Skip to main content
Download PDF

A systematic review of inherited retinal dystrophies in Pakistan: updates from 1999 to April 2023

BMC Ophthalmology volume 24, Article number: 55 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Inherited retinal degenerations (IRDs) are a group of rare genetic conditions affecting retina of the eye that range in prevalence from 1 in 2000 to 1 in 4000 people globally. This review is based on a retrospective analysis of research articles reporting IRDs associated genetic findings in Pakistani families between 1999 and April 2023.

Methods

Articles were retrieved through survey of online sources, notably, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Following a stringent selection criterion, a total of 126 research articles and conference abstracts were considered. All reported variants were cross-checked and validated for their correct genomic nomenclature using different online resources/databases, and their pathogenicity scores were explained as per ACMG guidelines.

Results

A total of 277 unique sequence variants in 87 distinct genes, previously known to cause IRDs, were uncovered. In around 70% cases, parents of the index patient were consanguineously married, and approximately 88.81% of the detected variants were found in a homozygous state. Overall, more than 95% of the IRDs cases were recessively inherited. Missense variants were predominant (41.88%), followed by Indels/frameshift (26.35%), nonsense (19.13%), splice site (12.27%) and synonymous change (0.36%). Non-syndromic IRDs were significantly higher than syndromic IRDs (77.32% vs. 22.68%). Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) was the most frequently observed IRD followed by Leber’s congenital amaurosis (LCA). Altogether, mutations in PDE6A gene was the leading cause of IRDs in Pakistani families followed by mutations in TULP1 gene.

Conclusion

In summary, Pakistani families are notable in expressing recessively inherited monogenic disorders including IRDs likely due to the highest prevalence of consanguinity in the country that leads to expression of rare pathogenic variants in homozygous state.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Inherited retinal dystrophies (IRDs) are a group of clinically and genetically diverse eye disorders ranging in prevalence from 1 in 2000 to 1 in 4000 people globally [1, 2]. IRDs are broadly divided into two categories (i) non-syndromic, and (ii) syndromic types depending upon absence or presence of extra-ocular manifestations, respectively. Major clinical symptoms of non-syndromic IRDs include, but not limited to, night blindness or nyctalopia, color vision deficiency, photophobia, nystagmus, reduced visual acuity, day vision loss as well as central or peripheral vision loss. Syndromic IRDs, on the other hand, are known for systemic findings such as obesity, polydactyly, renal abnormalities, deafness, speech, and intellectual disability together with ocular symptoms [3,4,5,6]. Globally, mutations in over 300 distinct genes have thus far been associated with all forms of IRDs [3]. IRDs follow all modes of Mendelian inheritance such as autosomal recessive [7], autosomal dominant [8], X-linked [9], mitochondrial [10] as well as digenic [11] and oligogenic patterns [12]. Accordingly, IRDs are classified into various subtypes depending upon disease onset, mode of inheritance, rate of disease progression, clinical presentation, part of retina affected (rods, cones, retinal pigment epithelium, inner retina and choroid), and/or involvement of extra ocular phenotypes [13]. Non-syndromic and syndromic IRDs are briefly explained in the following sections.

Non-syndromic IRDs

Cone or cone-rod dystrophy (CD/CRD)

Cone and cone-rod dystrophies (CD/CRD) are a rare form of retinal dystrophies with a worldwide prevalence rate of 1:40,000 [14]. CD/CRD are progressive disorders of cone and rod photoreceptor cells in retina presenting clinical and genetic heterogeneity [4]. Major clinical symptoms of CD include reduced day vision, color vision deficiency, reduced visual acuity, and photophobia [15]. Similarly, CRD is characterized by cone dysfunction at first resulting in progressive loss of day vision. This is followed by rods dysfunction eventually leading to night blindness (nyctalopia). However, symptoms such as photophobia, color vision deficiency, and legal blindness overlap between CD and CRD. The electroretinogram (ERG) shows both cone and rod dysfunction and is non-recordable in advanced case [16]. CD/CRD may transmit as autosomal recessive, autosomal dominant or X-linked entity with mutations in as many as 32 distinct genes identified so far [17]. Gill and colleagues have reported that 62.2% cases of recessively inherited CD/CRD are linked to mutations in ABCA4 gene. Similarly, of the dominantly inherited CD/CRD, 34.6% cases are attributed to mutations in GUCY2D gene. Lastly, of the X-linked inherited CD/CRD, 73.0% cases are due to mutations in RPGR gene [18].

Congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB)

As the name indicate, congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB) is a form of non-progressive inherited retinal dystrophy that appears at birth, however identified in childhood [19]. Visual symptoms include night blindness, nystagmus and reduced visual acuity [20]. ERG findings show normal cone response; however, reduced or abolished rod response is detected on ERG in CSNB. Similarly, fundoscopy mostly remains unremarkable [21]. CSNB is divided into four distinct types namely, Schubert–Borstein type, Riggs type, Oguchi disease, and fundus albipunctatus [22]. Though patients with Schubert–Borstein or Riggs type both have normal fundi, the two types can be distinguished from each other with the help of full-field electroretinography (ff-ERG) [23]. Oguchi disease and fundus albipunctatus shows fundus abnormalities. For instance, Oguchi disease is characterized by a gray-white metallic sheen that disappears after dark adaptation, a feature called the Mizuo–Nakamura phenomenon. Fundus albipunctatus is characterized by small white dots scattered across the posterior pole sparing the fovea. In scotopic settings, Riggs type has flat a-wave in dim flash and reduced a- and b-wave with a strong single flash. In contrast, the Schubert–Bornschein type has normal a-wave and severely reduced b-wave, classically described as an electronegative waveform. In photopic settings, Riggs type has a normal photopic response, the Schubert–Bornschein type has abnormal photopic findings [23,24,25]. To our knowledge, at least 18 genes are known to cause CSNB, including 13 genes for AR-CSNB, 3 genes for AD-CSNB, and 2 genes for XL-CSNB [20].

Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA)

Leber’s congenital amaurosis (LCA) is a rare, and one of the most clinically severe form of IRDs with a worldwide prevalence of 1:80,000 [26]. LCA is, typically, associated with early onset vision loss, nystagmus, and amaurotic pupils [27]. Clinical pattern includes pigmentory retinopathy, reduced or absent ERG response, poor central vision or complete blindness at birth [28]. LCA predominately follows autosomal recessive inheritance pattern except for CRX, IMPDH1, and OTX2 genes that results in autosomal dominant LCA [29]. LCA account for approximately 5% of the total IRDs cases [30], and ~ 20% of childhood blindness [27]. So far, pathogenic variants in 38 genes are known to cause LCA [27]. Some of the frequently mutated genes in LCA include AIPL1, CEP290, CRB1 and GUCY2D [31].

Macular degeneration (MD)

Macular degeneration (MD) is a heterogeneous group of progressive eye disorders that are clinically characterized by bilateral symmetrical macular abnormalities and macular flecks. Visual complaints include, reduced visual acuity, central vision loss, photophobia, slow dark adaptation, and nystagmus [32]. Stargardt disease 1 (STGD1) disease is the most common form of macular dystrophy with a prevalence rate of 1 in 8000–10000 [33]. STGD1 follows an autosomal recessive mode of inheritance with ABCA4 as the leading cause of the disease that accounts for 95% STGD1 cases [34]. Of the total 18 genes known to cause MD, 14 genes are responsible for AD-MD while the remaining 4 genes results in AR-MD [RetNet—Retinal Information Network (uth.edu), accessed on March 6, 2023].

Retinitis pigmentosa (RP)

Retinitis pigmentosa (RP), with a worldwide incidence rate of 1:3000 to 1:4000, appears as the most highly frequent type of IRDs [35]. Though symptoms and onset of RP is largely variable, it usually starts with night blindness during first or second decade of life due to the degeneration of rod photoreceptor cells. This is followed by visual field constriction (tunnel vision) and degeneration of cone photoreceptors, finally leading to complete blindness by late third or early fourth decade of life. Auxiliary symptoms may include photophobia, nystagmus and reduced visual acuity [35]. Around 70%-80% of RP cases are non-syndromic (isolated) while the remaining 20–30% cases are associated with non-ocular manifestations, and thus classified as syndromic RP [36]. RP may be inherited as an autosomal dominant (15–25%), autosomal recessive (5–20%), X-linked (5–15%) [37, 38], or a di-genic entity [39] with associated mutations reported in over 132 different genes [RetNet—Retinal Information Network (uth.edu)]. Mutations in RPGR gene is the leading cause of X-linked RP [40].

Syndromic IRDs

Bardet-biedl syndrome

Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a rare ciliopathy with multisystem involvement [41]. Hallmark features of BBS include obesity, macro or micro-cephaly, night blindness, cone-rod dystrophy, retinitis pigmentosa (RP), hypodontia, dental crowding, hepatic fibrosis, hypogonadism, hypogenitalism, tricuspid regurgitation, dilated cardiomyopathy, renal anomalies, polydactyly, brachydactyly, syndactyly, delayed development, mental retardation, ataxia, speech disability speech delay, and diabetes mellitus [42, 43]. However, expression of these symptoms may vary from one person to the other. Since the mutated genes in BBS have functional relevance in ciliary biogenesis and trafficking, the condition is regarded as ciliopathy [44]. As per literature survey [45], and RetNet—Retinal Information Network (uth.edu), mutations in 28 distinct genes/loci are so far associated with BBS phenotypes, all following an autosomal recessive inheritance pattern [46] and in some cases oligogenic [47]. Interestingly, ~ 50% of the total BBS cases are attributed to pathological sequence variations in three genes, namely, BBS1, BBS2, and BBS10 [45].

Usher syndrome (USH)

Usher syndrome (USH) is a rare form syndromic IRDs, presenting deafness in conjunction with blindness, that affect people with a worldwide prevalence of 4–17 in 100000 [48] [49]. Chief ocular complaints are night blindness, progressive vision loss, nystagmus whereas non-ocular symptoms include hearing difficulty or sensorineural hearing loss of variable degree [50]. USH is sub-divided into different types, for example, USH1, USH2 and USH3, based upon clinical presentation of the disease. USH2 is the predominant type among all sub-types [51]. USH is passed in an autosomal recessive pattern [52], and di-genic [53] with mutation in 10 genes thus far known to cause the disease. While mutations in USH2A gene account for roughly 80% of USH2 cases, MYO7A gene mutations are responsible for over 50% of USH1 cases [54].

Joubert syndrome

Joubert syndrome (JBTS) is an infrequent genetic ciliopathy characterized by the involvement of multiple systems and organs, including the brain, kidneys, liver, and eyes. The clinical presentation of JBTS typically involve mild to moderate mental retardation, macrocephaly, retinal dystrophy, nystagmus, coloboma, visual impairment, hepatic and renal anomalies, and skeletal deformities with characteristic “molar tooth sign” on MRI. Given its rarity as a genetic ciliopathy, JBTS has a global occurrence rate of 1 in 80,000 to 1 in 100,000 live births [55]. JBTS is predominantly inherited as an autosomal recessive disorder [56]. However, there have been reports of X-linked JBTS due to mutations in the OFD1 gene [55]. Pathogenic sequence variations in at least 40 genes have been reported to cause JBTS so far [57]. Mutations in AIH1 and CEP290 genes collectively account for approximately 38% of genetically diagnosed JBTS patients [55].

