Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Browse Articles Search Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1050
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
Previous article Browse articles Next article 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
J Res Med Sci 2017,  22:102

Heterozygosity analysis of polycystic kidney disease 1 gene microsatellite markers for linkage analysis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease type 1 in the iranian population


1 Department of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences; Regenerative Medicine Laboratory, Isfahan Kidney Diseases Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Date of Submission12-Feb-2017
Date of Decision08-May-2017
Date of Acceptance20-Jun-2017
Date of Web Publication26-Sep-2017

Correspondence Address:
Rasoul Salehi
Department of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan 81746-73461
Iran
Yousof Gheisari
Department of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan 81746-73461
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_136_17

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common genetic cause of end-stage renal disease. Although imaging techniques are a means of accurate diagnosis when the cysts appear in the third or fourth decades of the patient's life, they are of little value for early diagnosis. Genetic tests are required for preimplantation genetic diagnosis, decision-making for kidney donation to an affected relative. Although mutation of the polycystic kidney disease (PKD1) gene is solely responsible for the most cases of ADPKD, direct genetic testing is limited by the large size of this gene and the presence of many mutations without hot spots. Therefore, indirect diagnosis with linkage analysis using informative microsatellite markers has been suggested. Materials and Methods: In this study, we assessed the informativeness of the PKD1 gene markers D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 in Iranian population. Using specific primers, fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed on genomic DNA extracted from fifty unrelated individuals. PCR products were analyzed by the ALFexpress DNA sequencer system, and the number and frequency of alleles were determined to calculate the heterozygosity (HET) and polymorphism information content (PIC) values. Results: We found that the HET and PIC values for the D16S475 marker are 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. These two values are 0.82 and 0.80 for D16S291 and 0.50 and 0.47 for D16S3252, respectively. Conclusion: Based on this data, D16S475 and D16S291 are highly and D16S3252 is moderately informative for indirect genetic diagnosis of PKD1 mutations in this population.

Keywords: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, linkage analysis, microsatellite markers, polycystic kidney disease 1


How to cite this article:
Fatehi R, Khosravi S, Abedi M, Salehi R, Gheisari Y. Heterozygosity analysis of polycystic kidney disease 1 gene microsatellite markers for linkage analysis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease type 1 in the iranian population. J Res Med Sci 2017;22:102

How to cite this URL:
Fatehi R, Khosravi S, Abedi M, Salehi R, Gheisari Y. Heterozygosity analysis of polycystic kidney disease 1 gene microsatellite markers for linkage analysis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease type 1 in the iranian population. J Res Med Sci [serial online] 2017 [cited 2019 Aug 25];22:102. Available from: http://www.jmsjournal.net/text.asp?2017/22/1/102/215654




  Introduction Top


Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is a common hereditary kidney disease, with a frequency of 1 in 400–1 in 1000 in the general population.[1] This progressive disorder is caused by polycystic kidney disease (PKD)-1 mutation in 85% of the cases and PKD-2 mutation in most of the remaining ADPKD patients.[2],[3] ADPKD is caused by growing cysts in the kidney tubules often leads to renal failure and end-stage renal disease.[4] Besides the impairment of kidney function, ADPKD can also affect other organs such as the liver, pancreas, and spleen through the occurrence of growing cysts.[5] This multisystemic disorder is associated with cerebral and aortic aneurysms which cause sudden death in 8% of the patients.[6] Typically, ADPKD is diagnosed with the detection of cysts in the kidneys by imaging techniques. However, as the disease is late onset, these techniques are not suitable for diagnosis in children and young adults. Genetic tests allow the early detection of the disease which is important for genetic counseling, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, kidney donation from a young relative, or selection of individuals for the screening of aneurysms.[7],[8] However, direct mutation detection of this disorder are not straightforward due to the large size of the genes, extensive missense mutations dispersed almost all over the genes, and the existence of PKD1 homolog parts in the genomes.[9],[10] Therefore, indirect genetic testing based on linkage analysis can be considered for early detection of ADPKD.[11] This method is highly dependent on the presence of informative markers. Marker informativeness is population dependent and the appropriateness of markers should be assessed in local populations.[12] The PKD1 gene region contains different polymorphic markers. Among the microsatellite markers reported in the PKD1 gene region, two extragenic markers, i.e., D16S475 and D16S291, and one intragenic marker, i.e., D16S3252 have been shown to have a high degree of heterozygosity (HET).[13],[14],[15],[16] However, investigation of these markers has been rarely performed in the Iranian population. In this study, the HET and polymorphism information content (PIC) values for the PKD1 markers D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 were determined in a normal population of Iran.


  Materials and Methods Top


Sample preparation and DNA extraction

Peripheral blood samples were obtained from fifty unrelated, healthy individuals in Isfahan, Iran. DNA was extracted using the genomic DNA isolation kit (Genet Bio, Seoul, South Korea) according to the instructions of the manufacturer.

Primer design

The sequences of microsatellite markers were obtained from the ensemble database.[17] Primers were designed with PrimerPlex 2 V2.5 software (PREMIER Biosoft, Palo Alto CA, USA) for multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [Table 1]. Primer synthesis and labeling were performed by Macrogen (Seoul, South Korea).
Table 1: Characteristics of selected microsatellite markers including repeated sequence markers, sequence of primers, and polymerase chain reaction products size

Click here to view


Microsatellite genotyping

Using fluorescent PCR, DNA samples were genotyped for D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 with specific primers. PCR reactions were carried out in total volume of 25 μl containing 1 mM MgCl2, 1 unit of Taq DNA polymerase, 2.5 μl 10X PCR buffer, 0.2 mM dNTP mix (all from CinnaGen, Tehran, Iran), 2 μl DMSO (85%; MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, California), 2 μl glycerol (20% v/v; Merck, Darmstadt, Germany), 5 μM reverse primer, 5 μM Cy5-labeled forward primer, and 50 ng genomic DNA. Reaction conditions were as follows: 94°C (5 min), 10 cycles of 94°C (30 s), 68°C (30 s), and 72°C (30 s), followed by 30 cycles of 94°C (30 s), 60°C (30 s), and 72°C (30 s), and then a final extension step at 72°C for 5 min. After an initial examination with 2% agarose gel, the Cy5-labeled PCR products were studied using the automated laser fluorescence ALFexpress system (Amersham, Pharmacia Biotech, Roosendaal, Netherlands) for fragment size analysis.

Data analysis

PowerMarker V3.25 software was applied to perform the subsequent statistical analyses, including allele frequency, observed and expected HET values, PIC value, and testing the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE).[18]


  Results Top


To determine the informative markers for ADPKD1 genetic testing, genotyping of the markers linked to the PKD1 gene, D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252, was performed for fifty unrelated healthy individuals by fluorescent PCR followed by fragment analysis. The genomic location of the markers is shown in [Figure 1]a and a representative graph of fragment analysis for each marker is shown in [Figure 1]b. Genotyping analysis of D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 revealed the presence of 19, 9, and 6 alleles in the studied Iranian population, respectively. Allele frequencies of the D16S475 and D16S291 markers have approximately uniform distribution, a key feature of informative markers [Figure 2]. The most common alleles for the D16S475 and D16S291 markers have a frequency of 0.14 and 0.27, respectively. However, for the D16S3252 marker, one allele alone had a frequency of 0.69 that significantly differs from the frequency of other alleles, implying a relatively lower HET for this marker.
Figure 1: In this study, we assessed the informativeness of the polycystic kidney disease 1 gene markers D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 in an Iranian population. The genomic position of the polycystic kidney disease 1 gene microsatellite markers is shown (a). A representative graph of fragment analysis for each marker is demonstrated (b)

Click here to view
Figure 2: The number and frequencies of alleles for three microsatellite markers D16S475, D16S291, and D16S3252 for the polycystic kidney disease 1 gene were determined

Click here to view


To assess the informativeness of the markers, observed HET, expected HET, and PIC values were calculated based on allele frequencies [Table 2]. D16S475 and D16S291 with HET and PIC values >0.8 are highly informative markers. In addition, the D16S3252 marker with lower HET and PIC values is moderately informative in this population. The calculated HWE P value for D16S3252 was above 0.05. However, for D16S475 and D16S291, the population is not assumed to be in the HWE (P< 0.05).
Table 2: Number of genotypes, number of alleles, observed and expected heterozygosity, PIC value, and Fisher's exact P value of three microsatellite markers for linkage analysis of ADPKD1 in the Iranian population

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Indirect genetic testing by linkage analysis is a reliable and practical approach for ADPKD diagnosis in clinical settings. This method is highly reliant on the presence of informative genetic markers. However, the informativeness of markers, expressed by HET and PIC values, is population dependent and should be assessed in the society that the test is planning to be established. In this study, the HET of three microsatellite markers for the PKD1 gene, as the most responsible gene for ADPKD, was determined in Iranian population.

In the present study, microsatellite genotyping was performed for unrelated healthy individuals. We showed that D16S291 is a highly informative marker. This finding is consistent with another study on the Iranian population by Radpour et al.[19] We demonstrated that the D16S3252 marker is moderately informative, whereas it was highly informative in that study. This discrepancy may be due to the diversity of the Iranian population and difference of the subpopulations of these two studies. Furthermore, these two markers are known as suitable markers for ADPKD genetic testing in most studied populations.[8],[13],[14],[15] In addition, for the first time, we found D16S475 to be highly informative in our population. This marker has also been reported as a suitable marker in some other studies.[16]

In this study, fifty healthy individuals were randomly chosen. The selection of this sample size was based on a previous study by Hale et al. that showed only 25–30 individuals per population is enough to accurately estimate the number and frequency of common alleles and the calculation of related parameters.[20] Determining the frequency and HET of rare alleles are of little value for practical applications. A drawback of this study was the inability to show that the population is in the HWE for the D16S475 and D16S291 markers. This could be due to the relatively small sample size and the high number of alleles for these two markers. In spite of this limitation, the reported HET parameters for these two markers can be considered as acceptable estimations for clinical purposes.


  Conclusion Top


In this study as a first step of indirect genetic testing for ADPKD, the HET of three microsatellite markers of the PKD1 gene was determined. However, the suitability of more markers for the PKD1 gene and the other responsible gene, PKD2, remains to be investigated in future studies.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was supported by Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (Grant Number: 393406).

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Sessa A, Righetti M, Battini G. Autosomal recessive and dominant polycystic kidney diseases. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2004;56:329-38.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Hughes J, Ward CJ, Peral B, Aspinwall R, Clark K, San Millán JL, et al. The polycystic kidney disease 1 (PKD1) gene encodes a novel protein with multiple cell recognition domains. Nat Genet 1995;10:151-60.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Mochizuki T, Wu G, Hayashi T, Xenophontos SL, Veldhuisen B, Saris JJ, et al. PKD2, a gene for polycystic kidney disease that encodes an integral membrane protein. Science 1996;272:1339-42.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Brunelli SM, Blanchette CM, Claxton AJ, Roy D, Rossetti S, Gutierrez B. End-stage renal disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: A comparison of dialysis-related utilization and costs with other chronic kidney diseases. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 2015;7:65-72.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Pirson Y. Extrarenal manifestations of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2010;17:173-80.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Gibbs GF, Huston J 3rd, Qian Q, Kubly V, Harris PC, Brown RD Jr., et al. Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms in autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease. Kidney Int 2004;65:1621-7.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Pei Y, Watnick T. Diagnosis and screening of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2010;17:140-52.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
De Rycke M, Georgiou I, Sermon K, Lissens W, Henderix P, Joris H, et al. PGD for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease type 1. Mol Hum Reprod 2005;11:65-71.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
PKD Mutation Database. Available from: http://www.pkdb.mayo.edu. [Last cited on 2017 Jan 14].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Bogdanova N, Markoff A, Gerke V, McCluskey M, Horst J, Dworniczak B. Homologues to the first gene for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease are pseudogenes. Genomics 2001;74:333-41.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Barua M, Pei Y. Diagnosis of autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease: An integrated approach. Semin Nephrol 2010;30:356-65.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Reyes-Valdés MH. Informativeness of microsatellite markers. Methods Mol Biol 2013;1006:259-70.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Endreffy E, Maróti Z, Bereczki C, Túri S. Usefulness of combined genetic data in Hungarian families affected by autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Mol Cell Probes 2009;23:39-43.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Lee JG, Lee KB, Kim UK, Ahn C, Hwang DY, Hwang YH, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in Korean families with autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD): The first Asian report. Clin Genet 2001;60:138-44.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Mizoguchi M, Tamura T, Yamaki A, Higashihara E, Shimizu Y. Genotypes of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease in Japanese. J Hum Genet 2002;47:51-4.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Binczak-Kuleta A, Rozanski J, Domanski L, Myslak M, Ciechanowski K, Ciechanowicz A. DNA microsatellite analysis in families with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD): The first Polish study. J Appl Genet 2006;47:383-9.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Aken BL, Ayling S, Barrell D, Clarke L, Curwen V, Fairley S, et al. The Ensembl gene annotation system. Database (Oxford) 2016;2016. pii: Baw093.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Liu K, Muse SV. PowerMarker: An integrated analysis environment for genetic marker analysis. Bioinformatics 2005;21:2128-9.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Radpour R, Rezaee M, Haghighi MM, Ohadi M, Najmabadi H, Hajibeigi A. Genetic heterogeneity of PKD1 and PKD2 genes in Iran and determination of the genotype/phenotype correlations in several families with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Iran Biomed J 2006;10:1-8.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Hale ML, Burg TM, Steeves TE. Sampling for microsatellite-based population genetic studies: 25 to 30 individuals per population is enough to accurately estimate allele frequencies. PLoS One 2012;7:e45170.  Back to cited text no. 20
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
Previous article  Next article
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1107    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded84    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal