Clinical characteristics and genetic study of a child with Spastic paraplegia 52 due to variant of AP4S1 gene and a literature review.
10.3760/cma.j.cn511374-20241031-00572
- Author:
Li YANG
1
,
2
;
Zihao ZHU
;
Ran HUA
;
Baotian WANG
;
Junhong JIANG
;
Jiulai TANG
;
Der WU
Author Information
1. Pediatric Neurorehabilitation Center, Department of Pediatrics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui 230022, China. Derk_wu@
2. com.
- Publication Type:English Abstract
- MeSH:
Humans;
Male;
Spastic Paraplegia, Hereditary/genetics*;
Child, Preschool;
Female;
Exome Sequencing;
Child;
Infant;
Adaptor Protein Complex 4/genetics*;
Phenotype;
Mutation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Medical Genetics
2025;42(9):1106-1113
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the clinical phenotype and genetic characteristics of a child with hereditary Spastic paraplegia type 52 (SPG52) due to variant of AP4S1 gene.
METHODS:A child diagnosed with SPG52 at the Department of Pediatrics of the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University in May 2010 was selected as the study subject. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was carried out for the child and his parents. Candidate variants were confirmed by Sanger sequencing. Pathogenicity of the candidate variant was interpreted according to the guidelines from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital (Ethics No.: PJ2024-04-56).
RESULTS:The child had presented with global developmental delay from infancy, and featured progressive lower limb spasticity, contractures, talipes equinovarus, and muscle weakness, but with no significant facial dysmorphism. His first febrile seizure occurred before one year of age, followed by several afebrile seizures. The seizures had remitted after 3 to 4 years of antiepileptic therapy, and electroencephalography was normal. However, he had severe intellectual disability, and MRI revealed reduced white matter. WES identified a homozygous AP4S1 c.289C>T (p.Arg97*) variant in the child, for which both of his parents were heterozygous carriers. The variant was rated as pathogenic based on the ACMG guidelines. Literature review has identified 8 publications on SPG52, involving 18 patients from 12 pedigrees. Combined with our case, 14 had carried homozygous variants of the AP4S1 gene, 3 had compound heterozygous variants, and 2 had heterozygous variants, involving 12 distinct variant sites. The cohort included 7 males and 12 females. All patients exhibited progressive lower limb spasticity and weakness as the primary feature, with certain loss of independent ambulation. Most patients had intellectual disability, some had distinctive facial features, though febrile seizures or epilepsy were common. Electroencephalography often showed increased slow-wave activity. Brain MRI frequently demonstrated ventriculomegaly, a thin corpus callosum, and reduced white matter.
CONCLUSION:The homozygous c.289C>T (p.Arg97*) variant of the AP4S1 gene probably underlay the pathogenesis of SPG52 in this child. Above discovery has expanded the mutational spectrum of AP4S1 and provided valuable insights for the genetic diagnosis, counseling, and clinical management of SPG52.
