Cys rs281865354 0.2/0.3 + 2/ + 1.5 + / +  −/− 290/280 0.45/0.5 30
45 RS32-1 Proband 5mo Sporadic 6 c.589C>T p.Arg197Cys rs281865354 Follow/Follow NA/NA + / +  + /+ 257/313 0.95/0.74 200 B) VH, R) Vx
46 RS10-1 Proband 28 Sporadic 6 c.590G>A p.Arg197His rs281865355 0.06/0.08 NA/NA + / +  +/+ NA/NA NA/NA
47 RS19-1 Proband 43 Familial 6 c.598C>T p.Arg200Cys rs281865357 0.2/0.05 + 2.5/ + 2.5 + / +  + /+ 281/355 1.35/0.69 b
48 RS15-1 Proband 6 Sporadic 6 c.599G>A p.Arg200His rs281865358 0.7/0.7 + 0.5/−0.575 + / +  −/− 273.5/248 0.83/0.72 b
49 NTMC218 Prpband 43 Sporadic 6 c.599G>A p.Arg200His rs281865358 0.1/0.1 + 0.25/ + 0.25 + / +  + /+ 268/175.3 0.29/0.86 10 B) Retinal hole
50 RS29-1 Proband 1 Sporadic 6 c.608C>T p.Pro203Leu rs104894930 0.4/NLP NA/NA(aphakia) + / +  + /+ NA/NA NA/NA L) proliferative vitreoretinopathy
51 J0903 Proband 52 Sporadic 6 c.608C>T p.Pro203Leu rs104894930 0.5/0.3 −1.125/−1.25 −/− −/− 174.3/292 0.83/0.77 3 B) macular degeration
52 J0371 Proband 57 Sporadic 6 c.625C>T p.Arg209Cys rs281865361 CF/0.01 NA/0.875 + / +  −/− 114/218 1.25/0.67 3
53 J0640 Proband 31 Sporadic 6 c.625C>A p.Arg209Ser Novel 0.3/1.2 −1/−0.5 + /− −/− 295/279 0.93/0.99 b
54 RS06-1 Proband 49 Sporadic 6 c.638G>A p.Arg213Gln rs281865364 0.15/0.04 −0.5/0 −/− + /+ 312/332 0.77/0.59 b
55 RS05-1 Proband 7 Sporadic 6 c.657C>G p.Cys219Trp CM101549a 0.3/0.3 + 0.25/−0.5 −/− + /+ 344/400 0.69/0.71 b
56 MIYA020-1 proband 9 Familial 6 c.667T>C p.Cys223Arg rs104894929 0.4/0.5 −1/−1.5 + / +  +/+ 436/399.5 0.53/0.52 3 L) retinal fold, Vx
56 MIYA020-2 Sibling 12 Familial 6 c.667T>C p.Cys223Arg rs104894929 0.4/0.4 −1.5/−1 + /+ −/+ 342/382.8 0.55/0.52 3 L) retinal fold, Vx

B both eyes, CF counting finger, L left eye, IOL intraocular lens, mo month-old, NA not available, ODRL Oguchi disease-like retinal reflex, R right eye, USD undetermined splicing defect, VH vitreous hemorrahge, Vx vitrectomy, + present, − absent

aSNP (rs) ID is unavailable and ID of the Human Gene Mutation Database is shown

b20J (data are not interchangable with unit of cds/m2)

Genomic DNA was extracted from peripheral blood using DNA extraction kits or manual extraction with ethanol. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by Sanger sequencing was performed on 56 samples for six coding exons of the RS1 gene unless whole-exon deletions were detected via PCR. In brief, oligonucleotide primers for the flanking intron/untranslated region sequences were designed, and PCR was performed, followed by uni- or bidirectional sequencing depending on the quality of the PCR products. The primer sequences and annealing temperature for PCR for each exon are available on request. The other 11 samples were screened by whole-exome sequencing with at least 30× coverage for all exons. To identify sequence variations, reference sequences of RS1 (NM_000330.3) were used; variations were numbered based on the cDNA sequence, with +1 corresponding to the first nucleotide of the initiation codon (ATG).

Thirty-seven different mutations in the RS1 gene were identified in the 56 families, including 26 missense, 4 nonsense, 3 splicing, 1 deletion, 1 insertion, and 2 whole-exon deletion mutations (Table 1). Eleven point mutations were novel mutations, and 24 point mutations had previously been reported, based on the HGMD and one recent report (Table 1)8. A whole-exon deletion of exon 3 had been reported9, whereas a deletion of exons 2 and 3 has not been reported. In our study, DNA break points were not determined, and it is unknown whether the exon 3 deletion that we observed was identical to the known exon 3 deletion at the DNA level.

The frequency of the 11 novel point mutations was assessed using public domain databases. None of these variants were found in human genome variation databases for the Japanese population (the Human Genetic Variation Database (HGVD), http://www.hgvd.genome.med.kyoto-u.ac.jp/) or other population databases, such as the 1000 Genomes Project database (http://www.internationalgenome.org/1000-genomes-browers), the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database (http://www.exac.broadinstitute.org), and the 6500-exome database of the NHLBI-ESP project (ESP6500, http://evs.gs.washington.edu/EVS/). The pathogenicity of the seven novel missense mutations was predicted in silico by nine programs and via folding energy assessments6,1017. Overall, all variants were considered to be pathogenic (Table 2).

Table 2.

Pathogenicity assessment of the novel missense mutations in the RS1 gene

Nucleotide change Amino acid change Folding energy value6 (assessment) Polyphen2 HumDIV10 (cutoff = 0.85) GERP++11 (cutoff = 2) REVEL12 (cutoff = 0.5)a M-CAP13 (cutoff = 0.025) CADD14 phred (cutoff = 15)b PROVEAN15 (cutoff = −2.5) SIFT15 (cutoff = 0.05) Mutation Accessor16 (cutoff = 1.9) FATHMM17 (cutoff = −1.5)
c.35T>C p.Leu12Pro NA 0.984 5.69 0.701 0.782 25.100 −1.120 0.003 2.095 −5.160
c.175T>G p.Cys59Gly 0.04 (weak) 0.999 5.15 0.868 0.844 23.900 −2.850 0.000 2.610 −5.010
c.218C>T p.Ser73Leu 0.22 (weak) 0.953 5.43 0.825 0.896 27.200 −4.460 0.002 3.925 −5.630
c.326G>C p.Gly109Ala 1 (severe) 1.000 5.43 0.740 0.921 28.000 −0.860 0.233 0.780 −4.810
c.404G>A p.Gly135Glu 1 (severe) 0.953 4.91 0.985 0.943 27.100 −5.540 0.001 3.515 −5.610
c.417G>T p.Gln139His 1 (severe) 0.996 2.14 0.920 0.949 23.800 −4.830 0.001 4.435 −5.600
c.625C>A p.Arg209Ser 0.74 (moderate) 1.000 5.63 0.770 0.909 25.700 −0.200 0.044 1.695 −5.220

Underlined values are indicated as “pathogenic” according to the cutoff values (refs. 1017)

NA not applicable

a75.4% of disease mutations but 10.9% of neutral variants

b≤1% percentile highest scores

Seven of the known mutations were detected in more than one family; in particular, p.Glu72Lys, p.Tyr89Cys, p.Arg182Cys, p.Arg102Trp, p.Arg197Cys, p.Arg200His, and p.Pro203Leu were observed in 6, 4, 4, 3, 3, 2, and 2 families, respectively. These mutations have previously been reported in the same population and in other populations4,7,9. Mutation hot spots were suggested instead of founder effects as an explanation of these mutations.

Overall, the clinical findings of this study were consistent with those of earlier reports, although detailed phenotype–genotype relationships remain undetermined1,3,6,7.

Of the 109 phakic eyes for which refractive error (in spherical equivalents) was measured, there were 60 (55.0%), 5 (4.6%), and 44 (40.4%) hypermetropic, emmetropic, and myopic eyes, respectively (Table 1). For the hypermetropic eyes, the refractive error ranged from 0.25 to 10.0 diopters (D), and the average error was + 2.7 D. For the myopic eyes, the refractive error ranged from −0.125 to −7.5 D, and the average error was −1.6 D. The average difference in refractive error between the two eyes was 1.0 D for 51 patients.

