The inner junction protein CFAP20 functions in motile and non-motile cilia and is critical for vision.

Motile and non-motile cilia are associated with mutually-exclusive genetic disorders. Motile cilia propel sperm or extracellular fluids, and their dysfunction causes primary ciliary dyskinesia. Non-motile cilia serve as sensory/signalling antennae on most cell types, and their disruption causes single-organ ciliopathies such as retinopathies or multi-system syndromes. CFAP20 is a ciliopathy candidate known to modulate motile cilia in unicellular eukaryotes. We demonstrate that in zebrafish, cfap20 is required for motile cilia function, and in C. elegans, CFAP-20 maintains the structural integrity of non-motile cilia inner junctions, influencing sensory-dependent signalling and development. Human patients and zebrafish with CFAP20 mutations both exhibit retinal dystrophy. Hence, CFAP20 functions within a structural/functional hub centered on the inner junction that is shared between motile and non-motile cilia, and is distinct from other ciliopathy-associated domains or macromolecular complexes. Our findings suggest an uncharacterised pathomechanism for retinal dystrophy, and potentially for motile and non-motile ciliopathies in general.

PEX6 Mutations in Peroxisomal Biogenesis Disorders: An Usher Syndrome Mimic.

Purpose: Peroxisomal biogenesis disorders (PBDs) represent a spectrum of conditions that result in vision loss, sensorineural hearing loss, neurologic dysfunction, and other abnormalities resulting from aberrant peroxisomal function caused by mutations in PEX genes. With no treatments currently available, we sought to investigate the disease mechanism in a patient with a PBD caused by defects in PEX6 and to probe whether overexpression of PEX6 could restore peroxisome function and potentially offer therapeutic benefit. Design: Laboratory-based study. Participants: A 12-year-old boy sought treatment with hearing loss and retinopathy. After negative results in an Usher syndrome panel, targeted genetic testing revealed compound heterozygous mutations in PEX6. These included a 14-nucleotide deletion (c.802_815del: p.(Asp268Cysfs∗8)) and a milder missense variant (c.35T→C:(p.Phe12Ser)). Methods: Patient-derived skin fibroblasts were cultured, and a PEX6 knockout cell line was developed using clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and Cas9 technology in HEK293T cells to emulate a more severe disease phenotype. Immunoblot analysis of whole cell lysates was performed to assess peroxisome number. Immunofluorescence studies used antibodies against components of the peroxisomal protein import pathway to interrogate the effects of mutations in PEX6 on protein trafficking. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measures were peroxisome abundance and matrix protein import. Results: Peroxisome number was not significantly different between control fibroblasts and patient fibroblasts; however, fewer peroxisomes were observed in PEX6 knockout cells compared with wild-type cells (P = 0.04). Analysis by immunofluorescent microscopy showed significantly impaired peroxisomal targeting signal 1- and peroxisomal targeting signal 2-mediated matrix protein import in both patient fibroblasts and PEX6 knockout cells. Overexpressing PEX6 resulted in improved matrix protein import in PEX6 knockout cells. Conclusions: Mutations in PEX6 were responsible for combined hearing loss and retinopathy in our patient. The primary peroxisomal defect in our patient's skin fibroblasts was impaired peroxisomal protein import as opposed to reduction in the number of peroxisomes. Genetic strategies that introduce wild-type PEX6 into cells deficient in PEX6 protein show promise in restoring peroxisome function. Future studies of patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cell-derived retinal pigment epithelium cells may clarify the role of PEX6 in the retina and the potential for gene therapy in these patients.

Ocular Gene Therapy with Adeno-associated Virus Vectors: Current Outlook for Patients and Researchers.

In this "Perspective", we discuss ocular gene therapy - the patient's perspective, the various strategies of gene replacement and gene editing, the place of adeno-associated virus vectors, routes of delivery to the eye and the remaining question - "why does immunity continue to limit efficacy?" Through the coordinated efforts of patients, researchers, granting agencies and industry, and after many years of pre-clinical studies, biochemical, cellular, and animal models, we are seeing clinical trials emerge for many previously untreatable heritable ocular disorders. The pathway to therapies has been led by the successful treatment of the RPE65 form of Leber congenital amaurosis with LUXTURNA TM . In some cases, immune reactions to the vectors continue to occur, limiting efficacy. The underlying mechanisms of inflammation require further study, and new vectors need to be designed that limit the triggers of immunity. Researchers studying ocular gene therapies and clinicians enrolling patients in clinical trials must recognize the current limitations of these therapies to properly manage expectations and avoid disappointment, but we believe that gene therapies are well on their way to successful, widespread utilization to treat heritable ocular disorders.