SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Case report: Novel NUS1 variant in a Chinese patient with tremors and intellectual disability.

Front Genet · 2024-04-09

DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1373448PMID: 38655050

Open accessJournal Article; Case Reports; case-reportOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

IntroductionNuclear undecaprenyl pyrophosphate synthase 1 (NUS1) gene variants are associated with a range of phenotypes, including epilepsy, intellectual disability, cerebellar ataxia, Parkinson's disease, dystonia, and congenital disorders of glycosylation. Additionally, cases describing genotypes and clinical features are rare.Case presentationHerein, we report the case of a 23-year-old Chinese female patient who presented with tremors, intellectual disability, and epilepsy. A history of carbon monoxide exposure, brain trauma, or encephalitis was not present in this case. Trio whole-exome sequencing analysis revealed a de novo pathogenic variant of c.750del in exon 4, leading to p.Leu251* amino acid substitution. Genetic analysis failed to identify the identical mutations in the remaining family members who underwent screening. The patient was diagnosed with a rare congenital disease, "congenital glycosylation disorder, type 1aa, autosomal dominant, type 55, with seizures (MRD-55)."ConclusionWe provide further evidence for the role of variants in NUS1 in the development of tremors, epilepsy, and intellectual disabilities. These findings expand our understanding of the clinical phenotypes of NUS1 variants.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.