Cited by 24Connective tissue disorders researchDermatological and Skeletal DisordersSkin and Cellular Biology Research

Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type I: a clinical and ultrastructural study of a family with reduced amounts of collagen type III

PAEPE, A., NICHOLLS, A., NARCISI, P., KEYSER, F.DE, QUATACKER, J., STAEY, M.VAN, MATTON, M., POPE, F. M.·1987·British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract

Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) type I was diagnosed in an 18-year-old girl on the basis of marked skin hyperextensibility with generalized loose-jointedness, pigmented paper-tissue scars, and a pronounced tendency to bruising. Her father and one of her sisters showed a similar phenotype. Her mother was normal. Light microscopy of skin biopsies showed large, irregular collagen fibres in the father and daughter, with normal findings in the mother. Electron microscopy of the skin sections revealed a variation in diameter and shape of the collagen fibrils as well as slight dilatation of the rough endoplasmic reticulum of fibroblasts in father and daughter, but normal findings in the mother. Cultured fibroblasts did not show these changes. Measurements of collagen synthesis by fibroblast cultures showed that type III collagen levels were reduced to 50% of normal in the father and daughter, and were normal in the mother. The alpha I (III) proteins had a normal molecular weight, determined by SDS-PAGE electrophoresis. The phenotypes and biochemical results in the family members tested were compatible with autosomal dominant transmission. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a type III collagen deficiency in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type I. The findings in this family, especially the pronounced bruising tendency, illustrate the heterogeneity within type I EDS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1987.tb04096.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
PAEPE, A., NICHOLLS, A., NARCISI, P., KEYSER, F. D., QUATACKER, J., STAEY, M. V., MATTON, M., & POPE, F. M.
Affiliations
Northwick Park Hospital (GB)
Venue
British Journal of Dermatology
Published
1987-07
Volume
117
Issue
1
Pages
89-97
ISSN
  • 0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2133
OpenAlex
W2065867290
Cited by
24
References
4
Citations by year
2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Dermatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Connective tissue disorders research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Dermatological and Skeletal Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Skin and Cellular Biology Research
Keywords
type III collagen, skin hyperextensibility, skin ultrastructure, collagen fibril morphology, autosomal dominant inheritance, familial case
MeSH terms
Chromatography, Thin Layer, Collagen, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Endoplasmic Reticulum, Female, Fibroblasts, Humans, Male, Microscopy, Electron, Pedigree, Skin

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review