2017
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.86
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

EFHC1 variants in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy: reanalysis according to NHGRI and ACMG guidelines for assigning disease causality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
1
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
2
26
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The significance of EFHC1 was questioned after some variants published in early reports were subsequently found to be present in population databases without seizures such as the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD) . Despite these findings, a recent systematic review provided evidence that EFHC1 variants are indeed a contributing liability factor in JME . The recognition that a condition is probably multifactorial should not necessarily dissuade a physician from referring their patient for genetic counseling, if they are interested, as the individual and/or family members may benefit from recurrence risk counseling based on available empiric recurrence risks, and also a discussion on prenatal risks due to fetal exposure to various antiepileptic medication …”
Section: Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Syndromesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The significance of EFHC1 was questioned after some variants published in early reports were subsequently found to be present in population databases without seizures such as the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD) . Despite these findings, a recent systematic review provided evidence that EFHC1 variants are indeed a contributing liability factor in JME . The recognition that a condition is probably multifactorial should not necessarily dissuade a physician from referring their patient for genetic counseling, if they are interested, as the individual and/or family members may benefit from recurrence risk counseling based on available empiric recurrence risks, and also a discussion on prenatal risks due to fetal exposure to various antiepileptic medication …”
Section: Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Syndromesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…55 Despite these findings, a recent systematic review provided evidence that EFHC1 variants are indeed a contributing liability factor in JME. 56 The recognition that a condition is probably multifactorial should not necessarily dissuade a physician from referring their patient for genetic counseling, if they are interested, as the individual and/or family members may benefit from recurrence risk counseling based on available empiric recurrence risks, 13,57 and also a discussion on prenatal risks due to fetal exposure to various antiepileptic medication. [58][59][60] Not all GGEs are multifactorial, and there are convincing monogenic, highly penetrant, non-syndromic, causes for GGE.…”
Section: Focal-onset Seizuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study also included JME mutations (H89R, Y355C, R372W, R436C, N519S, V556L, I619S, and Y631C) reported from India. The majority of these EFHC1 coding variants originated from Bangalore (R372W, R436C, N519S, V556L, I619S, and Y631C) and may not be pathogenic . Therefore, these are far from the New Delhi EFHC1 variants that are located primarily between DM10 (1) and DM10 (2) domains.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interestingly, in a recent article Bailey et al 19 reanalyzed 54 EFHC1 variants associated with epilepsy from 17 cohorts and classified 9 variants as pathogenic. This study also included JME mutations (H89R, Y355C, R372W, R436C, N519S, V556L, I619S, and Y631C) reported from India.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a large research community focusing on genetic variation study relating to human disease (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). This community often performs their analysis in-house rather than using any of the currently available tools for variant analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%