Search

Despite the increased diagnostic yield associated with genomic sequencing (GS), a sizable proportion of patients do not receive a genetic diagnosis at the time of the initial GS analysis. Systematic data reanalysis leads to considerable increases in genetic diagnosis rates yet is time intensive and leads to questions of feasibility. Few policies address whether laboratories have a duty to reanalyse and it is unclear how this impacts clinical practice. To address this, we interviewed 31 genetic health professionals (GHPs) across Europe, Australia and Canada about their experiences with data reanalysis and variant reinterpretation practices after requesting GS for their patients. GHPs described a range of processes required to initiate reanalysis of GS data for their patients and often practices involved a combination of reanalysis initiation methods. The most common mechanism for reanalysis was a patient-initiated model, where they instruct patients to return to the genetic service for clinical reassessment after a period of time or if new information comes to light. Yet several GHPs expressed concerns about patients' inabilities to understand the need to return to trigger reanalysis, or advocate for themselves, which may exacerbate health inequities. Regardless of the reanalysis initiation model that a genetic service adopts, patients' and clinicians' roles and responsibilities need to be clearly outlined so patients do not miss the opportunity to receive ongoing information about their genetic diagnosis. This requires consensus on the delineation of these roles for clinicians and laboratories to ensure clear pathways for reanalysis and reinterpretation to be performed to improve patient care.

This study explores the different manifestations and navigations of uncertainty in the practice of diagnostic next‐generation sequencing (NGS) testing. Drawing upon multi‐sited fieldwork conducted at a large Centre for Human Genetics in Belgium, we analyse how uncertainty takes shape and is managed in the different steps of the diagnostic process: starting from the testing offer, to the analysis in the lab, the multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs) and ending with the consultation with the patient. Building on interviews with genetic healthcare professionals and their patients and observations in consultations and MDTs, our empirical work underlines the duality of uncertainty as both burdensome and productive. Building on the existing literature on uncertainty in medicine and NGS, our analysis shows the ontological politics at play in the everyday uncertainty work in this CHG. We show how the, at times, contrasting ways of dealing with uncertainty lead to friction but also result in constructive negotiation and collaboration between actors, making use of multiple types of evidence and expertise. By not only minimising but also sustaining or inviting uncertainty, genetic healthcare professionals are able to advance the practices around NGS in a way that matches their multidisciplinary understandings, considerations and more normative stances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our international study, ‘Your DNA, Your Say’, uses film and an online cross-sectional survey to gather public attitudes toward the donation, access and sharing of DNA information. We describe the methodological approach used to create an engaging and bespoke survey, suitable for translation into many different languages. We address some of the particular challenges in designing a survey on the subject of genomics. In order to understand the significance of a genomic result, researchers and clinicians alike use external databases containing DNA and medical information from thousands of people. We ask how publics would like their ‘anonymous’ data to be used (or not to be used) and whether they are concerned by the potential risks of reidentification; the results will be used to inform policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Recognition of the role of genetics in the epilepsies has increased dramatically, impacting on clinical practice across many epilepsy syndromes. There is limited research investigating the impact of gene identification on individuals and families with epilepsy. While research has focused on the impact of delivering genetic information to families at the time of diagnosis in genetic diseases more broadly, little is known about how genetic results in epileptic diseases influences people's lives many years after it has been conveyed. This study used qualitative methods to explore the experience of receiving a genetic result in people with familial epilepsy. Interviews were conducted with individuals with familial epilepsies in whom the underlying genetic mutation had been identified. Recorded interviews underwent thematic analysis. 20 individuals from three families with different epilepsy syndromes and causative genes were interviewed. Multiple generations within families were studied. The mean time from receiving the genetic result prior to interview was 10.9 years (range 5–14 years). Three major themes were identified: 1) living with epilepsy: an individual's experience of the severity of epilepsy in their family influenced their view. 2) Clinical utility of the test: participants expressed varying reactions to receiving a genetic result. While for some it provided helpful information and relief, others were not surprised by the finding given the familial context. Some valued the use of genetic information for reproductive decision-making, particularly in the setting of severely affected family members. While altruistic reasons for participating in genetic research were discussed, participants emphasised the benefit of participation to them and their families. 3) ‘Talking about the family genes’: individuals reported poor communication between family members about their epilepsy and its genetic implications. The results provide important insights into the family experience of genetic epilepsies and communication within families. This information can be used to inform the development of guidelines for genetic result disclosure and genetic counselling for individuals and families with epilepsies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To characterize the frequency and nature of the family history of seizures in probands with epilepsy falling within the epilepsy-aphasia spectrum ( EAS) in order to understand the genetic architecture of this group of disorders. Methods Patients with epileptic encephalopathy with continuous spike-and-wave during sleep ( ECSWS), Landau- Kleffner syndrome ( LKS), atypical benign partial epilepsy ( ABPE), and intermediate epilepsy-aphasia disorders ( IEAD) were recruited. All affected and available unaffected relatives up to three degrees of relatedness underwent phenotyping using a validated seizure questionnaire. Pedigrees were constructed for all families. The proportion of affected relatives according to each degree of relatedness was calculated. The epilepsy phenotypes in close relatives were analyzed. The data were compared to the families of probands with benign childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes ( BECTS) using the same methodology. Key Findings Thirty-one probands, including five ECSWS, three LKS, one ABPE, and 22 IEAD were recruited. The mean age of seizure onset was 3.9 (range 0.5-7) years. A male predominance was seen (68%, 21/31) . Sixteen (51.6%) of 31 had a positive family history of seizures. Among 1,254 relatives, 30 (2.4%) had a history of seizures: 13 (10.2%) of 128 first-degree relatives, 5 (1.7%) of 291 second-degree relatives, and 12 (1.4%) of 835 third-degree relatives. Thirteen had febrile seizures, including two who had both febrile seizures and epilepsy. Of the 19 relatives with epilepsy, 4 had BECTS, 4 epilepsies with focal seizures of unknown cause, 3 IEAD, and 7 unclassified. One had genetic generalized epilepsy. In the families of the BECTS probands, 9.8% of first-degree, 3% of second-degree, and 1.5% of third-degree relatives had seizures, which was not significantly different from the EAS cohort families. Significance The frequencies of seizures in relatives of probands with EAS suggest that the underlying genetic influence of EAS is consistent with complex inheritance and similar to BECTS. The phenotypic pattern observed in the affected relatives comprised predominantly febrile seizures and focal seizures. These findings suggest that a shared genetic predisposition to focal epilepsies underpins the epilepsy-aphasia spectrum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Eyelid myoclonia with absences (EM) is an uncommon type of absence seizure associated with a variety of epilepsy syndromes. The syndrome of epilepsy with EM (EMA) has been proposed to denote the onset of frequent EM induced by eye closure and photic stimulation beginning in childhood. The clinical genetics of EMA has not been well characterized, although a family history of seizures is not infrequent. Methods: Individuals with EMA were ascertained by referral and through the investigators' clinical practices. All available family members were assessed for seizures using a validated seizure questionnaire. Electroclinical data were obtained on each proband and all affected family members; pedigrees were constructed. Families were analyzed for phenotypic patterns. Key Findings: Eighteen individuals with EMA were recruited. A history of seizures was found in 34 relatives in 15 (83%) of 18 families. In terms of epilepsy syndromes, 9 relatives from 7 of 15 families had febrile seizures. Two relatives had EMA. Classical genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE) syndromes were seen in five relatives: two generalized tonic-clonic seizures alone, two childhood absence epilepsy (CAE), and one juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). Genetic epilepsy with febrile seizures plus (GEFS+) phenotypes occurred in 16 relatives. On review of the epilepsy syndromes within each family, seven families had a pattern consistent with GEFS+, whereas three families had classical GGE. Significance: The clinical genetics of EMA is suggestive of complex inheritance with shared genetic determinants overlapping with both classical GGE and GEFS+. The epilepsy syndromes in relatives of probands with EMA differ from those found in families of probands with CAE, supporting the concept that patients with EMA have a syndrome that is distinct from CAE. This presumably reflects different genetic components contributing to their genetic architecture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Temporal lobe epilepsy is the commonest partial epilepsy of adulthood. Although generally perceived as an acquired disorder, several forms of familial temporal lobe epilepsy, with mesial or lateral seizure semiology, have been described. Descriptions of familial mesial temporal lobe epilepsy have varied widely from a benign epilepsy syndrome with prominent déjà vu and without antecedent febrile seizures or magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities, to heterogeneous, but generally more refractory epilepsies, often with a history of febrile seizures and with frequent hippocampal atrophy and high T2 signal on magnetic resonance imaging. Compelling evidence of a genetic aetiology (rather than chance aggregation) in familial mesial temporal lobe epilepsy has come from twin studies. Dominant inheritance has been reported in two large families, though the usual mode of inheritance is not known. Here, we describe clinical and neurophysiological features of 20 new mesial temporal lobe epilepsy families including 51 affected individuals. The epilepsies in these families were generally benign, and febrile seizure history was infrequent (9.8%). No evidence of hippocampal sclerosis or dysplasia was present on brain imaging. A single individual underwent anterior temporal lobectomy, with subsequent seizure freedom and histopathological evidence of hippocampal sclerosis was not found. Inheritance patterns in probands’ relatives were analysed in these families, together with 19 other temporal lobe epilepsy families previously reported by us. Observed frequencies of epilepsies in relatives were lower than predicted by dominant Mendelian models, while only a minority (8/39) of families could be compatible with recessive inheritance. These findings strongly suggest that complex inheritance, similar to that widely accepted in the idiopathic generalized epilepsies, is the usual mode of inheritance in familial mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. This disorder, which appears to be relatively common, and not typically associated with hippocampal sclerosis, is an appropriate target for contemporary approaches to complex disorders such as genome-wide association studies for common genetic variants or deep sequencing for rare variants. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]