Citations

Abstract Aims To compare the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children with and without epilepsy using clinical diagnoses and chart review with research‐defined criteria and to examine sex ratios, age at ASD onset, and intellectual disability between groups. Method The Olmsted County birth cohort included 30 490 individuals, of whom 257 (0.84%) had epilepsy diagnosed before 19 years of age. The cohort was previously screened for ASD using three case definitions: research‐inclusive (ASD‐R I ), research‐narrow (ASD‐R N ), and clinically diagnosed ASD (ASD‐C). For those with ASD‐R I , we assessed sex, intellectual disability (IQ < 70), and age at ASD onset. Means and proportions are reported when available. Results ASD prevalence was significantly higher in participants with epilepsy across all definitions: ASD‐R I 21.4% versus 3.2%; ASD‐R N 14.0% versus 1.6%; and ASD‐C 7.9% versus 0.7%. Children with both epilepsy and ASD‐R I were more often female (38.2% vs 25.8%), had higher rates of intellectual disability (56.5% vs 15.4%), and met the ASD‐R I criteria at a younger age (mean 7 years 5 months vs 8 years 8 months). Interpretation Co‐occurring ASD and epilepsy are frequently associated with intellectual disability, earlier age at ASD diagnosis, and reduced male predominance.

ABSTRACT Post‐translational modifications, such as glycosylation and phosphorylation, play a critical role in protein trafficking, interactions, and stability. Disruptions in these pathways can lead to glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) deficiencies, which present with a spectrum of clinical features, including congenital anomalies, dysmorphic features, developmental delay, hypotonia, and epilepsy. Biallelic variants in PIGV , a key mannosyltransferase in GPI biosynthesis, cause Hyperphosphatasia with Impaired Intellectual Development Syndrome 1 (HPMRS1), a rare disorder characterized by hyperphosphatasia, seizures, developmental delay, hypotonia, abnormal MRI findings, and distinct facial dysmorphisms. Fewer than 30 cases have been reported to date. We conducted a case study and literature review; with clinical data obtained from medical records. A 2‐year‐old female presented with developmental delay, myoclonic epilepsy, hypotonia, and mild facial dysmorphism. Laboratory results showed elevated alkaline phosphatase (899 U/L) and low pyridoxal 5′‐phosphate levels in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Brain MRI revealed diffuse cerebral volume loss and ventriculomegaly. Trio genome sequencing identified two PIGV variants: c.1415T>C‐p.(Leu472Pro) and c.524T>C‐p.(Leu175Pro). Functional studies using PIGV ‐knockout HEK293 cells transfected with wild‐type or mutant PIGV constructs demonstrated reduced GPI‐anchored protein (GPI‐AP) expression under weaker promoters, indicating impaired enzymatic activity. We report two novel PIGV variants associated with HPMRS1, emphasizing the value of functional assays in variant interpretation. Our findings also highlight the diagnostic relevance of alkaline phosphatase measurement in patients with refractory seizures.

Abstract Objective To assess the localization and lateralization values of ictal emotional features and ictal defensive behaviors in pediatric and young adult patients with frontal lobe epilepsy (FLE). Methods Children and young adults with FLE were identified from a single institution's epilepsy surgery database. Two epileptologists determined by consensus the presence of ictal emotional features (positive‐ smile, laughter, humming, singing; negative‐ fear, crying, anger, disgust, contempt, sadness) and ictal defensive behaviors (freezing with a fearful facial expression, shielding the face with hands, burying the face in a pillow, or exhibiting hyperkinetic motor behaviors like attempting to escape from bed or resisting restraint) in each patient's first video EEG (vEEG). Historic seizure semiology and vEEG reports were compared with the consensus vEEG analysis. Longitudinal changes in ictal emotional features were defined by the emergence or resolution of ictal emotional features between historic seizure semiology and re‐review of presurgical vEEG analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the seizure lateralization (left vs. right) and sublobar localization (precentral, medial, lateral, extensive) based on surgical extent. Results Twenty‐three FLE patients were included (female 39%; mean age at vEEG analysis: 11.28 years, range 1.75–20.17). The inter‐rater reliability was very good for both ictal emotional features ( κ = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.59–1) and ictal defensive behaviors ( κ = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.79–1). Ictal emotional features were observed in 10 patients (43.4%), with negative emotions present in 70% (7/10) of these cases. vEEG reports lacked documentation of ictal emotional features in two patients. Although ictal emotional features showed no statistical correlation by sublobar regions, ictal defensive behaviors were consistently seen in medial compared to lateral FLE (100% vs. 16.6%; p = 0.004). Longitudinal changes in ictal emotional features were observed in 8 (34.7%) patients. Significance Ictal emotional features were common in pediatric and young adult FLE patients and were mainly negative. Ictal defensive behaviors were more likely associated with medial FLE. Longitudinal changes in ictal emotional features occurred in about a third of pediatric and young adult patients with FLE. Plain Language Summary This study examined emotional features and defensive behaviors during seizures in children and young adults with FLE. Negative emotions were commonly seen during seizures. Ictal defensive behaviors were more frequently observed in patients with medial FLE, and recognizing these signs could help clinicians localize the seizures. Changes in emotional features were seen over time in about one‐third of children and young adult patients.

AbstractWhile pediatric epilepsy shares some features with adult epilepsy, the growing and developing brain during childhood is associated with differences in epilepsy etiologies, syndromes, comorbidities, management, and outcomes. We must also consider the long-term effects of epilepsy and treatments. This section highlights unique considerations for pediatric epilepsy. These include pediatric onset electroclinical syndromes that commonly resolve prior to adulthood, treatment duration of self-limited pediatric epilepsy syndromes, pediatric-onset epilepsy with etiology-specific treatment, and therapies used more commonly in the pediatric population. In addition, pediatric-onset epilepsy is associated with a higher risk for developmental, psychiatric, and behavioral comorbidities in a bidirectional fashion. Family dynamics are affected by a child with epilepsy, and transitioning to the adult clinic is a particular challenge for this population. Finally, there are special issues that occur in pediatric epilepsy, including the lack of pediatric FDA approvals for newly available therapies and the need for sedation for investigations.

Abstract Objective Dravet syndrome is a developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterized by drug‐resistance, lifelong seizures, and significant comorbidities including intellectual and motor impairment. Receiving a diagnosis of Dravet syndrome is challenging for parents/caregivers, and little research has focused on how the diagnosis should be given. A Delphi consensus process was undertaken to determine key aspects for healthcare professionals (HCPs) to consider when communicating a Dravet syndrome diagnosis to parents/caregivers. Methods Following a literature search and steering committee review, 34 statements relating to the first diagnosis consultation were independent‐ and anonymously voted on (from 1, totally inappropriate, to 9, totally appropriate) by an international group of expert child neurologists, neuropsychiatrists, nurses, and patient advisory group (PAG) representatives. The statements were divided into five chapters: (i) communication during the first diagnosis consultation, (ii) information to be delivered during the first diagnosis consultation, (iii) points to be reiterated at the end of the first diagnosis consultation, (iv) information to be delivered at subsequent consultations, and (v) communication around genetic testing. Statements receiving ≥ 75% of the votes with a score of ≥7 and/or with a median score of ≥8 were considered consensual. Results The statements were evaluated by 44 HCPs and PAG representatives in the first round of voting; 29 statements obtained strong consensus, 3 received good consensus, and 2 did not reach consensus. The committee reformulated and resubmitted 4 statements for evaluation (42/44 voters): 3 obtained strong consensus and 1 remained not consensual. The final consensual recommendations include guidance on consultation setting, key disease aspects to convey, how to discuss genetic testing results, disease evolution, and the risk of SUDEP, among other topics. Significance It is hoped that this international Delphi consensus will facilitate a better‐structured initial diagnosis consultation and offer further support for parents/caregivers at this challenging time of learning about Dravet syndrome. Plain Language Summary Diagnosis of Dravet syndrome, a rare and severe form of childhood‐onset epilepsy, is often challenging to give to parents. This international study developed guidance and recommendations to help healthcare professionals better structure and personalize this disclosure. By following this advice, doctors can provide more tailored support to families, improving their understanding and management of the condition.

The National Association of Epilepsy Centers (NAEC) recently published their updated guidelines for specialized epilepsy centers. The first NAEC guidelines provided basic expectations for in-patient care, with the goal of makingan accurate diagnosis and choose the best intervention- medical or surgical. With the 2001 report, the emphasis was for epilepsy centers to be able to provide comprehensive diagnostic and treatment services. The NAEC 2010 guidelines further delineated the essential elements of level 3 and 4 specialized epilepsy centers.The goal of the 2023 guidelines is not only to provide optimal standards of care, but also to “elevate evidence-based science into standard practice.”4 Therefore, these are the first NAEC guidelines that are solely funded by NAEC and also the first founded on an evidence-informed, consensus-based process. The 2023 guidelines now include 52 recommendations across the following domains: Inpatient Services/EMU, Surgery, Diagnostic Evaluation, and Outpatient Services. The guidelines provide us with the recommendations when creating new centers or ways to improve our current centers. Well- documented guidelines such as these provide us with support when seeking additional financial and personnel resources. Put simply, these guidelines have provided us with the recipe for ideal comprehensive epilepsy care for PWE.