No abstract

ObjectiveThe term ‘precision medicine’ describes a rational treatment strategy tailored to one person that reverses or modifies the disease pathophysiology. In epilepsy, single case and small cohort reports document nascent precision medicine strategies in specific genetic epilepsies. The aim of this multicentre observational study was to investigate the deeper complexity of precision medicine in epilepsy.MethodsA systematic survey of patients with epilepsy with a molecular genetic diagnosis was conducted in six tertiary epilepsy centres including children and adults. A standardised questionnaire was used for data collection, including genetic findings and impact on clinical and therapeutic management.ResultsWe included 293 patients with genetic epilepsies, 137 children and 156 adults, 162 females and 131 males. Treatment changes were undertaken because of the genetic findings in 94 patients (32%), including rational precision medicine treatment and/or a treatment change prompted by the genetic diagnosis, but not directly related to known pathophysiological mechanisms. There was a rational precision medicine treatment for 56 patients (19%), and this was tried in 33/56 (59%) and was successful (ie, >50% seizure reduction) in 10/33 (30%) patients. In 73/293 (25%) patients there was a treatment change prompted by the genetic diagnosis, but not directly related to known pathophysiological mechanisms, and this was successful in 24/73 (33%).SignificanceOur survey of clinical practice in specialised epilepsy centres shows high variability of clinical outcomes following the identification of a genetic cause for an epilepsy. Meaningful change in the treatment paradigm after genetic testing is not yet possible for many people with epilepsy. This systematic survey provides an overview of the current application of precision medicine in the epilepsies, and suggests the adoption of a more considered approach.

Objective: We describe a multicenter experience with VNS implantation in pediatric patients with epileptic encephalopathy. Our goal was to assess VNS efficacy and identify potential predictors of favorable outcome. Methods: This was a retrospective study. Inclusion criteria were: ≤18 years at the time of VNS implantation and at least one year of follow‐up. All patients were non‐candidates for excisional procedures. Favorable clinical outcome and effective VNS therapy were defined as seizure reduction >50%. Outcome data were reviewed at one, two, three and five years after VNS implantation. Fisher's exact test, Kaplan‐Meier and multiple logistic regression analysis were employed. Results: Twenty‐seven patients met inclusion criteria. Responder rate (seizure frequency reduction ≥ 50%) at one‐year follow‐up was 25.9%, and 15.3% at last follow‐up visit. The only variable significantly predicting favorable outcome was time to VNS implantation, with the best outcome achieved when VNS implantation was performed within five years of seizure onset (overall response rate of 83.3% at one year of follow‐up and 100% at five years). In total, 63% of patients evidenced improved QOL at last follow‐up visit. Only one patient exited the study due to an adverse event at two years from implantation. Significance: Early VNS implantation within five years of seizure onset was the only predictor of favorable clinical outcome in pediatric patients with epileptic encephalopathy. Improved QOL and a very low incidence of adverse events were observed.

The aim of this study is to describe demographic data, semiology and etiology in a pediatric population with status epilepticus (SE) and refractory SE (RSE). Method: We retrospectively reviewed patients with the following inclusion criteria: i) age between two months and eighteen years; ii) SE diagnosis; iii) admission from January 2001 to December 2016; iv) available clinical data. Results: We enrolled 124 patients. Mean and median age was 4.6 ± 4.2 years and 3.3 [1.2-7.5] years respectively.SE had a "de novo" onset in 66.9%. Focal convulsive-SE was the most common semiology (50.8%) whilst generalised (32.3%) and nonconvulsive-SE (NCSE) (16.9%) were less represented. Some etiologies showed a different age distribution: febrile in youngest age (p = 0.002, phi 0.3) and idiopathic-cryptogenic in older children (p = 0.016, phi 0.2).A statistical significance correlation was detected between semiology and etiology (p < 0.001, Cramer's V 0.4), chemotherapy and NCSE (n = 6/21 vs 3/103, p < 0.001) as well as PRES and NCSE (n = 7/21 vs 5/103, p < 0.001).Only 17.7% had a RSE. No correlation was found in demographic and clinical data, but NCSE, acute and idiopathic-cryptogenic etiologies were more frequently associated to RSE. Encephalitis was the most common diagnosis in acute etiologies whereas unknown epilepsy in idiopathic-cryptogenic group. Conclusion: Most of our findings were previously described however we found a significant role of non-antiepileptic treatments (chemotherapy-dialysis) and comorbidity (PRES) determining acute etiology and NCSE. Acute (mostly encephalitis), idiopathic-cryptogenic (mainly unknown-epilepsy) and NCSE were frequently detected in RSE. In the above mentioned conditions a high level of suspicion was recommended.