For 125 eyes, the decimal best-corrected visual acuity varied from counting fingers to 1.2, with a median of 0.3. For 131 eyes for which retinal status was determined, retinoschisis was present in the macula in 110 eyes (84.0%) and in the periphery in 88 eyes (61.8%).

DA-ERGs were recorded in 104 eyes using different stimulus intensities; intensities that tended to be higher than those recommended in the standard protocol from the International Society of Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision were used for certain patients18. Negative ERGs were more frequently observed in this study (84.6%, Table 1) than in earlier studies3, likely due to the use of higher-intensity light stimuli19.

The observed retinal complications included a need for pars plana vitrectomy (N = 16); macular or retinal degeneration, including Oguchi disease-like retinal surface abnormalities (N = 6); vitreous hemorrhage (N = 5); retinal folds (N = 4); and congenital glaucoma (N = 1).

We sought to establish a possible phenotype-genotype relationship for eyes with truncation mutations (i.e., nonsense, splicing, deletion, insertion, or exon deletion mutations) as opposed to missense mutations. The newly identified mutations do not appear to produce distinct clinical phenotypes compared with reported mutations. However, patients with novel missense mutations did present at an earlier age than those with reported missense mutations (data not shown).

Foveal schisis was more frequently found in eyes with truncation mutations than in those with missense mutations (100% versus 78%, P = 0.0035, Supplemental Table 1). It is possible that nearly normal foveal structure can only be seen in eyes with missense mutations20. Peripheral schisis was found in 50% and 67% of eyes with truncation and missense mutations, respectively (P = 0.107).

Compared with eyes with missense mutations, eyes with truncation mutations showed larger b-waves (P = 0.023) and higher b/a ratios (P = 0.019) on DA-ERG, whereas no significant difference was observed for the mean a-wave amplitude (Supplemental Table 2). Differences in patient age, visual acuity, refractive error, and light stimulus settings for DA-ERGs were not significant.

Vincent et al.20 reported that truncation mutations were associated with poor visual acuity and a higher probability of a b/a ratio < 1.0. Our data yielded contradictory results, with higher b-wave amplitude and a greater b/a ratio in eyes with truncation mutations than in eyes with missense mutations. One possible reason for this discrepancy is that the patients with truncation mutations presented at a younger age, which tends to be associated with better preservation of ERG findings21. Nonetheless, our study implies that it will be difficult to determine a phenotype–genotype relationship using ERGs.

This study has limitations. Because of the retrospective nature of this investigation, in which only mutation-proven cases were selected, the identification rate of the RS1 gene in XLRS has not been determined. A history of clinical findings, including vitreous hemorrhages, may have been missed in certain cases due to only reviewing medical records.

In summary, this study was the largest survey of patients with mutations in the RS1 gene in the Japanese population. The progress of gene therapy for XLRS has reached the clinical trial stage, and exact genetic determinations for each patient could lead to more efficient future treatments22.

Supplementary information

Supplement tables 1 and 2 (21.9KB, docx)

Acknowledgements

The study was supported by a Japanese Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (17K11441 to H.K.) and by the Practical Research Project for Rare/Intractable Diseases (17ek0109282h0001 to T.I.), a program of the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.

HGV database

The relevant data from this Data Report are hosted at the Human Genome Variation Database at 10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2408

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2411

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2414

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2417

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2420

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2423

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2426

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2429

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2432

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2435

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2438

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2441

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2444

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2447

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2450

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2453

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2456

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2459

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2462

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2465

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2468

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2471

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2474

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2477

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2480

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2483

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2486

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2489

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2492

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2495

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2498

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2501

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2504

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2507

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2510

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2513

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary information is available for this paper at 10.1038/s41439-018-0034-6.

