NUDT21-spanning CNVs lead to neuropsychiatric disease and altered MeCP2 abundance via alternative polyadenylation

  1. Vincenzo A Gennarino
  2. Callison E Alcott
  3. Chun-An Chen
  4. Arindam Chaudhury
  5. Madelyn A Gillentine
  6. Jill A Rosenfeld
  7. Sumit Parikh
  8. James W Wheless
  9. Elizabeth R Roeder
  10. Dafne DG Horovitz
  11. Erin K Roney
  12. Janice L Smith
  13. Sau W Cheung
  14. Wei Li
  15. Joel R Neilson
  16. Christian P Schaaf
  17. Huda Y Zoghbi  Is a corresponding author
  1. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  2. Texas Children's Hospital, United States
  3. Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital, United States
  4. University of Tennessee Health Science Center, United States
  5. Instituto Nacional de Saude da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira, Brazil

Abstract

The brain is sensitive to the dose of MECP2 such that small fluctuations in protein quantity lead to neuropsychiatric disease. Despite the importance of MeCP2 levels to brain function, little is know about its regulation. Here, we report eleven individuals with neuropsychiatric disease and copy-number variations spanning NUDT21, which encodes a subunit of pre-mRNA cleavage factor Im. Investigations of MECP2 mRNA and protein abundance in patient-derived lymphoblastoid cells from one NUDT21 deletion and three duplication cases show that NUDT21 regulates MeCP2 protein quantity. Elevated NUDT21 increases usage of the distal polyadenylation site in the MECP2 3'UTR, resulting in an enrichment of inefficiently translated long-mRNA isoforms. Importantly, normalization of NUDT21 via siRNA-mediated knockdown in duplication-patient lymphoblasts restores MeCP2 to normal levels. In this study, we identify NUDT21 as a novel candidate for intellectual disability and neuropsychiatric disease, and elucidate a mechanism of pathogenesis by MeCP2 dysregulation via altered alternative polyadenylation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Vincenzo A Gennarino

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Callison E Alcott

    Jan and Dan Duncan Neurological Research Institute, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Chun-An Chen

    Departments of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Arindam Chaudhury

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Madelyn A Gillentine

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Jill A Rosenfeld

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Sumit Parikh

    Center for Child Neurology, Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. James W Wheless

    Department of Pediatric Neurology, Neuroscience Institute and Tuberous Sclerosis Clinic, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Elizabeth R Roeder

    Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, San Antonio, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Dafne DG Horovitz

    Depto de Genetica Medica, Instituto Nacional de Saude da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Erin K Roney

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Janice L Smith

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Sau W Cheung

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Wei Li

    Division of Biostatistics, Dan L Duncan Cancer Center, Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. Joel R Neilson

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  16. Christian P Schaaf

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  17. Huda Y Zoghbi

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    hzoghbi@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    Huda Y Zoghbi, Senior editor, eLife.

Ethics

Human subjects: Following informed consent, approved by the InstitutionalReview Board for Human Subject Research at Baylor College of Medicine, we performed a comprehensive chart review of medical records and neuropsychological testing. A venous blood sample was provided by the probands in order to establish immortalized lymphoblastoid cell lines.

Copyright

© 2015, Zoghbi et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,786
    views
  • 665
    downloads
  • 69
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Vincenzo A Gennarino
  2. Callison E Alcott
  3. Chun-An Chen
  4. Arindam Chaudhury
  5. Madelyn A Gillentine
  6. Jill A Rosenfeld
  7. Sumit Parikh
  8. James W Wheless
  9. Elizabeth R Roeder
  10. Dafne DG Horovitz
  11. Erin K Roney
  12. Janice L Smith
  13. Sau W Cheung
  14. Wei Li
  15. Joel R Neilson
  16. Christian P Schaaf
  17. Huda Y Zoghbi
(2015)
NUDT21-spanning CNVs lead to neuropsychiatric disease and altered MeCP2 abundance via alternative polyadenylation
eLife 4:e10782.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10782

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10782

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Silvia Galli, Marco Di Antonio
    Insight

    The buildup of knot-like RNA structures in brain cells may be the key to understanding how uncontrolled protein aggregation drives Alzheimer’s disease.

    1. Neuroscience
    Aneri Soni, Michael J Frank
    Research Article

    How and why is working memory (WM) capacity limited? Traditional cognitive accounts focus either on limitations on the number or items that can be stored (slots models), or loss of precision with increasing load (resource models). Here, we show that a neural network model of prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia can learn to reuse the same prefrontal populations to store multiple items, leading to resource-like constraints within a slot-like system, and inducing a trade-off between quantity and precision of information. Such ‘chunking’ strategies are adapted as a function of reinforcement learning and WM task demands, mimicking human performance and normative models. Moreover, adaptive performance requires a dynamic range of dopaminergic signals to adjust striatal gating policies, providing a new interpretation of WM difficulties in patient populations such as Parkinson’s disease, ADHD, and schizophrenia. These simulations also suggest a computational rather than anatomical limit to WM capacity.