Comparative Effectiveness of Stereo-EEG versus Subdural Grids in Epilepsy Surgery

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of subdural electrode (SDE) implantations versus stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG), the two predominant methods of intracranial EEG (iEEG) performed in difficult to localize drug-resistant focal epilepsy. METHODS: The Surgical Therapies Commission of the International League Against Epilepsy created an international registry of iEEG patients implanted between 2005-2019 with ≥ 1 year follow-up. We used propensity score matching to control exposure selection bias and generate comparable cohorts. Study endpoints: 1) likelihood of resection after iEEG; 2) seizure-freedom at last follow-up; and 3) complications (composite of either post-operative infection, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or permanent neurologic deficit). RESULTS: Ten study sites from seven countries and three continents contributed 2,012 patients, including 1,468 (73%) eligible for analysis (526 SDE, 942 SEEG) of whom 988 (67%) underwent subsequent resection. Propensity score matching improved covariate balance between exposure groups for all analyses. Propensity-matched patients who underwent SDE had higher odds of subsequent resective surgery (odds ratio OR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.05 - 1.84), and higher odds of complications (OR=2.24, 95% CI 1.34-3.74; unadjusted: 9.6% after SDE vs. 3.3% after SEEG). Odds of seizure-freedom in propensity-matched resected patients were 1.66 times higher (95% CI 1.21, 2.26) for SEEG compared to SDE (unadjusted: 55% seizure-free after SEEG-guided resections vs. 41% after SDE) INTERPRETATION: Compared to SEEG, SDE evaluations are more likely to lead to brain surgery in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, but have more surgical complications and lower probability of seizure-freedom. This comparative-effectiveness study provides the highest feasible evidence level to guide decisions on iEEG. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Polygenic burden in focal and generalized epilepsies.

Rare genetic variants can cause epilepsy, and genetic testing has been widely adopted for severe, paediatric-onset epilepsies. The phenotypic consequences of common genetic risk burden for epilepsies and their potential future clinical applications have not yet been determined. Using polygenic risk scores (PRS) from a European-ancestry genome-wide association study in generalized and focal epilepsy, we quantified common genetic burden in patients with generalized epilepsy (GE-PRS) or focal epilepsy (FE-PRS) from two independent non-Finnish European cohorts (Epi25 Consortium, n = 5705; Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, n = 620; both compared to 20 435 controls). One Finnish-ancestry population isolate (Finnish-ancestry Epi25, n = 449; compared to 1559 controls), two European-ancestry biobanks (UK Biobank, n = 383 656; Vanderbilt biorepository, n = 49 494), and one Japanese-ancestry biobank (BioBank Japan, n = 168 680) were used for additional replications. Across 8386 patients with epilepsy and 622 212 population controls, we found and replicated significantly higher GE-PRS in patients with generalized epilepsy of European-ancestry compared to patients with focal epilepsy (Epi25: P = 1.64×10-15; Cleveland: P = 2.85×10-4; Finnish-ancestry Epi25: P = 1.80×10-4) or population controls (Epi25: P = 2.35×10-70; Cleveland: P = 1.43×10-7; Finnish-ancestry Epi25: P = 3.11×10-4; UK Biobank and Vanderbilt biorepository meta-analysis: P = 7.99×10-4). FE-PRS were significantly higher in patients with focal epilepsy compared to controls in the non-Finnish, non-biobank cohorts (Epi25: P = 5.74×10-19; Cleveland: P = 1.69×10-6). European ancestry-derived PRS did not predict generalized epilepsy or focal epilepsy in Japanese-ancestry individuals. Finally, we observed a significant 4.6-fold and a 4.5-fold enrichment of patients with generalized epilepsy compared to controls in the top 0.5% highest GE-PRS of the two non-Finnish European cohorts (Epi25: P = 2.60×10-15; Cleveland: P = 1.39×10-2). We conclude that common variant risk associated with epilepsy is significantly enriched in multiple cohorts of patients with epilepsy compared to controls-in particular for generalized epilepsy. As sample sizes and PRS accuracy continue to increase with further common variant discovery, PRS could complement established clinical biomarkers and augment genetic testing for patient classification, comorbidity research, and potentially targeted treatment

Polygenic burden in focal and generalized epilepsies

Rare genetic variants can cause epilepsy, and genetic testing has been widely adopted for severe, paediatric-onset epilepsies. The phenotypic consequences of common genetic risk burden for epilepsies and their potential future clinical applications have not yet been determined. Using polygenic risk scores (PRS) from a European-ancestry genome-wide association study in generalized and focal epilepsy, we quantified common genetic burden in patients with generalized epilepsy (GE-PRS) or focal epilepsy (FE-PRS) from two independent non-Finnish European cohorts (Epi25 Consortium, n = 5705; Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, n = 620; both compared to 20 435 controls). One Finnish-ancestry population isolate (Finnish-ancestry Epi25, n = 449; compared to 1559 controls), two European-ancestry biobanks (UK Biobank, n = 383 656; Vanderbilt biorepository, n = 49 494), and one Japaneseancestry biobank (BioBank Japan, n = 168 680) were used for additional replications. Across 8386 patients with epilepsy and 622 212 population controls, we found and replicated significantly higher GE-PRS in patients with generalized epilepsy of European-ancestry compared to patients with focal epilepsy (Epi25: P = 1.64 710-15; Cleveland: P = 2.85 710-4; Finnish-ancestry Epi25: P = 1.80 710-4) or population controls (Epi25: P = 2.35 710-70; Cleveland: P = 1.43 710-7; Finnish-ancestry Epi25: P = 3.11 710-4; UK Biobank and Vanderbilt biorepository meta-analysis: P = 7.99 710-4). FE-PRS were significantly higher in patients with focal epilepsy compared to controls in the non-Finnish, non-biobank cohorts (Epi25: P = 5.74 710-19; Cleveland: P = 1.69 710-6). European ancestry-derived PRS did not predict generalized epilepsy or focal epilepsy in Japanese-ancestry individuals. Finally, we observed a significant 4.6-fold and a 4.5-fold enrichment of patients with generalized epilepsy compared to controls in the top 0.5% highest GE-PRS of the two non-Finnish European cohorts (Epi25: P = 2.60 710-15; Cleveland: P = 1.39 710-2). We conclude that common variant risk associated with epilepsy is significantly enriched in multiple cohorts of patients with epilepsy compared to controls-in particular for generalized epilepsy. As sample sizes and PRS accuracy continue to increase with further common variant discovery, PRS could complement established clinical biomarkers and augment genetic testing for patient classification, comorbidity research, and potentially targeted treatment

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

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

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

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

Neuromodulation in epilepsy: state-of-the-art approved therapies.

Three neuromodulation therapies have been appropriately tested and approved in refractory focal epilepsies: vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT-DBS), and closed-loop responsive neurostimulation of the epileptogenic zone or zones. These therapies are primarily palliative. Only a few individuals have achieved complete freedom from seizures for more than 12 months with these therapies, whereas more than half have benefited from long-term reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50%. Implantation-related adverse events primarily include infection and pain at the implant site. Intracranial haemorrhage is a frequent adverse event for ANT-DBS and responsive neurostimulation. Other stimulation-specific side-effects are observed with VNS and ANT-DBS. Biomarkers to predict response to neuromodulation therapies are not available, and high-level evidence to aid decision making about when and for whom these therapies should be preferred over other antiepileptic treatments is scant. Future studies are thus needed to address these shortfalls in knowledge, approve other forms of neuromodulation, and develop personalised closed-loop therapies with embedded machine learning. Until then, neuromodulation could be considered for individuals with intractable seizures, ideally after the possibility of curative surgical treatment has been carefully assessed and ruled out or judged less appropriate