Reproductive choices and intrafamilial communication in neurogenetic diseases with different self-estimated severities

Genetic Testing of Movements Disorders: A Review of Clinical Utility

Currently, pathogenic variants in more than 500 different genes are known to cause various movement disorders. The increasing accessibility and reducing cost of genetic testing has resulted in increasing clinical use of genetic testing for the diagnosis of movement disorders. However, the optimal use case(s) for genetic testing at a patient level remain ill-defined. Here, we review the utility of genetic testing in patients with movement disorders and also highlight current challenges and limitations that need to be considered when making decisions about genetic testing in clinical practice.

Highlights

The utility of genetic testing extends across multiple clinical and non-clinical domains. Here we review different aspects of the utility of genetic testing for movement disorders and the numerous associated challenges and limitations. These factors should be weighed on a case-by-case basis when requesting genetic tests in clinical practice.

End-of-Life Discussions With Patients and Caregivers Affected By Neurogenetic Diseases

Background and Objectives

No effective cure is available for neurogenetic diseases such as Huntington disease, spinocerebellar ataxias, and Friedreich ataxia, all of which cause progressive motor, cognitive, and psychiatric symptoms leading, in the long term, to severe communication (among other) impairments. In end-of-life situations, advanced directives (indications formulated by the patient about end-of-life choices) are one decision-making resource for relatives, caregivers, and health care professionals. Given the slowly progressive nature of these diseases, the related disabilities, and their hereditary component, patients, caregivers, and neurologists are often at a loss concerning the right course of action to take. Our study's aim was to explore patients' and caregivers' perceptions, needs, and expectations around anticipated end-of-life discussions and advanced directives.

Methods

DIRAGENE is an observational, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study with a patient-centered component and a primary caregiver-centered component. Observations include disease severity, psychosocial, and emotional scales; in-house questionnaires; and semidirected interviews.

Results

We included 124 participants, of which 81 were patients and 43 primary caregivers. Only 16% of the participants knew specifically about advanced directives and 7% had written documents vs 30% and 18% in the general French population, respectively, adjusted for age. Qualitative analysis of the interviews with 15 couples showed notable dissimilarities in ideas about advanced directives between patients and caregivers and that the underlying pathology, severity, and inheritability are less relevant factors regarding end-of-life discussions than age, environment, prior experiences with death, and history of family illness. Most patients (95%) and caregivers (98%) found that participating in the study was helpful in bringing awareness to end-of-life issues, wished to prioritize discussing them with loved ones, and requested assistance in managing them throughout the course of the disease.

Discussion

Being affected by severe neurogenetic diseases does not seem to prompt individuals to give much thought to end-of-life planning. However, patients and caregivers welcome comprehensive information and expect progressive support from trained health care professionals in having such discussions. Routine integration of these conversations into medical management through a holistic and adapted approach will benefit patients with illnesses with unfavorable long-term prognoses.

Autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxias: new genes and progress towards treatments

Dominantly inherited spinocerebellar ataxias (SCAs) are associated with phenotypes that range from pure cerebellar to multisystemic. The list of implicated genes has lengthened in the past 5 years with the inclusion of SCA37/DAB1, SCA45/FAT2, SCA46/PLD3, SCA47/PUM1, SCA48/STUB1, SCA50/NPTX1, SCA25/PNPT1, SCA49/SAM9DL, and SCA27B/FGF14. In some patients, co-occurrence of multiple potentially pathogenic variants can explain variable penetrance or more severe phenotypes. Given this extreme clinical and genetic heterogeneity, genome sequencing should become the diagnostic tool of choice but is still not available in many clinical settings. Treatments tested in phase 2 and phase 3 studies, such as riluzole and transcranial direct current stimulation of the cerebellum and spinal cord, have given conflicting results. To enable early intervention, preataxic carriers of pathogenic variants should be assessed with biomarkers, such as neurofilament light chain and brain MRI; these biomarkers could also be used as outcome measures, given that clinical outcomes are not useful in the preataxic phase. The development of bioassays measuring the concentration of the mutant protein (eg, ataxin-3) might facilitate monitoring of target engagement by gene therapies.