Senior-loken syndrome

Senior-Loken syndrome (SLS) is a rare syndromic form of IRDs that is estimated to affect 1 in 1,000,000 individuals worldwide. The disease is characterized by retinopathy that may progress as Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA), retinitis pigmentosa (RP), or sector RP. Patients typically present with photophobia, nystagmus, and hyperopia, which may manifest in the first few years of life or later in childhood. Additionally, patients with SLS experience nephronophthisis, a condition that is marked by cystic kidney disease (medullary cystic kidney disease), reduced concentrating ability, and chronic tubule-interstitial nephritis. Over time, the disease typically progresses to end-stage renal disease [58, 59]. SLS is inherited as an autosomal recessive Mendelian disorder [60]. To date, mutations in 10 genes are associated with SLS including NPHP1 [61], NPHP2 [62], NPHP3 [63], NPHP4 [64], NPHP5/IQCB1 [65], NPHP6/CEP290 [66, 67], NPHP10/SDCCAG8 [68], NPHP13/WRD19 [69], NPHP15/CEP164 [70], and TRAF3IP1 [71].

Methods

This review was carried out between November-2022 and April-2023 by following PRISMA guidelines as mentioned in Supplementary Table S1. Briefly, the inclusion criteria for considering genetic studies comprised families of Pakistani descent, exhibiting both syndromic and non-syndromic inherited retinal disorders, and articles published during the period spanning from 1999 to April-2023. A thorough literature survey was performed for this purpose using PubMed (NCBI), Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Different key words such as inherited retinal degenerations/dystrophies, IRDs, retinitis pigmentosa (syndromic/non-syndromic), Stargardt disease, cone- and/or cone-rod dystrophy, macular degeneration, congenital stationary night blindness, leber congenital amaurosis, achromatopsia, color blindness, mutations, Pakistan, etc. were used for retrieving relevant literature. All articles that appeared during our search were further shortlisted and papers that did not fall under the purview of this review were excluded. This included articles presenting findings related to non-retinal phenotypes like cataract, age related macular dystrophy, microphthalmia, anophthalmia, aniridia, anterior segment dysgenesis, and sporadic cases. Data pertaining to genetic and clinical aspects of the families were extracted from all papers and recorded (and tabulated) in Microsoft (MS) excel sheet. This followed manual curation of the data using different options of the MS excel tool. Genomic nomenclature of all variants reported in this study were validated using VariantValidator [https://variantvalidator.org]. Additional features of the variants such as impact of the variations on cDNA and protein level, gene symbols, protein and transcript ID, genomic coordinates of the variation, inheritance pattern, and allele frequencies were determined using major genomic data bases (Ensemble, UCSC, HGNC, OMIM, gnomAD). All identified variants were queried in different online databases such as ClinVar, HGMD and Varsome to check their clinical significance. ACMG verdicts about the variants were retrieved from Varsome database. Retinal information network (RetNet) was used to calculate number of genes associated with each IRDs type. All missense variants were evaluated for their predicted pathogenicity using different in-silico tools, namely, CADD, DANN, LRT, Mutation Assessor, Mutation Taster, Mutpred, PolyPhen-2, PROVEAN, and SIFT.

Results

Demographic and clinical features of IRDs

This review paper focused on a total of 126 published research articles, including 1 case series, 34 case reports, and 91 cohort papers, all documenting IRDs in families of Pakistani descent between 1999 and April-2023. Excluding a retrospective case series study (n = 1), major diagnostic methods utilized in the remaining 125 articles included linkage analysis and/or homozygosity mapping coupled with targeted Sanger sequencing (n = 62), targeted Sanger sequencing (n = 24), and next-generation sequencing (panel-based sequencing, whole exome sequencing, and whole genome sequencing) (n = 39) (Fig. 1, Table S3).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Chart showing number of articles published with respect to time (1999–2023)

Full size image

All articles were thoroughly checked to infer different features such as ethnic affiliation of the patients, parental consanguinity, zygosity of the identified alleles, mutation types /molecular impact of the alleles, inheritance pattern, and disease type. Collectively, highest number of IRDs cases were reported from Punjab province (32.21%), followed by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (13.73%), Sindh (1.12%), Baluchistan (0.84%), and Kashmir (< 1%), while a subset (1.12%) of studies documented IRDs in Pakistani families living abroad (UK/Canada). In the remaining 50.70% cases, no ethnic affiliation could be inferred from the published reports. Analysis of the retrieved articles for presence/absence of parental consanguinity revealed that parents were consanguineously married in 70.03% of the cases, 2.24% non-consanguineously married while no information about parental consanguinity were available in 27.73% cases. Interestingly, 95.50% IRDs cases were found to follow autosomal recessive (AR) inheritance pattern followed by autosomal dominant (AD) (1.70%), X-Linked (1.10%) pattern (Table 1). In the remaining 1.70% cases, information about inheritance pattern was not known. The authors, however, reported homozygous pathogenic variants in genes which can cause both AD and AR inheritance pattern (as per OMIM database).

