4.5 Article

Genetic testing in the epilepsies-Report of the ILAE Genetics Commission

期刊

EPILEPSIA
卷 51, 期 4, 页码 655-670

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02429.x

关键词

Epilepsy; Seizures; Genetics; Genetic testing; SCN1A

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21249062, 23659529] Funding Source: KAKEN
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS043472-05, R01 NS043472, R03 NS065346, R01 NS036319-03, R01 NS036319, R03 NS065346-01A1] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>In this report, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Genetics Commission discusses essential issues to be considered with regard to clinical genetic testing in the epilepsies. Genetic research on the epilepsies has led to the identification of more than 20 genes with a major effect on susceptibility to idiopathic epilepsies. The most important potential clinical application of these discoveries is genetic testing: the use of genetic information, either to clarify the diagnosis in people already known or suspected to have epilepsy (diagnostic testing), or to predict onset of epilepsy in people at risk because of a family history (predictive testing). Although genetic testing has many potential benefits, it also has potential harms, and assessment of these potential benefits and harms in particular situations is complex. Moreover, many treating clinicians are unfamiliar with the types of tests available, how to access them, how to decide whether they should be offered, and what measures should be used to maximize benefit and minimize harm to their patients. Because the field is moving rapidly, with new information emerging practically every day, we present a framework for considering the clinical utility of genetic testing that can be applied to many different syndromes and clinical contexts. Given the current state of knowledge, genetic testing has high clinical utility in few clinical contexts, but in some of these it carries implications for daily clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据