Characterization of aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) mutations in familial isolated pituitary adenoma families

  1. Lookup NU author(s)
  2. Dr Timothy Cheetham
  3. Dr Richard Quinton
Author(s)Igreja S, Chahal HS, King P, Bolger GB, Srirangalingam U, Guasti L, Chapple JP, Trivellin G, Gueorguiev M, Guegan K, Stals K, Khoo B, Kumar AV, Ellard S, Grossman AB, Korbonits M, International FIPA Consortium, Akker S, Atkinson B, Aylwin S, Baldeweg S, Bevan J, Cheetham T, Chew S, Choudry K, Clayton R, Damjanovic S, Darzy K, Dattani M, Davis J, Drake W, Dzeranova L, Eden B, Eguchi K, Fica S, Flanagan D, Frohman L, Gadelha M, Gallego P, Gla E, Goldman J, Goldstone T, Howlett T, Inder W, Iwata T, Kaplan F, Karavitaki N, Laws E, Lechan R, Levy M, Matsuno A, Miljic D, Modenesi S, Molitch M, Musat M, Orme S, Patocs A, Popovic V, Powell M, Quinton R, Randeva H, Ribeirode Oliveira JRA, Schofl C, Soares B, Spada A, Strasburger C, Swords F, Tsagarakis S, Vaks V, Wass JA, Widell H, Yarman S, Yoshimoto K
Publication type Article
JournalHuman Mutation
Year2010
Volume31
Issue8
Pages950-960
ISSN (print)1059-7794
ISSN (electronic)1098-1004
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) is an autosomal dominant condition with variable genetic background and incomplete penetrance. Germline mutations of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene have been reported in 15–40% of FIPA patients. Limited data are available on the functional consequences of the mutations or regarding the regulation of the AIP gene. We describe a large cohort of FIPA families and characterize missense and silent mutations using minigene constructs, luciferase and β-galactosidase assays, as well as in silico predictions. Patients with AIP mutations had a lower mean age at diagnosis (23.6±11.2 years) than AIP mutation-negative patients (40.4±14.5 years). A promoter mutation showed reduced in vitro activity corresponding to lower mRNA expression in patient samples. Stimulation of the protein kinase A-pathway positively regulates the AIP promoter. Silent mutations led to abnormal splicing resulting in truncated protein or reduced AIP expression. A two-hybrid assay of protein–protein interaction of all missense variants showed variable disruption of AIP-phosphodiesterase-4A5 binding. In summary, exonic, promoter, splice-site, and large deletion mutations in AIP are implicated in 31% of families in our FIPA cohort. Functional characterization of AIP changes is important to identify the functional impact of gene sequence variants.
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc.
URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/humu.21292
DOI10.1002/humu.21292
PubMed id20506337
Actions    Link to this publication
Share