Table 1 Demographic attributes of the index cases and genomic features of the observed alleles in Pakistani IRDs families between 1999 and April 2023
Full size table

As per available literature and genotype information, higher cases of non-syndromic (77.32%) IRDs were reported compared to syndromic IRDs (22.68%) (Table 1). Syndromic IRDs included Alström syndrome (AS) (~ 1%), BBS (8%), Cohen syndrome (COH) (~ 1%), JBTS (2%), MKS (1%), Retinal dystrophy with microvillus inclusion disease (RDMVID) (< 1%), SLSN (1%), USH (8%), Zellweger syndrome (ZS) (< 1%). Non-syndromic IRDs included RP (41%), LCA (14%), CSNB (6%), CRD (4%), RD (3%), Achromatopsia (2%), STGD (2%), Fundus Albipunctatus (FA) (1%), Hypotrichosis juvenile macular dystrophy HJMD (1%), FA/CSNB (~ 1%), LCA/EORD (~ 1%), MD (~ 1%), Retinitis punctata albescens (RPA) (~ 1%), Early onset retinal dystrophy (EORD) (< 1%), Choroideremia (CHM) (< 1%), Retinoschisis (RS) (< 1%) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Pie chart showing frequency distribution of IRDs types reported in Pakistani families

Full size image

Genetic spectrum of IRDs

Various characteristics of the identified genomic variants are shown in Table 1. A total of 277 disease-causing alleles across 87 known IRDs-associated genes were documented in the literature under the scope of this study as mentioned in supplementary Table S2. Topmost mutated genes included PDE6A (5.32%), TULP1 (4.76%), RP1 (4.48%), RPE65 (4.48%), CDH23 (3.36%), CRB1 (3.36%), GUCY2D (3.36%), LCA5 (3.08%), RPGRIP1 (3.08%), USH2A (3.08%), AIPL1 (2.80%), RDH5 (2.80%) PDE6B (2.80%) (Fig. 3). On the contrary, least frequently mutated genes, categorized as “Others”, were ARL13B, ARL3, ASRGL1, BEST1, CC2D2A, CHM, DRAM2, IFT43, IMPG2, MKKS, MKS1, NPHP4, NR2E3, NYX, PDE6H, PEX6, PRCD, PRPF3, RBP3, RPGR, RS1, SLC6A6, SNRNP200, STX3 and TCTN2 (each reported only once in Pakistani families so far) (Fig. 3). Of the total 277 disease-causing alleles found in Pakistani IRDs patients, 88.81% alleles were found in a homozygous state, 2.17% in heterozygous state, and 1.08% in hemizygous state; however, zygosity of the remaining 7.94% alleles was not described in the published reports (Table 1). Based on their predicted impact on protein, alleles were classified as missense, indels/frameshift, nonsense, splicing, and synonymous with their respective frequencies of 41.88%, 26.35%, 19.13%, 12.27%, and 0.36% (Table 1). Of the total 277 alleles, 61.37% (170 alleles) were defined as single nucleotide variants (SNVs). Of the 170 SNVs, 109 or 64.12% were transitions (Purine to Purine = 45, Pyramidine to Pyramidine = 64) and 61 or 35.88% were transversions (Purine to Pyramidine = 37, Pyramidine to Purine = 24) (Table 1). A C > T was the most frequent (44.04%) transition followed by G > A (31.19%), T > C (14.68%), and A > G (10.09%). Similarly, G > T (27.87%) was the mostly frequent transversion followed by G > C (19.67%), C > A (16.39%), T > G (14.75%), A > T (9.84%), C > G (4.92%), T > A (3.28%) and A > C (3.28%) (Table 1). Using ACMG guidelines, all reported alleles were re-evaluated for their clinical significance. Collectively, ‘pathogenic/likely pathogenic’ variants were found to be 71.48% followed by ‘variants of uncertain significance (VUS)’ (19.49%), and ‘benign/likely benign’ (2.89%). No ACMG verdict about the 6.14% alleles was available on the Varsome database (Supplementary Table S2).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Bar chart showing frequently mutated IRDs-associated genes in Pakistani families

Full size image

Furthermore, all missense variants (n = 116) were re-evaluated as per ACMG guidelines/standards, ClinVar database, and using in-silico tools (Table 2). ACMG predicted 63 missense alleles as pathogenic/likely pathogenic, 45 as VUS, and 8 as benign/likely benign (Table 2). Similarly, ClinVar database showed 49 missense variants as pathogenic/likely pathogenic, 16 as VUS, 9 as conflicting, and 6 as benign/likely benign. Thirty-six missense alleles were; however, not reported in the ClinVar database. Findings of our in-silico study are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 In-silico predictions of the identified 116 missense variants reported in Pakistani families
Full size table

In summary, eight alleles were eligible to be classified as benign/likely benign consistently by the ACMG standards, ClinVar classification system, and by majority of the online in-silico predictors. These eight benign/likely benign missense alleles are further detailed in Table 3, and include SEMA4A (p.Arg713Gln) [72], USH2A (p.Ser2445Phe) [73], RPGRIP1 (p.Ala547Ser) [74], RP1 (p.Thr373Ile) [75], ZNF513 (p.Cys339Arg) [7], ALMS1 (p.Lys1748Glu) [76], RAX2 (p.Gly125Glu) [77], and EYS (p.Thr2777Ser) [78].

Table 3 List of missense variants classified as ‘benign or Likely benign’ by the ACMG guidelines
Full size table

Discussion

This study provides an overview of the existing clinical and genetic aspects of IRDs in Pakistani families based on published reports. Majority of the IRDs families in the published reports belonged to two major ethnic Pakistani populations i.e. Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Other ethnic Pakistani populations such as Sindh, Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan were only marginally represented in the available medical literature. Consistent with the traditional practice of endogamy in the country [79,80,81], over 70% IRDs cases in this study were found among children whose parents were consanguineously married. Consequently, recessively inherited IRDs were disproportionately high (> 95%) in the current report as opposed to dominant cases. Our findings reiterate the fact that consanguinity-driven homozygosity mapping can greatly leverage identification of novel disease genes in recessively inherited Mendelian disorders in endogamous populations as previously shown [82, 83]. For example, at least 12 IRDs-associated genes have been first identified/reported in Pakistani families [84, 85].

