Abstract
Introduction
The human
Methods
Patients
The present study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee (Ref no. KU/IEC/05-09/2014-15). Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients/ guardians involved. The data including age, sex, clinical history, and pedigree was recorded.
Karyotypic Analysis
To rule out the possible association of any chromosomal anomalies with L1 syndrome patients included in the present study, we tested the L1 syndrome patients by karyotypic analysis. 2.5 mL of blood was collected in a sodium heparinized tube (from BD Vacutainer, Kumar chemicals, Shivaogga, Karnataka) for lymphocyte culture and karyotyping. The microscope with image capturing technology and software ‘Ikaros’ by Meta systems was used to identify the chromosomal anomalies. Based on ISCN (An International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature), 9 chromosomes were karyotyped and concluded as normal or syndromic.
Molecular Analysis
The blood sample of the patients was collected in a K3-EDTA tube (From Vacuette, Kumar Chemicals Shivamogga), and genomic DNA was extracted using a Qiagen QIAamp DNA Mini extraction kit (From Qiagen, Bengaluru). DNA was amplified by using a different set of primers (from SIGMA Aldrich, and Eurofins Genomics, Bengaluru) (Table 1). The primers were designed on the
Human L1CAM Gene Specific Primers Used in the Study.
Cycle sequencing started with an initial denaturation at 96°C for 1 minute, followed by 25 cycles (denaturation at 96°C for 10 sec, annealing at 50°C for 5 sec, and extension at 60°C for 4 minutes) and followed by the hold step at 4°C.
Results
Study Population
Based on L1 syndrome diagnostic criteria 113 patients were identified, and most of the patients shared one or more clinical features of L1 syndrome. Among them, 18 index cases (Table 2) with more typical features of L1 syndrome were screened for mutations in the
Summary of Clinical Data of Selected Patients.
Patients with Consanguinity and Family History.
Karyotyping
Karyotyping was performed to find out any chromosomal anomalies associated with the L1 syndrome and other diseases. The outcome of the study clearly revealed that all 18 analyzed patients had normal chromosomal arrangements (46, XY) and indicated that patients had no chromosomal anomalies and had prominent L1 syndrome phenotypes.
Screening of Mutations
A total of 9 different
Mutation Data of L1 Syndrome Patients.
Schematic Representation of Mutations and Protein Domain Model
The mutations are depicted here according to the exon and intronic positions of the

Protein Domain Model of the L1CAM Showing the Location of Missense and Nonsense Mutations.
In the present study, mutations were identified in six patients among 18 patients studied (33.3%). Most of the mutations are private mutations that occur in only one family. The study revealed a high mutation detection rate (83.30%) in patients with more than two typical L1 syndrome features and more than two affected members in a family (Figure 3) compared to the least mutation detection rate (16.60%) in patients having a negative family history with only one typical feature.

Illustration of Mutations
The mutation detection rate was related to the presence of typical clinical features of L1 syndrome. Mutations were found in 16.6% of patients with suspected L1 disease and a typical finding, in contrast to 83.33% of patients with more than two typical findings reported (
Mutation Detection Rate Relative to Family History, and the Number of Reported Clinical Phenotypes.
In-silico Analysis
The present study identified one nonsense and two missense variants. The potential effects of these variants were investigated using different in-silico prediction programs. PROVEAN program predicted the variant (G1120→T) to be deleterious with a score of –3.192.
PolyPhen-2 program predicted the missense variant (G894→C) to be benign with a score of
Another missense variant (G616→A) was found to be deleterious with a score below –2.5 by PROVEAN. The PolyPhen-2 predicted this mutation to be probably damaging with a score of 0.999. The MUpro also shows this missense mutation predicted to decrease the stability of the protein with a score of –0.9711 with a confidence score of –0.5686 which is less than ‘0’ and indicates more confidence in the prediction.
Discussion
The main features of the L1 syndrome include Corpus callosum agenesis, Mental retardation, Adducted thumbs, Spastic paraplegia, and Hydrocephalus. The clinical spectrum of L1 syndrome is highly variable and may involve any combination of these symptoms. At the severe end, there might be patients with massive hydrocephalus resulting in pre – or perinatal death, whereas, at the mild end, there are patients with mild mental retardation as their only abnormality. The phenotypes displayed in the L1 syndrome condition are overlapped with each other. Hence, the spectrum of clinical conditions varies in L1 syndrome.
