Medicine (RMH) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemSub-genic intolerance, ClinVar, and the epilepsies: A whole-exome sequencing study of 29,165 individuals(CELL PRESS, 2021-06-03)Both mild and severe epilepsies are influenced by variants in the same genes, yet an explanation for the resulting phenotypic variation is unknown. As part of the ongoing Epi25 Collaboration, we performed a whole-exome sequencing analysis of 13,487 epilepsy-affected individuals and 15,678 control individuals. While prior Epi25 studies focused on gene-based collapsing analyses, we asked how the pattern of variation within genes differs by epilepsy type. Specifically, we compared the genetic architectures of severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) and two generally less severe epilepsies, genetic generalized epilepsy and non-acquired focal epilepsy (NAFE). Our gene-based rare variant collapsing analysis used geographic ancestry-based clustering that included broader ancestries than previously possible and revealed novel associations. Using the missense intolerance ratio (MTR), we found that variants in DEE-affected individuals are in significantly more intolerant genic sub-regions than those in NAFE-affected individuals. Only previously reported pathogenic variants absent in available genomic datasets showed a significant burden in epilepsy-affected individuals compared with control individuals, and the ultra-rare pathogenic variants associated with DEE were located in more intolerant genic sub-regions than variants associated with non-DEE epilepsies. MTR filtering improved the yield of ultra-rare pathogenic variants in affected individuals compared with control individuals. Finally, analysis of variants in genes without a disease association revealed a significant burden of loss-of-function variants in the genes most intolerant to such variation, indicating additional epilepsy-risk genes yet to be discovered. Taken together, our study suggests that genic and sub-genic intolerance are critical characteristics for interpreting the effects of variation in genes that influence epilepsy.
-
ItemAntiepileptic Drug Teratogenicity and De Novo Genetic Variation Load(WILEY, 2020-06)OBJECTIVE: The mechanisms by which antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) cause birth defects (BDs) are unknown. Data suggest that AED-induced BDs may result from a genome-wide increase of de novo variants in the embryo, a mechanism that we investigated. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing data from child-parent trios were interrogated for de novo single-nucleotide variants/indels (dnSNVs/indels) and de novo copy number variants (dnCNVs). Generalized linear models were applied to assess de novo variant burdens in children exposed prenatally to AEDs (AED-exposed children) versus children without BDs not exposed prenatally to AEDs (AED-unexposed unaffected children), and AED-exposed children with BDs versus those without BDs, adjusting for confounders. Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical data. RESULTS: Sixty-seven child-parent trios were included: 10 with AED-exposed children with BDs, 46 with AED-exposed unaffected children, and 11 with AED-unexposed unaffected children. The dnSNV/indel burden did not differ between AED-exposed children and AED-unexposed unaffected children (median dnSNV/indel number/child [range] = 3 [0-7] vs 3 [1-5], p = 0.50). Among AED-exposed children, there were no significant differences between those with BDs and those unaffected. Likely deleterious dnSNVs/indels were detected in 9 of 67 (13%) children, none of whom had BDs. The proportion of cases harboring likely deleterious dnSNVs/indels did not differ significantly between AED-unexposed and AED-exposed children. The dnCNV burden was not associated with AED exposure or birth outcome. INTERPRETATION: Our study indicates that prenatal AED exposure does not increase the burden of de novo variants, and that this mechanism is not a major contributor to AED-induced BDs. These results can be incorporated in routine patient counseling. ANN NEUROL 2020;87:897-906.