Of the total retrieved variants detected in IRDs families of Pakistani origin, ~ 80% were considered as ‘rare’ since they were reported only once from the Pakistani population. The remainder ~ 20% variants were observed at least twice in Pakistani families, hence they were considered as ‘recurrent’ alleles. Of the recurrent alleles, a frameshift mutation in LCA5 gene (NM_001122779.3:c.1151delC;p.Pro384GlnfsTer18) was independently reported seven times [76, 86,87,88,89,90,91], and thus considered to be the topmost commonly reported allele in Pakistan.

While ethnic affiliations of index cases carrying c.1151delC allele were not provided in five out of seven studies, c.1151delC allele was independently reported in two unrelated families from KPK and Punjab provinces. The second most recurrent allele was a missense substitution (c.1138A > G:p.Thr380Ala) in the TULP1 (NM_003322.6) gene which was reported by five independent studies. Of them, two families belonged to ethnically matched KPK population, and thus possibly related. However, one family carrying c.1138A > G allele belonged to Punjab province. No data on the ethnic affiliation was available in the remaining two reports [88,89,90, 92, 93]. In addition to the likelihood that these alleles constitute hotspot mutations, frequent occurrence of these recurrent alleles in multiple and ethnically matched Pakistani families might indicate a founder effect in the society.

Our findings, of RP as the most leading IRD type in Pakistani families (41%), align with several previous studies suggesting RP as the most frequently reported form of IRDs in world populations [94,95,96,97,98]. Also, we have found that RP is the most genetically heterogeneous disorder among IRDs in Pakistani population as mutations in 37 different RP-associated genes were identified. Nonetheless, Pakistani families somehow present unique genetic architecture of IRDs. For example, unlike ABCA4 and/or USH2A gene mutations which are considered as a major etiology of the IRDs cases worldwide [96,97,98], we have found that PDE6A gene mutations are the leading cause of IRDs in Pakistani families. While disease-causing mutations in SNRNP200 gene are known to cause adRP [99,100,101], SNRNP200 gene mutation correlated with arRP in a Pakistani IRD family [102]. Lastly, detection of rare forms of IRDs notably STX3-associated intestinal-retinal syndrome [103], VPS13B-associated Cohen syndrome [104], and SLC6A6-associated taurine transporter (TauT) deficiency disorders [105] in Pakistani families not only points towards the distinctive genetic nature of this population but it also highlights its potential in medical research.

Our CADD score analysis of all missense variants that are described in this report revealed two alleles with lowest CADD-PHRED scores. These included RP1 (c.2005G > A; p.Ala669Thr), and RAX2 (c.374G > A; p.Gly125Glu) with a CADD-PHRED scores of 1.173 and 1.497, respectively. Though our in-silico findings about these alleles are not final, we recommend further researcher to further investigate these two missense variants in order to fully characterize their impact on protein structure and/or function.

Conclusions

This study provides a comprehensive overview of IRDs in Pakistani families over a period of 25 years (1999–2023). Our analysis reaffirms the fact that majority of the prevalent IRDs cases in Pakistan are recessively inherited, and that they mostly appeared due to the bi-allelic inheritance of rare pathogenic mutations from both parents. Undoubtedly, RP was the most frequently occurring IRD in Pakistan followed by LCA. Overall, PDE6A gene mutations was the leading cause of IRDs in Pakistani families followed by mutations in TULP1 gene. Altogether, marked genetic and allelic and heterogeneity was observed in the Pakistani IRDs families. In summary, Pakistani families are notable in expressing both common and rare Mendelian disorders such as Cohen syndrome, intestinal-retinal syndrome, and taurine transporter deficiency possibly due to the traditional practice of endogamy in the society.

Limitations

Since the data presented in this study were all retrieved from published reports, and further validated/curated using online databases, we foresee certain limitations in our study. For example, we do not claim causality of variants (if any) presented in this report as it does not fall under the purview of our study. Despite our own efforts, we do see the possibility of overlooking certain relevant literature on the subject. Incomplete information, inconsistencies or in some cases errors seen in the retrieved data may have skewed our own analysis. It is pertinent to mention here that all calculations about genomic variants were based on the total number of alleles (n = 277) reported in the 126 research articles. We were unfortunately unable to assess objectively the total number of families and/or patients affected by these 277 alleles due to the inadequate information provided in the literature. Nevertheless, published reports emerged mostly from two provinces of Pakistan i.e. Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Therefore, we recommend taking care while extrapolating our findings to other ethnic Pakistani populations like Sindh, Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

Abbreviations

ACMG:

The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics

adRP:

Autosomal Dominant Retinitis Pigmentosa

arRP:

Autosomal Recessive Retinitis Pigmentosa

AS:

Alström syndrome

BBS:

Bardet-Biedl syndrome

CADD:

Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion

CD/CRD:

Cone dystrophy or Cone rod dystrophy

CHM:

Choroideremia

COH:

Cohen syndrome

CSNB:

Congenital Stationary Night Blindness

EORD:

Early onset retinal dystrophy

FA:

Fundus Albipunctatus

gnomAD:

Genome aggregation database

HGMD:

Human Gene Mutation Database

HJMD:

Hypotrichosis juvenile macular dystrophy

IRDs:

Inherited retinal degenerations

JBTS:

Joubert syndrome

LCA:

Leber’s congenital amaurosis

MD:

Macular degeneration

MKS:

Meckel Syndrome

RDMVID:

Retinal dystrophy with microvillus inclusion disease

RP:

Retinitis pigmentosa

RPA:

Retinitis punctata albescens

RS:

Retinoschisis

SIFT:

Sorting Intolerant from Tolerant

SLS:

Senior-Loken syndrome

STGD:

Stargardt disease

USH:

Usher Syndrome, and

ZS:

Zellweger syndrome

References

  1. Ayuso C, Millan JM. Retinitis pigmentosa and allied conditions today: a paradigm of translational research. Genome Med. 2010;2(5):34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hanany M, Rivolta C, Sharon D. Worldwide carrier frequency and genetic prevalence of autosomal recessive inherited retinal diseases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(5):2710–6.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tehreem R, et al. Exome sequencing identified molecular determinants of retinal dystrophies in nine consanguineous Pakistani families. Genes (Basel). 2022;13(9):1630.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gill JS, et al. Progressive cone and cone-rod dystrophies: clinical features, molecular genetics and prospects for therapy. Br J Ophthalmol. 2019;103(5):711–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Maria T, et al. Clinical and preclinical therapeutic outcome metrics for USH2A-related disease. Human Mol Genet. 2020;29(11):1882–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gouronc A, et al. High prevalence of Bardet-Biedl syndrome in La Reunion Island is due to a founder variant in ARL6/BBS3. Clin Genet. 2020;98(2):166–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Li L, et al. A mutation in ZNF513, a putative regulator of photoreceptor development, causes autosomal-recessive retinitis pigmentosa. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;87(3):400–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ayyagari R, et al. Late-onset macular degeneration and long anterior lens zonules result from a CTRP5 gene mutation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(9):3363–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Branham K, et al. Mutations in RPGR and RP2 account for 15% of males with simplex retinal degenerative disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(13):8232–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown MD, et al. Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy: a model for mitochondrial neurodegenerative diseases. FASEB J. 1992;6(10):2791–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ebermann I, et al. PDZD7 is a modifier of retinal disease and a contributor to digenic Usher syndrome. J Clin Invest. 2010;120(6):1812–23.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ripolles-Garcia A, et al. Natural disease history of a canine model of oligogenic RPGRIP1-cone-rod dystrophy establishes variable effects of previously and newly mapped modifier loci. Hum Mol Genet. 2023;32(13):2139–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellingford JM, et al. Molecular findings from 537 individuals with inherited retinal disease. J Med Genet. 2016;53(11):761–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hamel CP. Cone rod dystrophies. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;2:7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Thiadens AA, et al. Clinical course, genetic etiology, and visual outcome in cone and cone-rod dystrophy. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(4):819–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boulanger-Scemama E, et al. Phenotype analysis of retinal dystrophies in light of the underlying genetic defects: application to cone and cone-rod dystrophies. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(19):4854.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Donato L, et al. The impact of modifier genes on cone-rod dystrophy heterogeneity: an explorative familial pilot study and a hypothesis on neurotransmission impairment. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(12):e0278857.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jasdeep, S.G., et al., Progressive cone and cone-rod dystrophies: clinical features, molecular genetics and prospects for therapy. British J Ophthalmol, 2019.

  19. Zeitz C, et al. Night blindness-associated mutations in the ligand-binding, cysteine-rich, and intracellular domains of the metabotropic glutamate receptor 6 abolish protein trafficking. Hum Mutat. 2007;28(8):771–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zeitz C, Robson AG, Audo I. Congenital stationary night blindness: an analysis and update of genotype-phenotype correlations and pathogenic mechanisms. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2015;45:58–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bijveld MM, et al. Genotype and phenotype of 101 dutch patients with congenital stationary night blindness. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(10):2072–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tsang SH, Sharma T. Congenital Stationary Night Blindness. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1085:61–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kabanarou SA, et al. Congenital stationary night blindness and a “Schubert-Bornschein” type electrophysiology in a family with dominant inheritance. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(8):1018–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Marmor MF, Zeitz C. Riggs-type dominant congenital stationary night blindness: ERG findings, a new GNAT1 mutation and a systemic association. Doc Ophthalmol. 2018;137(1):57–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Miyake Y, et al. On- and off-responses in photopic electroretinogram in complete and incomplete types of congenital stationary night blindness. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 1987;31(1):81–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsang SH, Sharma T. Leber Congenital Amaurosis. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1085:131–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Huang CH, et al. Leber’s congenital amaurosis: current concepts of genotype-phenotype correlations. Genes (Basel). 2021;12(8):1261.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Gul H, et al. Homozygosity mapping coupled with whole-exome sequencing and protein modelling identified a novel missense mutation in GUCY2D in a consanguineous Pakistani family with Leber congenital amaurosis. J Genet. 2021;100:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Stone EM. Leber congenital amaurosis - a model for efficient genetic testing of heterogeneous disorders: LXIV Edward Jackson Memorial Lecture. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144(6):791–811.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Oscar FCC, Juan Carlos Z. Review and update on the molecular basis of Leber congenital amaurosis. World J Clin Cases. 2015;3(2):112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Astuti GD, et al. Comprehensive genotyping reveals RPE65 as the most frequently mutated gene in Leber congenital amaurosis in Denmark. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(7):1071–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Rahman N, et al. Macular dystrophies: clinical and imaging features, molecular genetics and therapeutic options. Br J Ophthalmol. 2020;104(4):451–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sadda, S.R., Ryan's retina. 2023: Elsevier.

  34. Haji Abdollahi S, Hirose T. Stargardt-Fundus flavimaculatus: recent advancements and treatment. Semin Ophthalmol. 2013;28(5–6):372–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Hartong DT, Berson EL, Dryja TP. Retinitis pigmentosa. Lancet. 2006;368(9549):1795–809.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Ferrari S, et al. Retinitis pigmentosa: genes and disease mechanisms. Curr Genomics. 2011;12(4):238–49.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Rivolta C, et al. Retinitis pigmentosa and allied diseases: numerous diseases, genes, and inheritance patterns. Hum Mol Genet. 2002;11(10):1219–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tsang SH, Sharma T. Autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1085:69–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dryja TP, et al. Dominant and digenic mutations in the peripherin/RDS and ROM1 genes in retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38(10):1972–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Beigi F, et al. Homozygous females for a X-linked RPGR-ORF15 mutation in an Iranian family with retinitis pigmentosa. Exp Eye Res. 2021;211:108714.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Florea, L., L. Caba, and E.V. Gorduza, Bardet-Biedl Syndrome-Multiple Kaleidoscope Images: Insight into Mechanisms of Genotype-Phenotype Correlations. Genes (Basel), 2021. 12(9).

  42. Khan SA, Ahmad Ansari MZ, Khalid M. Bardet Biedl syndrome: a rare genetic disorder. J Pak Med Assoc. 2020;70(9):1651–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Evgeny NS, et al., Bardet-Biedl Syndrome. Molecular Syndromology, 2016.

  44. Jonathan LT, Philip LB, The nonmotile ciliopathies. Genetics in Medicine, 2009.

  45. Forsyth R, Gunay-Aygun M, Bardet-Biedl Syndrome Overview, in GeneReviews((R)), M.P. Adam, et al., Editors. 1993: Seattle (WA).

  46. Muzammal M, et al. Exome sequence analysis in consanguineous Pakistani families inheriting Bardet-Biedle syndrome determined founder effect of mutation c.299delC (p.Ser100Leufs*24) in BBS9 gene. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2019;7(8):e834.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Badano JL, et al. Dissection of epistasis in oligogenic bardet-Biedl syndrome. Nature. 2006;439(7074):326–30.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Maria, T., et al., Usher syndrome: clinical features, molecular genetics and advancing therapeutics. 2020.

  49. Mathur P, Yang J. Usher syndrome: Hearing loss, retinal degeneration and associated abnormalities. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2015;1852(3):406–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Fuster-García C, et al. Usher syndrome: genetics of a human ciliopathy. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(13):6723.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Stemerdink M, et al. Genetics, pathogenesis and therapeutic developments for Usher syndrome type 2. Hum Genet. 2022;141(3–4):737–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Whatley M, et al. Usher syndrome: genetics and molecular links of hearing loss and directions for therapy. Front Genet. 2020;11:565216.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Zheng QY, et al. Digenic inheritance of deafness caused by mutations in genes encoding cadherin 23 and protocadherin 15 in mice and humans. Hum Mol Genet. 2005;14(1):103–11.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Toms M, Pagarkar W, Moosajee M. Usher syndrome: clinical features, molecular genetics and advancing therapeutics. Ther Adv Ophthalmol. 2020;12:2515841420952194.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Wang SF, et al. Review of ocular manifestations of joubert syndrome. Genes (Basel). 2018;9(12):605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Spahiu L, et al. Joubert syndrome: molecular basis and treatment. J Mother Child. 2022;26(1):118–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Gana S, Serpieri V, Valente EM. Genotype-phenotype correlates in Joubert syndrome: a review. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2022;190(1):72–88.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Tsang SH, Aycinena ARP, Sharma T. Ciliopathy: Senior-Loken Syndrome. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1085:175–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Khairil-Ridzwan KK, et al. Exudative retinal detachment due to coats disease in a teenager with senior-loken syndrome: case report and review of literature. Cureus. 2019;11(4):e4460.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Ronquillo CC, Bernstein PS, Baehr W. Senior-Loken syndrome: a syndromic form of retinal dystrophy associated with nephronophthisis. Vision Res. 2012;75:88–97.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Hildebrandt F, et al. A novel gene encoding an SH3 domain protein is mutated in nephronophthisis type 1. Nat Genet. 1997;17(2):149–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Otto EA, et al. Mutations in INVS encoding inversin cause nephronophthisis type 2, linking renal cystic disease to the function of primary cilia and left-right axis determination. Nat Genet. 2003;34(4):413–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Olbrich H, et al. Mutations in a novel gene, NPHP3, cause adolescent nephronophthisis, tapeto-retinal degeneration and hepatic fibrosis. Nat Genet. 2003;34(4):455–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Mollet G, et al. The gene mutated in juvenile nephronophthisis type 4 encodes a novel protein that interacts with nephrocystin. Nat Genet. 2002;32(2):300–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Otto EA, et al. Nephrocystin-5, a ciliary IQ domain protein, is mutated in Senior-Loken syndrome and interacts with RPGR and calmodulin. Nat Genet. 2005;37(3):282–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Sayer JA, et al. The centrosomal protein nephrocystin-6 is mutated in Joubert syndrome and activates transcription factor ATF4. Nat Genet. 2006;38(6):674–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Valente EM, et al. Mutations in CEP290, which encodes a centrosomal protein, cause pleiotropic forms of Joubert syndrome. Nat Genet. 2006;38(6):623–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Otto EA, et al. Candidate exome capture identifies mutation of SDCCAG8 as the cause of a retinal-renal ciliopathy. Nat Genet. 2010;42(10):840–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Coussa RG, et al. WDR19: an ancient, retrograde, intraflagellar ciliary protein is mutated in autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa and in Senior-Loken syndrome. Clin Genet. 2013;84(2):150–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Chaki M, et al. Exome capture reveals ZNF423 and CEP164 mutations, linking renal ciliopathies to DNA damage response signaling. Cell. 2012;150(3):533–48.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Bizet AA, et al. Mutations in TRAF3IP1/IFT54 reveal a new role for IFT proteins in microtubule stabilization. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8666.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Abid A, et al. Identification of novel mutations in the SEMA4A gene associated with retinal degenerative diseases. J Med Genet. 2006;43(4):378–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Ahmed AN, et al. USH2A gene variants cause Keratoconus and Usher syndrome phenotypes in Pakistani families. BMC Ophthalmol. 2021;21(1):191.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Hameed A, et al. Evidence of RPGRIP1 gene mutations associated with recessive cone-rod dystrophy. J Med Genet. 2003;40(8):616–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Khaliq S, et al. Novel association of RP1 gene mutations with autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa. J Med Genet. 2005;42(5):436–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Maranhao B, et al. Investigating the molecular basis of retinal degeneration in a familial cohort of Pakistani decent by exome sequencing. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(9):e0136561.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Biswas P, et al. Deciphering the genetic architecture and ethnographic distribution of IRD in three ethnic populations by whole genome sequence analysis. PLoS Genet. 2021;17(10):e1009848.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Khan MI, et al. Missense mutations at homologous positions in the fourth and fifth laminin A G-like domains of eyes shut homolog cause autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa. Mol Vis. 2010;16:2753–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Ahmad B, Rehman AU, Malik S. Consanguinity and inbreeding coefficient in tribal pashtuns inhabiting the turbulent and war-affected territory of bajaur agency. North-West Pakistan J Biosoc Sci. 2016;48(1):113–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Ahmad I, Rehman AU, Malik S. Determinants of consanguinity and inbreeding coefficient f in dir lower district, north-west pakistan: a multivariate approach. Iran J Public Health. 2016;45(4):537–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Rehman AU, et al. Transition in consanguinity in Dir lower district, a victim of war, natural disaster and population displacement, in North-West Pakistan - a response to Sthanadar. J Biosoc Sci. 2016;48(3):421–6.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Alkuraya FS. Autozygome decoded. Genet Med. 2010;12(12):765–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Carr IM, et al. Autozygosity mapping with exome sequence data. Hum Mutat. 2013;34(1):50–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Biswas P, et al. A missense mutation in ASRGL1 is involved in causing autosomal recessive retinal degeneration. Hum Mol Genet. 2016;25(12):2483–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Khan MI, et al. The molecular basis of retinal dystrophies in pakistan. Genes (Basel). 2014;5(1):176–95.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. den Hollander AI, et al. Mutations in LCA5, encoding the ciliary protein lebercilin, cause Leber congenital amaurosis. Nat Genet. 2007;39(7):889–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Mackay DS, et al. Screening of a large cohort of leber congenital amaurosis and retinitis pigmentosa patients identifies novel LCA5 mutations and new genotype-phenotype correlations. Hum Mutat. 2013;34(11):1537–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Maria M, et al. Homozygosity mapping and targeted sanger sequencing reveal genetic defects underlying inherited retinal disease in families from pakistan. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0119806.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. McKibbin M, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlation for leber congenital amaurosis in Northern Pakistan. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128(1):107–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Li L, et al. Homozygosity mapping and genetic analysis of autosomal recessive retinal dystrophies in 144 consanguineous Pakistani families. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58(4):2218–38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Biswas P, et al. Identification of causative mutations in consanguineous pedigrees from Pakistan with recessive retinal degeneration by whole exome analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(15):3349–3349.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Ajmal M, et al. Identification of recurrent and novel mutations in TULP1 in Pakistani families with early-onset retinitis pigmentosa. Mol Vis. 2012;18:1226–37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Cifuentes Delatte L. 30 years of alkalinizing treatment. Actas Urol Esp. 1990;14(2):85–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Verbakel SK, et al. Non-syndromic retinitis pigmentosa. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018;66:157–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Pagon RA. Retinitis pigmentosa. Surv Ophthalmol. 1988;33(3):137–77.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Perea-Romero I, et al. Genetic landscape of 6089 inherited retinal dystrophies affected cases in Spain and their therapeutic and extended epidemiological implications. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1526.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Karali M, et al. Genetic epidemiology of inherited retinal diseases in a large patient cohort followed at a single center in Italy. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):20815.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Pontikos N, et al. Genetic basis of inherited retinal disease in a molecularly characterized cohort of more than 3000 families from the United Kingdom. Ophthalmology. 2020;127(10):1384–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Zhang T, et al. SNRNP200 mutations cause autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Front Med (Lausanne). 2020;7:588991.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Zhang X, et al. Contribution of SNRNP200 sequence variations to retinitis pigmentosa. Eye (Lond). 2013;27(10):1204–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Cvackova Z, Mateju D, Stanek D. Retinitis pigmentosa mutations of SNRNP200 enhance cryptic splice-site recognition. Hum Mutat. 2014;35(3):308–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Astuti GDN, et al. Identification of inherited retinal disease-associated genetic variants in 11 candidate genes. Genes (Basel). 2018;9(1):21.

    Article  MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Janecke AR, et al. Pathogenic STX3 variants affecting the retinal and intestinal transcripts cause an early-onset severe retinal dystrophy in microvillus inclusion disease subjects. Hum Genet. 2021;140(8):1143–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Rafiq MA, et al. Novel VPS13B mutations in three large pakistani cohen syndrome families suggests a baloch variant with autistic-like features. BMC Med Genet. 2015;16:41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Ansar M, et al. Taurine treatment of retinal degeneration and cardiomyopathy in a consanguineous family with SLC6A6 taurine transporter deficiency. Hum Mol Genet. 2020;29(4):618–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, Faculty of Biological and Health Sciences, Hazara University, Mansehra, 21300, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

    Asad Munir, Salma Afsar & Atta Ur Rehman

Authors
  1. Asad Munir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Salma Afsar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Atta Ur Rehman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AM and AUR conceived the idea. AM and SA collected and tabulated the data. AM and AUR analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors thoroughly read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atta Ur Rehman.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Munir, A., Afsar, S. & Rehman, A.U. A systematic review of inherited retinal dystrophies in Pakistan: updates from 1999 to April 2023. BMC Ophthalmol 24, 55 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03319-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03319-7

Keywords

BMC Ophthalmology

ISSN: 1471-2415

Contact us