In the present study, Sanger sequencing of the
Two missense mutations (G894→C: transversion) and (G616→A: transition) were identified in the present study (Table 4). The transversion mutation G894→C was detected in exon 8 and is a novel missense mutation observed in two patients A1 & A20. Exon 8 encodes for the third immunoglobulin domain (Ig3) and this missense mutation has led to a change of Glutamine to Histidine in position 298 (Q298H). Since the Ig3 domain is responsible for homophilic interactions with other L1 proteins, this mutation probably affects the homophilic interaction of the domain.
Another mutation (G →A transition) was detected at position 616 (G616→A), of exon 6 of the L1CAM gene. Exon 6 encodes the second immunoglobulin domain (Ig2), and this missense mutation in exon 6 led to a change of aspartic acid to asparagine in position 206 (D206N). Aspartic acid is highly conserved in homologous adhesion molecules; therefore, the mutation probably affects the core structure of the domain. The Ig2 domain is responsible for homophilic interactions with other L1 proteins on the membranes of adjacent cells. Based on the mutation classification, both missense mutations (G894→C and G616→A) are novel mutations that come under class II extracellular missense mutations. To date, in the
Patient SIMS-1 carried a nonsense mutation (G1120→T) at the Ig4 domain in the extracellular portion at exon 9 which resulted in a stop codon yielding L1 protein truncated (E374X) (Table 4). Previous studies have found similar mutations in this region which manifest with variable clinical symptoms from Hydrocephalus to MASA syndrome.8, 10, 15, 16 The patient was diagnosed with hydrocephalus at the age of the first month, and at the age of 10 months, he was severely affected, both mentally and physically. And he belongs to a family with one affected male in generation II (Figure 3). Exon 9 encodes the 4th immunoglobulin domain (Ig4) and this nonsense mutation in exon 9 has led to a change of glutamic acid to STOP codon (GAG→TAG) in position 374 (E374X). Glutamic acid is involved in protein-active or binding sites and functions as an essential neurotransmitter and the body uses it to produce other neurotransmitters. This amino acid is also critical for brain development and function.
17
Therefore the interaction between L1 molecules has been disrupted due to truncated mutation (E374X) and resulted in abnormal development of the brain. This extracellular truncated mutation E374X represents a form of class I mutation.18, 19 (
The patient VMH-C carried a splice site mutation (694+11g→a) in Intron 6 of the
The present study has also found three silent mutations such as C507→T in the exon 5 of Ig2, C724→T, and C792→T in the exon 7 of Ig3. Since there is no successive change in the amino acid, these are silent mutations without any functional effects. To date, in the
Two intronic mutations were found in the present study (806+48g→a; 806+62c→t) and belonged to the region Ig3. These intronic variations are present in the region of intron 7 and the effect of these mutations are unknown.
In the present study, mutations were found at the rate of one in six patients (16.6%) with L1 disease in contrast to eight mutations in five cases (83.33%) with more than two typical L1 features reported. Of these six patients, the mutation detection rate was directly related to the number of L1 features reported. The mutation detection rate in the present study is congruent with previous studies and confirms that the probability of finding L1CAM mutations increases by up to 66% in patients with three or more clinical features, and 74.2% in patients with at least two additional cases in the family.8, 10, 30, 31 Overall, the present study has reported the number of mutations that will enrich the L1CAM mutation database. These mutations will be a good source to investigate their functional aspects and their pathogenicity so that the mechanisms underlying the L1 syndrome can be understood further.
Limitations of the Study
The present study has limitations such as a small sample size and a limited number of exons of the
Conclusion
L1 syndrome has the most consistent features like hydrocephalus, mental retardation (MR), aphasia, spasticity, etc. Our findings support that L1 syndrome is associated with widely heterogeneous phenotypes. The present study has identified nine mutations, including one nonsense and two missense mutations. The present study is the first of its kind from the southern region of India to identify L1 syndrome patients and screen for mutations in the
Abbreviations
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
Authors’ Contribution
Statement of Ethics
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
Funding
ICMJE Statement
Supplemental Material
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
