Piero Perucca1, Ingrid E Scheffer2, A Simon Harvey3, Paul A James4, Sebastian Lunke5, Natalie Thorne6, Clara Gaff7, Brigid M Regan8, John A Damiano8, Michael S Hildebrand8, Samuel F Berkovic8, Terence J O'Brien9, Patrick Kwan9. 1. Departments of Medicine and Neurology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: piero.perucca@mh.org.au. 2. Epilepsy Research Centre and Department of Medicine, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Departments of Paediatrics and Neurology, The Royal Children's Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 3. Departments of Paediatrics and Neurology, The Royal Children's Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 4. Department of Genetic Medicine, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 5. Centre for Translational Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 6. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 7. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Departments of Medicine and Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 8. Epilepsy Research Centre and Department of Medicine, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 9. Departments of Medicine and Neurology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Driven by advances in genomic technology and reduction in costs, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is venturing into routine clinical care. The 'real-world' clinical utility of NGS remains to be determined in focal epilepsies, which account for 60% of all epilepsies and for which the importance of genetic factors is just beginning to emerge. We investigated the diagnostic yield and management implications of whole exome sequencing (WES)-based screening of selected genes in the routine care of common focal epilepsies suspected to have a genetic basis. METHODS: We performed WES, followed by targeted analysis of 64 epilepsy genes, on 40 consecutive children and adults enrolled prospectively from routine clinical practice who had MRI-negative focal epilepsy and a family history of febrile seizures or any type of epilepsy in at least one first- or second-degree relative. Exclusion criteria were previous genetic testing, severe intellectual disability and benign focal epilepsies of childhood. RESULTS: 5/40 (12.5%) patients had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant, detected in SCN1A, DEPDC5, PCDH19, GABRG2 or NPRL2. Identifying a pathogenic SCN1A variant in a patient with drug-resistant epilepsy prompted to halt presurgical investigations due to concern of unfavorable post-surgical outcome. It also led in the same patient to discontinue long-standing carbamazepine therapy (a potentially aggravating drug in epilepsies due to SCN1A mutations), resulting in complete seizure control. Patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants had a younger median age of seizure onset (range) compared to those without [18 months (8 months-18 years) vs 18 years (18 months-70 years), p=0.02]. SIGNIFICANCE: Our data demonstrate that WES with targeted gene analysis is an effective diagnostic tool for patients with common focal epilepsies in whom a genetic etiology is suspected. It can also influence clinical decision-making, including antiepileptic drug selection and consideration of epilepsy surgery, hence supporting its incorporation in the routine clinical care of this patient group.
OBJECTIVE: Driven by advances in genomic technology and reduction in costs, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is venturing into routine clinical care. The 'real-world' clinical utility of NGS remains to be determined in focal epilepsies, which account for 60% of all epilepsies and for which the importance of genetic factors is just beginning to emerge. We investigated the diagnostic yield and management implications of whole exome sequencing (WES)-based screening of selected genes in the routine care of common focal epilepsies suspected to have a genetic basis. METHODS: We performed WES, followed by targeted analysis of 64 epilepsy genes, on 40 consecutive children and adults enrolled prospectively from routine clinical practice who had MRI-negative focal epilepsy and a family history of febrile seizures or any type of epilepsy in at least one first- or second-degree relative. Exclusion criteria were previous genetic testing, severe intellectual disability and benign focal epilepsies of childhood. RESULTS: 5/40 (12.5%) patients had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant, detected in SCN1A, DEPDC5, PCDH19, GABRG2 or NPRL2. Identifying a pathogenic SCN1A variant in a patient with drug-resistant epilepsy prompted to halt presurgical investigations due to concern of unfavorable post-surgical outcome. It also led in the same patient to discontinue long-standing carbamazepine therapy (a potentially aggravating drug in epilepsies due to SCN1A mutations), resulting in complete seizure control. Patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants had a younger median age of seizure onset (range) compared to those without [18 months (8 months-18 years) vs 18 years (18 months-70 years), p=0.02]. SIGNIFICANCE: Our data demonstrate that WES with targeted gene analysis is an effective diagnostic tool for patients with common focal epilepsies in whom a genetic etiology is suspected. It can also influence clinical decision-making, including antiepileptic drug selection and consideration of epilepsy surgery, hence supporting its incorporation in the routine clinical care of this patient group.
Authors: Sara Reynhout; Sandra Jansen; Dorien Haesen; Siska van Belle; Sonja A de Munnik; Ernie M H F Bongers; Jolanda H Schieving; Carlo Marcelis; Jeanne Amiel; Marlène Rio; Heather Mclaughlin; Roger Ladda; Susan Sell; Marjolein Kriek; Cacha M P C D Peeters-Scholte; Paulien A Terhal; Koen L van Gassen; Nienke Verbeek; Sonja Henry; Jessica Scott Schwoerer; Saleem Malik; Nicole Revencu; Carlos R Ferreira; Ellen Macnamara; Hilde M H Braakman; Elise Brimble; Maura R Z Ruzhnikov; Matias Wagner; Philip Harrer; Dagmar Wieczorek; Alma Kuechler; Barak Tziperman; Ortal Barel; Bert B A de Vries; Christopher T Gordon; Veerle Janssens; Lisenka E L M Vissers Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2018-12-27 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Kandamurugu Manickam; Monica R McClain; Laurie A Demmer; Sawona Biswas; Hutton M Kearney; Jennifer Malinowski; Lauren J Massingham; Danny Miller; Timothy W Yu; Fuki M Hisama Journal: Genet Med Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Clara L Gaff; Ingrid M Winship; Susan M Forrest; David P Hansen; Julian Clark; Paul M Waring; Mike South; Andrew H Sinclair Journal: NPJ Genom Med Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 8.617
Authors: Paul Dunn; Cassie L Albury; Neven Maksemous; Miles C Benton; Heidi G Sutherland; Robert A Smith; Larisa M Haupt; Lyn R Griffiths Journal: Front Genet Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: John K L Wong; Hongsheng Gui; Maxwell Kwok; Ping Wing Ng; Colin H T Lui; Larry Baum; Pak Chung Sham; Patrick Kwan; Stacey S Cherny Journal: Neurol Genet Date: 2018-06-11
Authors: Pietro Palumbo; Orazio Palumbo; Maria Pia Leone; Ester di Muro; Stefano Castellana; Luigi Bisceglia; Tommaso Mazza; Massimo Carella; Marco Castori Journal: Genes (Basel) Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 4.096