ARTICLE
Dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (DEB) is a heterogeneous group of inherited
mechanobullous disorders clinically characterised by trauma-induced mucocutaneous
blisters, leading to atrophic scarring, milia and nail dystrophy. The
phenotypic appearance, characterised by varying degrees of skin and mucous
fragility, in fact, may vary between affected individuals or families,
including at least 10 distinct forms of DEB [1]. Electron microscopy shows
a cleavage beneath the lamina densa with distinct abnormalities in the
anchoring fibrils (AFs) which appear morphologically altered, reduced
in number, or entirely absent in different variants of DEB [2].
This disorder occurs in dominant and recessive forms and has been closely
linked to the type VII collagen gene (COL7A1) that encodes the major component
of AFs [3, 4].
This paper describes a "sporadic" case of dominant dystrophic epidermolysis
bullosa (DDEB), although a mitis case of recessive dystrophic epidermolysis
bullosa (RDEB) cannot be excluded on the basis of clinical, immunofluorescent
and ultrastructural examination; it also emphasises the importance of
molecular technology so as to define the mode of inheritance in cases
of DEB with clinically normal parents and no other family members affected.
Case report
A 16-year old white boy came to our outpatients institute complaining
of nail dystrophy. The boy was the first-born of unrelated parents, after
an uneventful pregnancy, and a spontaneous and uncomplicated delivery.
The family medical history was negative for blistering disease for four
generations. The mother reported that eight days after the birth, some
blisters were noted on the fingers, feet, knees, elbows and a diagnosis
of epidermolysis bullosa, without specific classification, was made. On
these sites, such mechanical fragility continued during infancy with improvement
after puberty. At the time of presentation, physical examination revealed:
thickened and dystrophic nails both on the hands and feet, atrophic skin
with some milia on the hands (dorsal side) and both elbows and knees,
some large bullae on the hands and ankles (Figs.
1, 2, 3). Albopapuloid lesions were not found and the rest of
the skin was normal. He had normal teeth and hair and his musculoskeletal
growth appeared strong and harmonious.
Transmission electron microscopy, performed using standard procedures
on normal-appearing skin of the lateral side of the arm (in spite of the
mechanical friction no cleavage was obtained), revealed intact hemidesmosomes,
a normal indented dermal-epidermal junction with recognisable AFs, but
reduced in number (Fig. 4);
a careful examination of the lamina densa also displayed areas of few
or even absent AFs.
Immunostaining with monoclonal antibody to human type VII collagen (LH7:
2) demonstrated a reduction of staining with a linear pattern along the
basement membrane (Fig. 5).
Discussion
The diagnosis of DDEB was made on a clinical, ultrastructural and immunofluorescence
basis. The mild localised blisters, the atrophic scars with milia, the
nail dystrophy and the absence of albopapuloid lesions suggest a dystrophic
mild type of epidermolysis bullosa Cockayne-Touraine type.
Currently electron microscopic evaluation remains the gold standard
for diagnostic classification of epidermolysis bullosa [2]: several ultrastructural
changes in anchoring fibrils have previously been reported in DEB, although
AFs abnormalities specific to each subtype of DEB have not been defined.
According to the literature data [5, 6] in DDEB, AFs have been shown to
be diminished in number and abnormal in structure or reduced in number
but qualitatively normal. However, the relevance of these abnormalities
remains difficult to interpret due to the known variability in the number
and morphology of AFs in different body regions of normal subjects, making
controlled ultrastructural morphometric analysis necessary. Thus, morphometric
analysis of AFs alone seems unable to distinguish between the different
subtypes of DDEB and even some types of localised RDEB. Moreover, in our
case, the bright linear immunofluorescent staining at the dermal-epidermal
junction with type VII collagen antibody (LH7: 2) was similar to previously-reported
findings in different forms of dominant dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa
[7, 8].
Although most cases of "sporadic" DEB have been shown to be autosomal
recessive in nature [9-11], our case has clinical, ultrastructural and
immunofluorescence features more in keeping with an autosomal dominant
subtype; future mutational analysis will be necessary to determine the
precise molecular genetics of this case.
This problem has been brought out by recent publication of Christiano
and colleagues [12] of a series of seemingly sporadic cases which turned
out, in many instances, to be shown to have inherited two mutant alleles
from their clinically unaffected parents. This implies that "mild" RDEB
is commoner than once thought.
Type VII collagen, the major protein of AFs,
is synthesised by keratinocytes and by fibroblasts [13, 14]. Several COL7A1
mutations have recently been demonstrated both in DDEB and RDEB [15, 16].
In particular, mutations in dominant subtypes of DEB usually comprise
glycine substitutions in the triple helix of COL7A1. Such changes lead
to dominant negative disruption of the type VII collagen, perturbation
in AFs and relatively mild clinical phenotype. In contrast, in the recessively
inherited forms of DEB a premature termination codon and non-sense mutations
have been demonstrated in both COL7A1 alleles. As a result of mutation,
no type VII collagen polypeptides are synthesised and no functional AFs
are assembled, leading to a more severe clinical phenotype. Moreover mitis
forms of RDEB mutations may arise from the combination of a premature
termination codon mutation in one COL7A1 allele.
This evidence has important implications for genetic counselling to
the families: in particular, the risk for the mitis RDEB affected individual
of having an affected offspring is extremely small, while that of an individual
with a de novo dominant mutation is 1:2. Furthermore, the risk
of recurrence in subsequent pregnancies in the clinically- unaffected
parents of the mitis RDEB patient is 1:4, by contrast, in cases of the
clinically unaffected parents having an affected offspring with a de
novo dominant mutation, the risk is more difficult to predict: small
if the mutation arose during the early embryonic development, significant
if the mutation is derived from a parental germ-line mutation [9, 11].
Finally, although electron microscopy together with immunohistopathology
remain the gold standard for diagnostic classification of epidermolysis
bullosa (EB), it is often insufficient in those families having one mildly
affected individual and clinically normal parents (as in our case). In
view of the immense progress made in elucidating the molecular mechanism
in this disease, it would be desirable to set up established and appropriately
accredited molecular diagnostic laboratories in order to further understand
the different variants of EB, the basic aspects of the disease and the
precise mode of inheritance, for better genetic counselling in families
at risk.
Article accepted on 7/4/00
REFERENCES
1. Fine DD, Bauer EA, Briggman RA, et al. Revised clinical
and laboratory criteria for subtypes of inherited epidermolysis bullosa.
J Am Acad Dermatol 1991; 24: 119-35.
2. Bergman R. Immunohistopathologic diagnosis of epidermolysis
bullosa. Am J Dermatopathol 1999; 21: 185-92.
3. Ryynanen M, Knowlton RG, Parente MG, Chung LC, Chu ML, Uitto
J. Human type VII collagen: genetic linkage of the gene (COL7A1) on chromosoma
3 dominant dystrophic epidermolisis bullosa. Am J Hum Genet 1991;
49: 797-803.
4. Al-Imara L, Richards AJ, Eady RAJ, Leigh IM, Farral M, Pope
FM. Linkage of autosomal dominant dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa in
three British families to the marker D3S2 close to the COL7A1. Y Med
Genet 1992; 29: 381-2.
5. Tidman MJ, Eady RAJ. Evaluation of anchoring fibrils and other
components of the dermal-epidermal junction indystrophic epidermolysis
bullosa by a quantitative ultrastructural technique. J Invest Dermatol
1985; 84: 374-7.
6. Hovnanian A, Christiano AM, Uitto J. The molecular genetics
of dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. Arch Dermatol 1993; 129: 1566-70.
7. Heagery AHM, Kennedy AR, Leigh IM, et al. Identification
of an epidermal basement membrane deficit in recessive forms of a dystrophic
epidermolysis bullosa by LH7:2 monoclonal antibody: use in diagnosis.
Br J Dermatol 1986; 115: 125-31.
8. Leigh IM, Eady RAJ, Heagery AHM, et al. Type VII collagen
is a normal component of epidermal basement membrane which shows altered
expression in recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. J Invest
Dermatol 1988; 90: 639-42.
9. Hashimoto I, Kon A, Tamai K, Uitto J. Diagnostic dilemma of
"sporadic" cases of dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa: a new dominant or
mitis recessive mutation? Exp Dermatol 1999; 8: 140-2.
10. Lapinski P, Lapiere JC, Traczyk T, Chan LS. Sporadic dystrophic
epidermolysis bullosa with concomitant atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol
1998; 138: 315-20.
11. Uitto J. Molecular diagnostics of epidermolysis bullosa:
a novel pathomechanism and surprising genetics. Exp Dermatol 1999;
8: 92-5.
12. Christiano AM, McGrath JA, Uitto J. Influence of the second
COL7A1 mutation in determing the phenotypic severity of recessive dystrophic
epidermolysis bullosa. J Invest Dermatol 1996; 106: 766-70.
13. Regauer S, Seiler GR, Barrandon Y, et al. Epithelial
origin of cutaneous anchoring fibrils. J Cell Biol 1990; 111: 2109-15.
14. Stanley JR, Rubinstein N, Klaus-Koutun V. Epidermolysis bullosa
acquisita antigen is synthesized by both human keratinocytes and human
dermal fibroblasts. J Invest Dermatol 1985; 85: 542-5.
15. Mellerio JE, Salas-Alanis JC, Talamantes ML, Horn H, Tidman
MJ, et al. A recurrent glycine substitution mutation, G2043R, in
the type VII collage gene (COL 7A1) in dominant dystrophic epidermolysis
bullosa. Br J Dermatol 1998; 139: 730-7.
16. Kon A, Pulkkinen L, Ishida-Yamamoto A, Hashimoto I, Uitto
J. Novel COL7A1 Mutations in dystrophic forms of epidermolysis bullosa.
J Invest Dermatol 1998; 111: 534-7.
|