Pathological analysis of CFTD patients in our study supports the use of type 1 fiber hypotrophy as an isolated finding, as a predictor of mutations in TPM3. There was marked type 1 fiber hypotrophy in all CFTD and NM patients with TPM3 mutation. Six of the 8 mutation-negative cases referred as CFTD showed type 1 fiber predominance, but type 1 fiber predominance was not a feature of the CFTD cases with TPM3 mutations (48% ± 6% type 1 fibers). Additionally, muscle biopsies of 7 of the 8 mutation-negative cases displayed pathological abnormalities in addition to type 1 fiber hypotrophy, which technically precludes the diagnosis of CFTD for these cases. These findings support the use of strict pathological criteria in the diagnosis of CFTD, since patients with strictly-defined CFTD are likely to have TPM3 mutations.
Marked fiber type disproportion (type 1 fibers > 47% smaller than type 2 fibers) was seen in the 4 reviewed biopsies from CFTD cases with
TPM3 mutation, as well in the nemaline myopathy case with
TPM3 mutation. Biopsied muscle from the mother of patient 126-1 (patient 126-2) had a lesser degree of hypotrophy (type 1 fibers 33% smaller than type 2 fibers) than was observed in the other
TPM3 mutants, but she also displayed only mild symptoms, including ptosis, myopathic facies and mild muscle weakness. In addition, biopsies from patients with
TPM3 mutation displayed hypotrophy of most, if not all, type 1 fibers in the specimen, with no evidence of atrophy/hypotrophy of type 2 fibers or of fiber type grouping. These findings are similar to those reported in 3 cases of CFTD due to
ACTA1 mutation (
Laing, et al., 2004), but in contrast, the 3 reported cases of CFTD due to
SEPN1 mutation involve a less homogeneous degree of type 1 fiber hypotrophy than is seen with either mutation of
TPM3 or
ACTA1 mutation, with severe hypotrophy seen in only a minority of type 1 fibers (
Clarke, et al., 2006). These findings raise the possibility that the presence of a homogenous and high degree of fiber type disproportion affecting type 1 fibers may be predictive of mutations in either
TPM3 or
ACTA1. Type 1 fiber predominance has been a common feature in previous reports of patients with
TPM3 mutations with both CFTD and nemaline myopathy (
Clarke, et al., 2008;
Ilkovski, et al., 2008;
Laing, et al., 1992;
Penisson-Besnier, et al., 2007;
Ryan, et al., 2003;
Wattanasirichaigoon, et al., 2002)). In our study, type 1 fiber predominance was not found in cases of CFTD with
TPM3 mutation. The proportion of type 1 fibers within a muscle is dependent on numerous factors, including the muscle biopsied, which are difficult to control in retrospective studies of muscle biopsy tissue. However, it should be noted that a recent paper by Ilkovski et al. (
Ilkovski, et al., 2008) detected high percentages of type 1 fibers in several muscles of a patient with nemaline myopathy and a Met9Arg mutation in
TPM3. While previous reports suggest that
TPM3 mutation may promote type 1 fiber predominance, our data do not support the inclusion of type 1 fiber predominance as a necessary diagnostic criterion for CFTD.
Remarkably, our nemaline myopathy patient (343-1) with the c.502C>T (p.Arg168His) mutation had the same
TPM3 mutation as one of our CFTD patients (247-4). On biopsy at 59 years, type 1 fiber hypotrophy and numerous nemaline rods within type 1 fibers were seen in patient 343-1’s biopsy (), while patient 247-4, per report, had only type 1 fiber hypotrophy and no nemaline rods. This mutation was previously reported in 2 families with nemaline myopathy and one family with diagnoses of both CFTD and NM in different family members (
Clarke, et al., 2008;
Durling, et al., 2002;
Penisson-Besnier, et al., 2007). Muscle biopsies described in these reports noted hypotrophy of many type 1 fibers, with nemaline rods found within type 1 fibers by light and electron microscopy in all but one patient. Clarke et al. reported a father and daughter with the p.Arg168His mutation in which the daughter had rods in fewer than 2% of type 1 fibers and the father had no identifiable rods, resulting in a diagnosis of CFTD (
Clarke, et al., 2008). The restriction of pathologic findings to type 1 fibers is a feature that these cases have in common with the findings in patient 343-1’s muscle biopsy.
The p.X286Ser mutation found in our CFTD patient 313-1 has been previously reported in a 5 year old boy with nemaline myopathy (
Wattanasirichaigoon, et al., 2002). Interestingly, both cases have Hispanic/Mexican ancestry, suggesting that p.X286Ser could be a founder mutation in this population. While numerous nemaline rods and excessive variation in fiber size are seen in the reported case of nemaline myopathy upon review, there does not appear to be selective hypotrophy of type 1 fibers (
Wattanasirichaigoon, et al., 2002). This patient was a compound heterozygote for p.X286Ser and a second mutation, and he had a previous biopsy at age 2 years that was inconclusive. The biopsy of patient 313-1 in infancy shows marked atrophy of most type 1 fibers and a lack of nemaline rods, verified by electron microscopy. These findings raise the possibility of subsequent development of nemaline rods in patients with
TPM3 mutations as patients age, although the variability in histological findings could be due to the difference in mutations. However, it should be noted that biopsies taken from two of our patients with
TPM3 mutations at 11 (Pt. 247-4) and 29 (126-2) years of age, as well as a biopsy of a
TPM3 patient at 56 years of age reported by Clarke et al., contained no nemaline rods, which indicates that nemaline rods will not necessarily form in the muscle fibers of CFTD patients with
TPM3 mutations as they age.
In contrast to the homogeneity of pathological findings in our
TPM3-related cases of CFTD, there is significant clinical and genetic heterogeneity in this disease, and in general, there were no significant clinical features that differentiated patients with
TPM3 mutations from other patients with congenital myopathy. The identified mutations exhibited three patterns of inheritance: autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive, and
de novo (dominant) mutations. As reported in patients with
TPM3-associated nemaline myopathy, presenting symptoms varied from neonatal hypotonia and delayed motor milestones in early childhood to difficulty with exercise in adolescence. Similarly, the degree of weakness varied from severe to clinically unrecognized, with the recessive mutations causing more significant impairment (
Durling, et al., 2002;
Laing, et al., 1992;
Laing, et al., 1995;
Lehtokari, et al., 2008;
Penisson-Besnier, et al., 2007;
Tan, et al., 1999;
Wattanasirichaigoon, et al., 2002). The degree of clinical heterogeneity is exemplified by patient 126-1 and his mother, patient 126-2. Despite having the same heterozygous mutation, the mother’s presentation was less severe than the child’s to the point that her symptoms were only recognized retrospectively after her son’s diagnosis. Although we cannot rule out the possibility of mosaicism in the mother, careful analysis of peak heights in the DNA sequence chromatograms revealed no noticeable differences between the tracings from mother and son. This clinical variability suggests the possibility of other genetic or environmental influences on the course of disease. Similarly, the presence of identical mutations in patients with nemaline myopathy and CFTD suggests that additional factors are responsible for the degree and type of disease seen in these patients. Unlike some previously described patients with
TPM3 mutations, the patients in our study were not reported to present with a significantly greater weakness of the lower limbs or foot drop as a prominent feature (
Durling, et al., 2002;
Laing, et al., 1995). However, since we did not personally examine all patients, we cannot exclude this possibility.
In total, mutations in three genes,
ACTA1,
SEPN1, and now
TPM3, have been identified in cases of CFTD. Although there have been suggestions that CFTD is a “catch-all” diagnosis, useful only as a placeholder until a more specific diagnosis can be established, our data and the recent report by Clarke et al (
Clarke, et al., 2008) demonstrate clearly that there exists a definable group of patients, with a consistent clinical and pathological presentation, associated with mutations of the
TPM3 gene. We identified
TPM3 mutations in 5 of 13 cases of CFTD, including 3 novel mutations. In addition, we discovered a
TPM3 mutation in 1 of 18 selected cases of nemaline myopathy. The spectrum of clinicopathological presentations associated with
TPM3 now includes both nemaline myopathy and CFTD, and given the fact that the
TPM3 gene product, αTM
slow is predominantly expressed in type 1 (slow) muscle fibers, this gene should be regarded as a prime candidate for other congenital myopathies in which type 1 fiber hypotrophy is a major pathologic finding. This report brings the total number of unrelated individuals with reported
TPM3 associated congenital myopathy to 20, including 10 cases of CFTD, 7 of nemaline myopathy, 1 of cap disease, and 2 families with both CFTD or fiber size variation and NM in different members of the same family. While the usefulness of the CFTD diagnosis has been controversial (
Clarke and North, 2003), these results support the utility of the CFTD diagnosis in directing the course of genetic testing and suggest that
TPM3 should be considered as the first line of testing in patients with clinical symptoms consistent with congenital myopathy and relatively homogeneous type 1 hypotrophy without other pathological features.