References

  • 1.George ND, Yates JR, Moore AT. X linked retinoschisis. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1995;79:697–702. doi: 10.1136/bjo.79.7.697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Khan NW, Jamison JA, Kemp JA, Sieving PA. Analysis of photoreceptor function and inner retinal activity in juvenile X-linked retinoschisis. Vision. Res. 2001;41:3931–3942. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00188-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Renner AB, et al. ERG variability in X-linked congenital retinoschisis patients with mutations in the RS1 gene and the diagnostic importance of fundus autofluorescence and OCT. Doc. Ophthalmol. 2008;116:97–109. doi: 10.1007/s10633-007-9094-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sauer CG, et al. Positional cloning of the gene associated with X-linked juvenile retinoschisis. Nat. Genet. 1997;17:164–170. doi: 10.1038/ng1097-164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wu WW, Molday RS. Defective discoidin domain structure, subunit assembly, and endoplasmic reticulum processing of retinoschisin are primary mechanisms responsible for X-linked retinoschisis. J. Biol. Chem. 2003;278:28139–28146. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M302464200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Sergeev YV, et al. Molecular modeling of retinoschisin with functional analysis of pathogenic mutations from human X-linked retinoschisis. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2010;19:1302–1313. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddq006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Shinoda K, Ishida S, Oguchi Y, Mashima Y. Clinical characteristics of 14 japanese patients with X-linked juvenile retinoschisis associated with XLRS1 mutation. Ophthalmic Genet. 2000;21:171–180. doi: 10.1076/1381-6810(200009)2131-ZFT171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Katagiri S, et al. Clinical features of a toddler with bilateral bullous retinoschisis with a novel RS1 mutation. Am. J. Ophthalmol. Case Rep. 2017;5:76–80. doi: 10.1016/j.ajoc.2016.12.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Functional implications of the spectrum of mutations found in 234 cases with X-linked juvenile retinoschisis. The Retinoschisis Consortium. Hum. Mol. Genet. 7, 1185–1192 (1998). [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 10.Adzhubei IA, et al. A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations. Nat. Methods. 2010;7:248–249. doi: 10.1038/nmeth0410-248. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Davydov EV, et al. Identifying a high fraction of the human genome to be under selective constraint using GERP++ PLoS Comput. Biol. 2010;6:e1001025. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ioannidis NM, et al. Am J Hum Genet. 2016. REVEL: an ensemble method for predicting the pathogenicity of rare missense variants; pp. 877–885. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Jagadeesh KA, et al. M-CAP eliminates a majority of variants of uncertain significance in clinical exomes at high sensitivity. Nat. Genet. 2016;48:1581–1586. doi: 10.1038/ng.3703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kircher M, et al. A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants. Nat. Genet. 2014;46:310–315. doi: 10.1038/ng.2892. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kumar P, Henikoff S, Ng PC. Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm. Nat. Protoc. 2009;4:1073–1081. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2009.86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Reva B, Antipin Y, Sander C. Predicting the functional impact of protein mutations: application to cancer genomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:e118. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shihab HA, et al. Predicting the functional, molecular, and phenotypic consequences of amino acid substitutions using hidden Markov models. Hum. Mutat. 2013;34:57–65. doi: 10.1002/humu.22225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Robson AG, et al. ISCEV guide to visual electrodiagnostic procedures. Doc. Ophthalmol. 2018;136:1–26. doi: 10.1007/s10633-017-9621-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Marmor MF, et al. ISCEV Standard for full-field clinical electroretinography (2008 update) Doc. Ophthalmol. 2009;118:69–77. doi: 10.1007/s10633-008-9155-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Vincent A, et al. A phenotype-genotype correlation study of X-linked retinoschisis. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:1454–1464. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.12.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bowles K, et al. X-linked retinoschisis: RS1 mutation severity and age affect the ERG phenotype in a cohort of 68 affected male subjects. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52:9250–9256. doi: 10.1167/iovs.11-8115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hafler BP. Clinical progress in inherited retinal degenerations: gene therapy clinical trials and advances in genetic sequencing. Retina. 2017;37:417–423. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000001341. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplement tables 1 and 2 (21.9KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The relevant data from this Data Report are hosted at the Human Genome Variation Database at 10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2408

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2411

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2414

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2417

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2420

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2423

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2426

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2429

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2432

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2435

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2438

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2441

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2444

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2447

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2450

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2453

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2456

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2459

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2462

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2465

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2468

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2471

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2474

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2477

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2480

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2483

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2486

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2489

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2492

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2495

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2498

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2501

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2504

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2507

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2510

10.6084/m9.figshare.hgv.2513


Articles from Human Genome Variation are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES