Mutations in REEP6 Cause Autosomal-Recessive Retinitis Pigmentosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is the most frequent form of inherited retinal dystrophy. RP is genetically heterogeneous and the genes identified to date encode proteins involved in a wide range of functional pathways, including photoreceptor development, phototransduction, the retinoid cycle, cilia, and outer segment development. Here we report the identification of biallelic mutations in Receptor Expression Enhancer Protein 6 (REEP6) in seven individuals with autosomal-recessive RP from five unrelated families. REEP6 is a member of the REEP/Yop1 family of proteins that influence the structure of the endoplasmic reticulum but is relatively unstudied. The six variants identified include three frameshift variants, two missense variants, and a genomic rearrangement that disrupts exon 1. Human 3D organoid optic cups were used to investigate REEP6 expression and confirmed the expression of a retina-specific isoform REEP6.1, which is specifically affected by one of the frameshift mutations. Expression of the two missense variants (c.383C>T [p.Pro128Leu] and c.404T>C [p.Leu135Pro]) and the REEP6.1 frameshift mutant in cultured cells suggest that these changes destabilize the protein. Furthermore, CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene editing was used to produce Reep6 knock-in mice with the p.Leu135Pro RP-associated variant identified in one RP-affected individual. The homozygous knock-in mice mimic the clinical phenotypes of RP, including progressive photoreceptor degeneration and dysfunction of the rod photoreceptors. Therefore, our study implicates REEP6 in retinal homeostasis and highlights a pathway previously uncharacterized in retinal dystrophy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".