Table 1 Frequency, amplitude and latency of the ipsilateral MEPs in DCC-CMM patients

From: Non cell-autonomous role of DCC in the guidance of the corticospinal tract at the midline

Subject

Family Mutations

Gender/Age

MM WT score

Frequency of ipsilateral MEPs

Relative amplitude (MEPipsi/MEPcontra)

Latency of contralateral MEPs (ms)

Latency of ipsilateral MEPs (ms)

Patient 1

Family 1: Exon 4 c.823 C > T /p.Arg275*

M/41

2

65%

4%

22,8

23,6

Patient 2

Family 2: Exon 26 c.3835_3836del/p.Leu1279Profs*

F/51

3

100%

47%

21,9

22,5

Patient 3

Family 3: Exon 4 c.823 C > T /p.Arg275*

M/42

2

100%

392%

25,1

24,9

Patient 4

Family 2: Exon 26 c.3835_3836del/p.Leu1279Profs*

M/49

3

100%

322%

23,0

22,7

Patient 5

Family 4: del DCCex4and5

F/79

3

100%

409%

22,5

22,1

Patient 6

Family 1: Exon 4 c.823 C > T /p.Arg275*

F/44

2

100%

ipsilateral MEPs only

 

20,7

  1. The frequency of ipsilateral MEPs represents the percentage of trials in which unilateral stimulation of the dominant hemisphere elicited ipsilateral muscular responses. MEP: motor evoked potentials; MM: mirror movements; WT: Woods and Teuber.