TMEM107 recruits ciliopathy proteins to subdomains of the ciliary transition zone and causes Joubert syndrome

The transition zone (TZ) ciliary subcompartment is thought to control cilium composition and signalling by facilitating a protein diffusion barrier at the ciliary base. TZ defects cause ciliopathies such as Meckel–Gruber syndrome (MKS), nephronophthisis (NPHP) and Joubert syndrome1 (JBTS). However, the molecular composition and mechanisms underpinning TZ organization and barrier regulation are poorly understood. To uncover candidate TZ genes, we employed bioinformatics (coexpression and co-evolution) and identified TMEM107 as a TZ protein mutated in oral–facial–digital syndrome and JBTS patients. Mechanistic studies in Caenorhabditis elegans showed that TMEM-107 controls ciliary composition and functions redundantly with NPHP-4 to regulate cilium integrity, TZ docking and assembly of membrane to microtubule Y-link connectors. Furthermore, nematode TMEM-107 occupies an intermediate layer of the TZ-localized MKS module by organizing recruitment of the ciliopathy proteins MKS-1, TMEM-231 (JBTS20) and JBTS-14 (TMEM237). Finally, MKS module membrane proteins are immobile and super-resolution microscopy in worms and mammalian cells reveals periodic localizations within the TZ. This work expands the MKS module of ciliopathy-causing TZ proteins associated with diffusion barrier formation and provides insight into TZ subdomain architecture

A nationwide analytical and clinical evaluation of 44 rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 compared to RT-qPCR

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has resulted in massive testing by Rapid Antigen Tests (RAT) without solid independent data regarding clinical performance being available. Thus, decision on purchase of a specific RAT may rely on manufacturer-provided data and limited peer-reviewed data. METHODS: This study consists of two parts. In the retrospective analytical part, 33 RAT from 25 manufacturers were compared to RT-PCR on 100 negative and 204 positive deep oropharyngeal cavity samples divided into four groups based on RT-PCR Cq levels. In the prospective clinical part, nearly 200 individuals positive for SARS-CoV-2 and nearly 200 individuals negative for SARS-CoV-2 by routine RT-PCR testing were retested within 72 h for each of 44 included RAT from 26 manufacturers applying RT-PCR as the reference method. RESULTS: The overall analytical sensitivity differed significantly between the 33 included RAT; from 2.5% (95% CI 0.5–4.8) to 42% (95% CI 35–49). All RAT presented analytical specificities of 100%. Likewise, the overall clinical sensitivity varied significantly between the 44 included RAT; from 2.5% (95% CI 0.5–4.8) to 94% (95% CI 91–97). All RAT presented clinical specificities between 98 and 100%. CONCLUSION: The study presents analytical as well as clinical performance data for 44 commercially available RAT compared to the same RT-PCR test. The study enables identification of individual RAT that has significantly higher sensitivity than other included RAT and may aid decision makers in selecting between the included RAT. FUNDING: The study was funded by a participant fee for each test and the Danish Regions