Objective
To test the hypothesis that the kinetics of activation and deactivation of rod phototransduction are altered in children with Smith-Lemli-Optiz syndrome(SLOS), a common genetic disorder caused by an inborn error in cholesterol biosynthesis.
Methods
Thirteen patients with SLOS (median age, 4 years) were studied by means of scotopic full-field electroretinography. The kinetics of activation and deactivation of rod phototransduction were derived from the electroretinographic a-wave. Postreceptoral electroretinographic components were also evaluated.
Results
The kinetics of activation were below normal limits in all but 3 of the 13 patients. Rod cell recovery (deactivation) in SLOS was slower than normal in all 8 patients in whom it was studied. Postreceptoral sensitivity was below normal limits in all but 1 of the 13 patients.
Conclusions
The kinetics of phototransduction are slow in children with SLOS. This is likely a consequence of altered sterol composition in the cell membranes of the rod photoreceptors. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of altered kinetics of a membrane-bound signaling system in SLOS. Investigation of other membrane-bound signaling systems may be warranted in the quest to understand development and phenotype of individuals with SLOS.
PATIENTS WITH Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome (SLOS) (Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man [OMIM] 270400) have low serum cholesterol and detectable 7-dehydrocholesterol and 8-dehydrocholesterol concentrations due to a deficiency of the enzyme Δ7-dehydrocholesterol reductase.1-6 The mechanisms by which the biochemical abnormalities cause the SLOS phenotype of microcephaly, mental retardation, facial dysmorphia, genital and limb abnormalities, poor growth, and failure to thrive remain unknown. Some SLOS-affected individuals have ptosis and cataracts.7,8
Cholesterol, an important component of the lipid bilayer of cell membranes, affects the fluidity of membranes and the movement of proteins within the membranes.9-12 Rhodopsin is the membrane-bound receptor in retinal rod cells.13 Cholesterol concentration seems to affect the folding and unfolding of rhodopsin in the outer segment disk membrane as it participates in the transduction cascade.11 Regeneration of rhodopsin is less complete and slower in rod outer segment membranes with higher or lower cholesterol concentrations than found in control disc membranes.9-12,14 Phototransduction is initiated by capture of photons by rhodopsin, which then diffuses in the disc membrane to activate transducin, which then activates phosphodiesterase resulting in involvement of cyclic guanosine monophosphate and closure of the channels in the plasma membrane.15 Deactivation proceeds through another series of molecular steps whereby the cell recovers the ability of the channels to close in response to light.15 The kinetics of the molecular processes involved in activation, and probably deactivation, are governed by the rate of encounter of the proteins involved in the transduction processes.16
The steps involved in visual transduction can be described precisely.15,17,18 Furthermore, these processes can be investigated in patients using noninvasive electroretinographic(ERG) procedures.19-21 We used contemporary ERG procedures to study the kinetics of activation and deactivation of phototransduction in rods of children with SLOS.
Data of 13 patients, including 3 sibling pairs (patients 2 and 3, 4 and 5, and 11 and 12), with biochemically confirmed SLOS are summarized in Table 1. At the ages studied, normal scotopic ERG response parameters are mature.19 Cholesterol precursors that are not present in healthy individuals were detectable in all of the SLOS-affected patients (Table 1). All patients received cholesterol supplementation, although compliance was inconsistent in some patients. The median spherical equivalent was +1.00 diopter (D) (range, −0.50 to +3.5 D). Patients 1 and 3 had tiny nuclear cataracts in both eyes. Patients 3, 11, and 12 had ptosis. The study conformed to the principles outlined by the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Children's Hospital Committee on Clinical Investigation, Boston, Mass. Informed written consent was obtained from parents prior to the child's participation in the study. Healthy control subjects (n = 26) were aged 8 to 52 years (median age, 22 years).20
Electroretinographic testing was done at the time of other investigations under light inhalation anesthesia that does not alter ERG responses.22 Procedures for preparation of the patient and data acquisition were performed as previously described.20
Activation of Phototransduction in Rods
Rod photoresponse characteristics were estimated from the a-waves by means of the Hood and Birch21 formulation of the Lamb and Pugh17,18 model of the biochemical processes involved in the activation of rod phototransduction. The main parameters of this model are S and Rmp3. Sometimes referred to as a sensitivity parameter, 21S summarizes the kinetics of the series of processes from photon capture up to, and including, closure of the channels in the plasma membrane of the photoreceptor.18 In other words, the molecular mobilities of the proteins in the transduction cascade are a determinant of S. Rmp3 is the amplitude of the saturated rod response21 and represents the number of channels available for closure by light. A curve-fitting routine (MATLAB, fimins subroutine; The Math Works, Inc, Natick, Mass) was used to determine the best-fitting values of S, Rmp3, and td, a brief delay, in the following equation:
(1) (I, t) = {1 − exp[−0.5 I S (t-td)2]}Rmp3.
In this equation, I is the flash in estimated number of isomerizations per rod per flash. Approximately 8.5 isomerizations per rod per flash are produced by 1 scotopic troland second.23 Fitting of the model was restricted to a maximum of 20 milliseconds after stimulus onset. For the 26 controls, the mean (SD) value of S is 10.15 (1.58) seconds−2 and that of Rmp3 is 391 (79) µV.
Deactivation of Phototransduction in Rods
The kinetics of recovery of the rod cell's response to light were evaluated using a paired flash paradigm20,24-27 in 8 patients (patients 1-3, 8, and 10-13). Recovery, termed "deactivation, "is accomplished by a series of molecular processes whereby the channel's and rod's circulating current are restored to a response-ready state.15 At 7 selected interstimulus intervals (2-120 seconds) after a test flash, a probe flash was presented. Between each test-probe pair, 2 minutes in the dark was allowed. The amplitude of the response to the probe was expressed as a percentage of amplitude of the response to the test flash alone. For 8 controls, amplitude is 50% when the median interstimulus interval is 3 seconds (range, 2-5 seconds) and 100% at the 120-second interstimulus interval.
The b-wave stimulus-response data were fit by the function
(2) V/Vmax = I/(I + σ)
as previously described.20,28 The main parameters in this equation are V, the b-wave amplitude produced by flash intensity I; Vmax, the saturated b-wave amplitude; and log σ, the flash intensity that evokes a half-maximum response amplitude. For controls, the mean (SD) value of log σ is −0.84(0.10) log scotopic troland seconds and that of Vmax is 378 (57)µV.
In an analysis reminiscent of Granit, 29,30 the ERG waveform is considered the sum of the photoreceptor and postreceptoral retinal responses.31,32 Equation 1 modeled the rod photoresponse, sometimes called "P3." The photoresponse was digitally subtracted from the ERG waveform to obtain P2, which is thought to represent mainly the on-bipolar cell response, but also activity in other second- and third-order retinal neurons.31-36 In an analysis similar to that using equation 2 for the b-wave, the P2 stimulus-response function was fit with
(3) P2/P2max = I/(I + kp2),
where P2max is the saturated amplitude and kp2 is the semisaturation constant. Thus, 1/kp2 is a measure of sensitivity.
For each patient, data from 1 eye were analyzed. The patients' and controls' ERG parameters were compared (t test). In addition, individual patients' results were compared with the prediction interval for controls.37
Sample a- and b-wave records from 3-year-old patient 4 are shown in Figure 1. The mean values of the parameters calculated from the a-wave (S and Rmp3) and b-wave (log σ and Vmax) were significantly lower in patients with SLOS (Table 2).
The rod photoresponse parameters, Rmp3 and S, for each patient are plotted in Figure 2. In every case of SLOS, S was below the normal mean value and most (10 of 13) were below the 95% prediction limit for normal (Figure 2A). Thus, the kinetics of the activation of phototransduction, represented by S, are slower than normal in patients with SLOS. As for Rmp3, only 1 (patient 3) has a value below the limits of normal (Figure 2B).
Results of the paired flash test of deactivation are shown in Figure 3. With decreasing time after the test flash, as the sample records for patient 2 illustrate (Figure 3A), the amplitude of the response to the probe flash decreased. In every patient, the interstimulus interval (Figure 3B) at which the response was 50% of the dark-adapted response amplitude was longer (range, 6-16 seconds; median, 10.5 seconds) than in any control subject (range, 2-5 seconds; median, 3 seconds). Thus, the kinetics of deactivation were significantly delayed in the patients (Table 2).15,24,26,27
Sample P2 records are shown in Figure 4A. The parameters of the P2 stimulus-response function, P2max and log kp2, calculated by the fit of equation 3 to the P2 stimulus-response data (Figure 4B), are shown in Figure 4C and D. All but patient 6 had log kp2 values below the 95% prediction limit of normal, whereas only 4 had P2max below the 95% prediction limit. The patients' mean values of log kp2 and P2max differ significantly from those of the controls (Table 2).
Receptoral and postreceptoral deficits in SLOS sensitivity (S and log kp2) and saturated amplitude (Rmp3 and P2max)were compared and the results are shown in Figure 5. For both sensitivity and saturated amplitude, receptoral and postreceptoral deficits are correlated (sensitivity, r = 0.64, P = .02; saturated amplitude, r = 0.78, P = .003, respectively). Deficits appear more marked in postreceptoral than receptoral sensitivity(Figure 5A). Deficits in receptoral and postreceptoral saturated amplitudes are minimal (Figure 5B). Low sensitivity at the receptor can cause low postreceptoral sensitivity with little change in saturated amplitude.31,32,38
None of the ERG parameters (Table 2) was correlated with the concentrations of cholesterol, 7-dehyrocholesterol, 8-dehydrocholesterol, or with the ratio of cholesterol to total sterol levels(Table 1). The ERG parameters of the 4 patients with cholesterol concentrations less than 100 mg/d L did not differ significantly from those of the other 9 patients. None of the ERG parameters varied with age.
The kinetics of rod activation (Figure 2) and deactivation (Figure 3)are slowed significantly in these children with SLOS. The mean value of S, which summarizes the kinetics of the proteins involved in the activation of phototransduction, is only 61% of normal. Possibly the basis for the slow kinetics, as in the experimental cell membranes, 11,14 is a low cholesterol concentration in the outer segment membranes. The retina of the rat model of SLOS has a low cholesterol concentration.9
Although statistically lower in SLOS-affected patients than in controls, the saturated amplitude of the rod response, Rmp3, is robust at 84% of normal. Thus, the number of channels available for closure by light and length of the outer segment must not be reduced drastically in SLOS-affected patients. A small decrease in the outer segment length and a consequent decrease in the level of rhodopsin available for photon capture are unlikely to explain the proportionately larger decrease in S. Disorder in the cholesterol-deficient lipid bilayer and impaired mobility of proteins in the outer segment membranes are 2 possible, nonmutually exclusive explanations for low S.
None of the sterol levels (Table 1) were correlated with any ERG parameter. Plasma cholesterol level accounts for only 33% of the overall severity score in patients with SLOS.39 Furthermore, as does the brain, the retina makes its own cholesterol by the same biosynthetic pathway as in other tissues. Accordingly, cholesterol levels in peripheral blood are not necessarily an indicator of cholesterol levels in the retina. As in the rat model of SLOS, the deficit in the cholesterol concentration in the retina may not be as severe as in the serum.9
The slow kinetics in SLOS are evidence of significant impairment of a membrane-bound signaling system, namely, rhodopsin in the rod outer segment membranes. Whether the retinal dysfunction is progressive or is associated with visual impairment is not yet known. For now, we recommend that the vision and retinal status of children with SLOS be monitored. In the quest to learn more about SLOS, investigation of other membrane-bound signaling systems involved in development40,41 and neural processes may be warranted.
Corresponding author: Anne B. Fulton, MD, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 (e-mail: anne.fulton@tch.harvard.edu).
Submitted for publication November 19, 2002; final revision received May 23, 2003; accepted June 20, 2003.
This study was supported in part by grants EY 10597 (Drs Hansen and Fulton) and M01 RR02172 to Children's Hospital, Boston, from the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md.
1.Smith
DWLemli
LOpitz
JM A newly recognized syndrome of multiple congenital anomalies.
J. Pediatr. 1964;64210- 217
Google ScholarCrossref 2.Irons
MElias
ERSalen
GTint
GSBatta
AK Defective cholesterol biosynthesis in Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome [letter].
Lancet. 1993;3411414
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 3.Tint
GSIrons
MElias
ER
et al. Defective cholesterol biosynthesis associated with the Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome.
N Engl J Med. 1994;330107- 113
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 4.Fitzky
BUWitsch-Baumgartner
MErdel
M
et al. Mutation in the Delta-7-sterol reductase gene in patients with Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;958181- 8186
Google ScholarCrossref 5.Fitzky
BUGlossmann
HUtermann
GMoebius
FF Molecular geneticsof the Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome and postsqualene sterol metabolism.
Curr Opin Lipidol. 1999;10123- 131
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 6.Moebius
FFFitzky
BULee
JNPaik
Y KGlossmann
H Molecular cloning and expression of the human delta7-sterol reductase.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;951899- 1902
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 7.Atchaneeyasakul
LOLinck
LMConnor
WEWeleber
RGSteiner
RD Eye findings in 8 children and a spontaneously aborted fetus with RSH/Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome.
Am J Med Genet. 1998;80501- 505
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 8.Kretzer
FLHittner
HMMehta
RS Ocular manifestations of the Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome.
Arch Ophthalmol. 1981;992000- 2006
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 9.Fliesler
SJRichards
MJMiller
CPeachey
NS Marked alteration of sterol metabolism and composition without compromising retinal development or function.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;401792- 1801
PubMedGoogle Scholar 10.Boesze-Battaglia
KAlbert
AD Cholesterol modulation of photoreceptor function in bovine retinal rod outer segments.
J Biol Chem. 1990;26520727- 20730
PubMedGoogle Scholar 11.Albert
ADBoesze-Battaglia
KPaw
ZWatts
AEpand
RM Effect of cholesterol on rhodopsin stability in disk membranes.
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1996;129777- 82
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 12.Albert
ADYoung
JEYeagle
PL Rhodopsin-cholesterol interactions in bovine rod outer segment disk membranes.
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1996;128547- 55
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 13.Hargrave
PAMcDowell
JH Rhodopsin and phototransduction: a model system got G-protein-linked receptors.
FASEB J. 1992;62323- 2331
PubMedGoogle Scholar 14.Boesze-Battaglia
KAllen
C Differential rhodopsin regeneration in photoreceptor membranes is correlated with variations in membrane properties.
Biosci Rep. 1998;1829- 38
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 15.Pugh
EN
JrLamb
TD Phototransduction in vertebrate rods and cones: molecular mechanisms of amplification, recovery and light adaptation. Stavenga
DGde Grip
WJPugh
EN
Jreds.
Molecular Mechanisms of Visual Transduction. Amsterdam, the Netherlands Elsevier Science2000;183- 255Hoff
AJed.
Handbook of Biological Physics; 3
Google Scholar 16.Calvert
PDGovardovski
VIKrasnoperova
NAnderson
RELem
JMakino
CL Membrane protein diffusion sets the speed of rod phototransduction.
Nature. 2001;41190- 94
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 17.Pugh
EN
JrLamb
TD Amplification and kinetics of the activation steps in phototransduction.
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1993;1141111- 149
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 18.Lamb
TDPugh
EN
Jr A quantitative account of the activation steps involved in phototransduction in amphibian photoreceptors.
J Physiol (Lond). 1992;449719- 758
PubMedGoogle Scholar 19.Fulton
ABHansen
RM The development of scotopic sensitivity.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;411588- 1596
PubMedGoogle Scholar 20.Cooper
LLHansen
RMDarras
BT
et al. Rod photoreceptor function in children with mitochondrial disorders.
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;1201055- 1062
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 21.Hood
DCBirch
DG Rod phototransduction in retinitis pigmentosa: estimation and interpretation of parameters derived from the rod a-wave.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;352948- 2961
PubMedGoogle Scholar 22.Wongpichedchai
SHansen
RMKoka
BGudas
VMFulton
AB Effects of halothane on children's electroretinograms.
Ophthalmology. 1992;991309- 1312
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 23.Kraft
TWSchneeweis
DMSchnapf
JL Visual transduction in human rod photoreceptors.
J Physiol. 1993;464747- 765
PubMedGoogle Scholar 24.Lyubarsky
ALPugh
EN
Jr Recovery phase of the murine rod photoresponse reconstructed from electroretinographic recordings.
J Neurosci. 1996;16563- 571
PubMedGoogle Scholar 25.Birch
DGHood
DCNusinowitz
SPepperberg
DR Abnormal activation and inactivation mechanisms of rod transduction in patients with autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa and the pro-23-His mutation.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;361603- 1614
PubMedGoogle Scholar 26.Pepperberg
DRBirch
DGHofmann
KPHood
DC Recovery kinetics of human rod phototransduction inferred from the two-branched a-wave saturation function.
J Opt Soc Am A. 1996;13586- 600
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 27.Pepperberg
DRBirch
DGHood
DC Photoresponse of human rods in vivo derived from paired flash electroretinograms.
Vis Neurosci. 1997;1473- 82
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 28.Peachey
NSAlexander
KRFishman
GA The luminance-response function of the dark-adapted human electroretinogram.
Vis Res. 1989;29263- 270
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 29.Granit
R The components of the retinal action potential in mammals and their relation to the discharge in the optic nerve.
J Physiol (Lond). 1933;77207- 239
Google Scholar 30.Granit
R The components of the vertebrate electroretinogram.
Sensory Mechanisms of the Retina. London, England Hafner Publishing Co1963;38- 68
Google Scholar 31.Hood
DCBirch
DG A computational model of the amplitude and implicit time of the b-wave of the human ERG.
Vis Neurosci. 1992;8107- 126
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 32.Hood
DBirch
D Beta wave of the scotopic (rod) electroretinogram as a measure of the activity of human on-bipolar cells.
J Opt Soc Am A. 1996;13623- 633
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 33.Aleman
TLa Vail
MMMontemayor
R
et al. Augmented rod bipolar cell function in partial receptor loss: an ERG study in P23H rhodopsin transgenic and aging normal rats.
Vis Res. 2001;412779- 2797
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 34.Wurziger
KLichtenberger
THanitzsch
R On-bipolar cells and depolarising third-order neurons as the origin of the ERG b-wave in the RCS rat.
Vis Res. 2001;411091- 1101
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 35.Robson
JFrishman
L Response linearity and kinetics of the cat retina: the bipolar cell component of the dark-adapted electroretinogram.
Vis Neurosci. 1995;12837- 850
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 36.Robson
JGFrishman
LJ Photoreceptor and bipolar cell contributions to the cat electroretinogram: a kinetic model for the early part of the flash response.
J Opt Soc Am A. 1996;13613- 622
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 37.Whitmore
GA Prediction limits for a univariate normal observation.
Am Stat. 1986;40141- 143
Google Scholar 38.Hood
DCBirch
DGBirch
EE Use of models to improve hypothesis delineation: a study of infant electroretinography. In:Simons
Eed.
Early Visual Development, Normal and Abnormal New York, NY Oxford University Press1993;517- 535
Google Scholar 39.Yu
HLee
MHStarck
L
et al. Spectrum of delta(7)-dehydrocholesterol reductase mutations in patients with the Smith-Lemli-Opitz (RSH) syndrome.
Hum Mol Genet. 2000;91385- 1391
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 40.Roux
CWolf
CMulliez
N
et al. Role of cholesterol in embryonic development.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;71
((suppl 5))
1270S- 1279S
PubMedGoogle Scholar 41.Cooper
MKPorter
JAYoung
KEBeachy
PA Teratogen-mediated inhibition of target tissue response to Shh signaling.
Science. 1998;2801603- 1607
PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref