18 research outputs found

    European Reference Networks: challenges and opportunities

    Get PDF
    European Reference Networks (ERNs) were founded on the principle that many rare disease (RD) issues are pan-European and any single Member State cannot solve them alone. In 2021, ERNs are already in the deployment stage; however, their day-to-day functioning and realization of their potential are still severely hampered by many challenges, including issues in governance and regulation, lack of legal status, insufficient and unsustainable funding, lack of ERN integration into national systems, endangered collaboration with UK RD experts due to Brexit, insufficient exploitation of ERN potential in RD research, underappreciation of highly qualified human resources, problems with the involvement of patient representatives, and still unclear place of ERNs in the overall European RD and digital ecosystem. Bold and innovative solutions that must be taken to solve these challenges inevitably involve pan-European collaboration across several sectors and among multistakeholder RD communities and in many cases crucially rely on the constructive dialogue and coherent, united decisions of national and European authorities that are based on common EU values. Importantly, unresolved challenges may have a strong impact on the further sustainability of ERNs and their ability to realize full potential in addressing huge unmet needs of RD patients and their families.Diabetes mellitus: pathophysiological changes and therap

    Ultra-Rare Genetic Variation in the Epilepsies : A Whole-Exome Sequencing Study of 17,606 Individuals

    Get PDF
    Sequencing-based studies have identified novel risk genes associated with severe epilepsies and revealed an excess of rare deleterious variation in less-severe forms of epilepsy. To identify the shared and distinct ultra-rare genetic risk factors for different types of epilepsies, we performed a whole-exome sequencing (WES) analysis of 9,170 epilepsy-affected individuals and 8,436 controls of European ancestry. We focused on three phenotypic groups: severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs), genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE), and non-acquired focal epilepsy (NAFE). We observed that compared to controls, individuals with any type of epilepsy carried an excess of ultra-rare, deleterious variants in constrained genes and in genes previously associated with epilepsy; we saw the strongest enrichment in individuals with DEEs and the least strong in individuals with NAFE. Moreover, we found that inhibitory GABA(A) receptor genes were enriched for missense variants across all three classes of epilepsy, whereas no enrichment was seen in excitatory receptor genes. The larger gene groups for the GABAergic pathway or cation channels also showed a significant mutational burden in DEEs and GGE. Although no single gene surpassed exome-wide significance among individuals with GGE or NAFE, highly constrained genes and genes encoding ion channels were among the lead associations; such genes included CACNAIG, EEF1A2, and GABRG2 for GGE and LGI1, TRIM3, and GABRG2 for NAFE. Our study, the largest epilepsy WES study to date, confirms a convergence in the genetics of severe and less-severe epilepsies associated with ultra-rare coding variation, and it highlights a ubiquitous role for GABAergic inhibition in epilepsy etiology.Peer reviewe

    Sub-genic intolerance, ClinVar, and the epilepsies: A whole-exome sequencing study of 29,165 individuals

    Get PDF
    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

    Genome-wide identification and phenotypic characterization of seizure-associated copy number variations in 741,075 individuals

    Get PDF
    Copy number variants (CNV) are established risk factors for neurodevelopmental disorders with seizures or epilepsy. With the hypothesis that seizure disorders share genetic risk factors, we pooled CNV data from 10,590 individuals with seizure disorders, 16,109 individuals with clinically validated epilepsy, and 492,324 population controls and identified 25 genome-wide significant loci, 22 of which are novel for seizure disorders, such as deletions at 1p36.33, 1q44, 2p21-p16.3, 3q29, 8p23.3-p23.2, 9p24.3, 10q26.3, 15q11.2, 15q12-q13.1, 16p12.2, 17q21.31, duplications at 2q13, 9q34.3, 16p13.3, 17q12, 19p13.3, 20q13.33, and reciprocal CNVs at 16p11.2, and 22q11.21. Using genetic data from additional 248,751 individuals with 23 neuropsychiatric phenotypes, we explored the pleiotropy of these 25 loci. Finally, in a subset of individuals with epilepsy and detailed clinical data available, we performed phenome-wide association analyses between individual CNVs and clinical annotations categorized through the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO). For six CNVs, we identified 19 significant associations with specific HPO terms and generated, for all CNVs, phenotype signatures across 17 clinical categories relevant for epileptologists. This is the most comprehensive investigation of CNVs in epilepsy and related seizure disorders, with potential implications for clinical practice

    GWAS meta-analysis of over 29,000 people with epilepsy identifies 26 risk loci and subtype-specific genetic architecture

    Get PDF
    Epilepsy is a highly heritable disorder affecting over 50 million people worldwide, of which about one-third are resistant to current treatments. Here we report a multi-ancestry genome-wide association study including 29,944 cases, stratified into three broad categories and seven subtypes of epilepsy, and 52,538 controls. We identify 26 genome-wide significant loci, 19 of which are specific to genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE). We implicate 29 likely causal genes underlying these 26 loci. SNP-based heritability analyses show that common variants explain between 39.6% and 90% of genetic risk for GGE and its subtypes. Subtype analysis revealed markedly different genetic architectures between focal and generalized epilepsies. Gene-set analyses of GGE signals implicate synaptic processes in both excitatory and inhibitory neurons in the brain. Prioritized candidate genes overlap with monogenic epilepsy genes and with targets of current antiseizure medications. Finally, we leverage our results to identify alternate drugs with predicted efficacy if repurposed for epilepsy treatment

    European Reference Networks: challenges and opportunities

    No full text
    European Reference Networks (ERNs) were founded on the principle that many rare disease (RD) issues are pan-European and any single Member State cannot solve them alone. In 2021, ERNs are already in the deployment stage; however, their day-to-day functioning and realization of their potential are still severely hampered by many challenges, including issues in governance and regulation, lack of legal status, insufficient and unsustainable funding, lack of ERN integration into national systems, endangered collaboration with UK RD experts due to Brexit, insufficient exploitation of ERN potential in RD research, underappreciation of highly qualified human resources, problems with the involvement of patient representatives, and still unclear place of ERNs in the overall European RD and digital ecosystem. Bold and innovative solutions that must be taken to solve these challenges inevitably involve pan-European collaboration across several sectors and among multistakeholder RD communities and in many cases crucially rely on the constructive dialogue and coherent, united decisions of national and European authorities that are based on common EU values. Importantly, unresolved challenges may have a strong impact on the further sustainability of ERNs and their ability to realize full potential in addressing huge unmet needs of RD patients and their families

    Rare disease education in Europe and beyond: time to act

    No full text
    People living with rare diseases (PLWRD) still face huge unmet needs, in part due to the fact that care systems are not sufficiently aligned with their needs and healthcare workforce (HWF) along their care pathways lacks competencies to efficiently tackle rare disease-specific challenges. Level of rare disease knowledge and awareness among the current and future HWF is insufficient. In recent years, many educational resources on rare diseases have been developed, however, awareness of these resources is still limited and rare disease education is still not sufficiently taken into account by some crucial stakeholders as academia and professional organizations. Therefore, there is a need to fundamentally rethink rare disease education and HWF development across the whole spectrum from students to generalists, specialists and experts, to engage and empower PLWRD, their families and advocates, and to work towards a common coherent and complementary strategy on rare disease education and training in Europe and beyond. Special consideration should be also given to the role of nurse coordinators in care coordination, interprofessional training for integrated multidisciplinary care, patient and family-centered education, opportunities given by digital learning and fostering of social accountability to enforce the focus on socially-vulnerable groups such as PLWRD. The strategy has to be developed and implemented by multiple rare disease education and training providers: universities, medical and nursing schools and their associations, professional organizations, European Reference Networks, patient organizations, other organizations and institutions dedicated to rare diseases and rare cancers, authorities and policy bodies

    The gaps between the new EU legislation on in vitro diagnostics and the on-the-ground reality.

    No full text
    The background to this debate is now well-known: an EU policy decision to tighten controls on the devices and diagnostics sector led to the adoption of a regulation in 2017 with a schedule for implementation over coming years - a timetable extended still further by last-minute legislation in early 2022, to provide the sector and regulators with more time to adapt to the changes. Discussions among experts organised in April by the European Alliance for Personalized Medicine (EAPM) exposed continuing challenges that cannot be fully resolved by the recent deferral of implementation deadlines. One salient problem is that there is little awareness of the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) across Europe, and only limited awareness of the different structures of national systems involved in implementing IVDR, with consequent risks for patient and consumer access to in vitro diagnostics (IVDs). The tentative conclusion from these consultations is that despite a will across the sector to seek workable solutions, the obstacles remain formidable, and the potential solutions so far proposed remain more a matter of aspirations than of clear pathways

    Availability, accessibility and delivery to patients of the 28 orphan medicines approved by the European Medicine Agency for hereditary metabolic diseases in the MetabERN network.

    No full text
    The European Medicine Agency granted marketing approval to 164 orphan medicinal products for rare diseases, among which 28 products intended for the treatment of hereditary metabolic diseases. Taking advantage of its privileged connection with 69 healthcare centres of excellence in this field, MetabERN, the European Reference Network for hereditary metabolic diseases, performed a survey asking health care providers from 18 European countries whether these products are available on the market, reimbursed and therefore accessible for prescription, and actually delivered in their centre. RESULTS: Responses received from 52 centres (75%) concerned the design of treatment plans, the access to marketed products, and the barriers to delivery. Treatment options are always discussed with patients, who are often involved in their treatment plan. Most products (26/28) are available in most countries (15/18). Among the 15 broadly accessible products (88.5% of the centres), 9 are delivered to most patients (mean 70.1%), and the others to only few (16.5%). Among the 10 less accessible products (40.2% of the centres), 6 are delivered to many patients (66.7%), and 4 are rarely used (6.3%). Information was missing for 3 products. Delay between prescription and delivery is on average one month. Beside the lack of availability or accessibility, the most frequent reasons for not prescribing a treatment are patients' clinical status, characteristic, and personal choice. CONCLUSIONS: Data collected from health care providers in the MetabERN network indicate that two-third of the orphan medicines approved by EMA for the treatment of hereditary metabolic diseases are accessible to treating patients, although often less than one-half of the patients with the relevant conditions actually received the approved product to treat their disease. Thus, in spite of the remarkable achievement of many products, patients concerned by EMA-approved orphan medicinal products have persistent unmet needs, which deserve consideration. The enormous investments made by the companies to develop products, and the high financial burden for the Member States to purchase these products emphasize the importance of a scrupulous appreciation of treatment value involving all stakeholders at early stage of development, before marketing authorization, and during follow up
    corecore