June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
The Genetic Basis of Rod-Cone versus Cone-Rod Dystrophies
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jason Comander
    Ocular Genomics Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Sarah Chorfi
    Ocular Genomics Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Emily Place
    Ocular Genomics Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Carol Weigel Difranco
    Ocular Genomics Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Rachel M Huckfeldt
    Ocular Genomics Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Jason Comander AGTC, Atsena, Beam therapeutics, Biogen, Gensight, Vedere, Wave life sciences, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Participation in clinical trails with: AGTC, Biogen, Editas/Allergan, Meira GTX, ProQR, ReNueron, Spark, Code F (Financial Support), WO2016179496A1 Methods of delivering an agent to the eye, Code P (Patent); Sarah Chorfi None; Emily Place None; Carol Weigel Difranco None; Rachel Huckfeldt None
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH R01 EY031036
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 4492 – F0279. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jason Comander, Sarah Chorfi, Emily Place, Carol Weigel Difranco, Rachel M Huckfeldt; The Genetic Basis of Rod-Cone versus Cone-Rod Dystrophies. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):4492 – F0279.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are classically diagnosed and classified by the electroretinogram (ERG) rod and cone response amplitudes, and the pattern of ERG responses is associated with various clinical diagnoses. Certain gene defects cause primarily cone dysfunction, such as CNGA3, which causes achromatopsia. Other gene defects can cause a cone-rod dystrophy (cone>rod dysfunction), such as ABCA4. Some genes defects cause rod-cone dystrophies (rod>cone dysfunction), known as retinitis pigmentosa (RP), including rhodopsin.

Methods : This study compares residual cone and mixed rod-cone response amplitudes across 5095 ERGs of 1239 subjects with IRDs caused by 84 different genes. The mixed rod and cone response was elicited by 0.5 Hz white flashes at 0.22 cd*s/m2 after dark adaptation. The cone specific response was elicited by 30 Hz flashes after light adaptation. The residual of a curve fit of the cone versus mixed response amplitudes was calculated, which can be considered as a type of cone/rod amplitude ratio.

Results : The lowest cone/rod ratio, indicating primary cone dysfunction, was seen in KCNV2 defects, which causes “cone dystrophy with a supernormal rod electroretinogram”. AIPL1 defects, which also cause an unusual ERG, also had large residual rod signals with low cone signals. These two genes, along with achromatopsia genes such as CNGA3 & CNGB3, have the lowest cone/rod ratios. The highest cone/rod ratios, indicating primarily rod dysfunction, were frequently seen in genes that cause dominant RP, such as rhodopsin, KLHL7, and IMPHD1. (Different relative rankings are obtained with amplitude-independent calculations.) ABCA4, and to a lesser extent RPGR, showed a wide spectrum of ratios, consistent with their ability to cause RP versus cone-rod dystrophy in different subjects. Findings for additional genes are discussed.

Conclusions : This study shows, in an unbiased way, which IRD genes cause more rod versus cone-specific defects, in many human subjects. This pattern likely reflects the underlying biology of the different gene functions and might have implications for therapeutic approaches to gene replacement for IRDs.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

 

The curve-fit residual (y-axis), which is a type of cone/rod response ratio, is graphed separately for each gene (x-axis). The genes are ordered by the mean residual, with the cone-rod dystrophy pattern (e.g. cone dysfunction syndromes) on the left and the rod-cone pattern (retinitis pigmentosa) on the right.

The curve-fit residual (y-axis), which is a type of cone/rod response ratio, is graphed separately for each gene (x-axis). The genes are ordered by the mean residual, with the cone-rod dystrophy pattern (e.g. cone dysfunction syndromes) on the left and the rod-cone pattern (retinitis pigmentosa) on the right.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×