Donald, Kirsten A.

ABSTRACT The lower infrastructure requirements of portable ultra‐low field MRI (ULF‐MRI) systems have enabled their use in diverse settings such as intensive care units and remote medical facilities. The UNITY Project is an international neuroimaging network harnessing this technology, deploying portable ULF‐MRI systems globally to expand access to MRI for studies into brain development. Given the wide range of environments where ULF‐MRI systems may operate, there are external factors that might influence image quality. This work aims to introduce the quality control (QC) framework used by the UNITY Project to investigate how robust the systems are and how QC metrics compare between sites and over time. We present a QC framework using a commercially available phantom, scanned with 64 mT portable MRI systems at 17 sites across 12 countries on four continents. Using automated, open‐source analysis tools, we quantify signal‐to‐noise, image contrast, and geometric distortions. Our results demonstrated that the image quality is robust to the varying operational environment, for example, electromagnetic noise interference and temperature. The Larmor frequency was significantly correlated to room temperature, as was image noise and contrast. Image distortions were less than 2.5 mm, with high robustness over time. Similar to studies at higher field, we found that changes in pulse sequence parameters from software updates had an impact on QC metrics. This study demonstrates that portable ULF‐MRI systems can be deployed in a variety of environments for multi‐center neuroimaging studies and produce robust results.

Background High-impact pathogenic variants in more than a thousand genes are involved in Mendelian forms of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). Methods This study describes the molecular and clinical characterisation of 28 probands with NDD harbouring heterozygous AGO1 coding variants, occurring de novo for all those whose transmission could have been verified (26/28). Results A total of 15 unique variants leading to amino acid changes or deletions were identified: 12 missense variants, two in-frame deletions of one codon, and one canonical splice variant leading to a deletion of two amino acid residues. Recurrently identified variants were present in several unrelated individuals: p.(Phe180del), p.(Leu190Pro), p.(Leu190Arg), p.(Gly199Ser), p.(Val254Ile) and p.(Glu376del). AGO1 encodes the Argonaute 1 protein, which functions in gene-silencing pathways mediated by small non-coding RNAs. Three-dimensional protein structure predictions suggest that these variants might alter the flexibility of the AGO1 linker domains, which likely would impair its function in mRNA processing. Affected individuals present with intellectual disability of varying severity, as well as speech and motor delay, autistic behaviour and additional behavioural manifestations. Conclusion Our study establishes that de novo coding variants in AGO1 are involved in a novel monogenic form of NDD, highly similar to the recently reported AGO2 -related NDD.

SummaryAttention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common and challenging comorbidity affecting many children with epilepsy. A working group under the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Commission identified key questions on the identification and management of ADHD in children with epilepsy. Systematic reviews of the evidence to support approaches to these questions were collated and graded using criteria from the American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) requirements were followed, with PROSPERO registration (CRD42018094617). No increased risk of ADHD in boys with epilepsy compared to girls with epilepsy was found (Level A). Valproate use in pregnancy is associated with inattentiveness and hyperactivity in offspring (1 class I study), and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased risk of ADHD (Level A). Impact of early seizure onset on development of ADHD was unclear (Level U), but more evident with poor seizure control (Level B). ADHD screening should be performed from 6 years of age, or at diagnosis, and repeated annually (Level U) and reevaluated after change of antiepileptic drug (AED) (Level U). Diagnosis should involve health practitioners with expert training in ADHD (Level U). Use of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire screening tool is supported (Level B). Formal cognitive testing is strongly recommended in children with epilepsy who are struggling at school (Level U). Behavioral problems are more likely with polytherapy than monotherapy (Level C). Valproate can exacerbate attentional issues in children with childhood absence epilepsy (Level A). Methylphenidate is tolerated and effective in children with epilepsy (Level B). Limited evidence supports that atomoxetine is tolerated (Level C). Multidisciplinary involvement in transition and adult ADHD clinics is essential (Level U). In conclusion, although recommendations could be proposed for some of the study questions, this systematic review highlighted the need for more comprehensive and targeted large‐population prospective studies.