Hundreds of genetic variants in KCNQ2 encoding the voltage-gated potassium channel KV7.2 are associated with early onset epilepsy and/or developmental disability, but the functional consequences of most variants are unknown. Absent functional annotation for KCNQ2 variants hinders identification of individuals who may benefit from emerging precision therapies. We employed automated patch clamp recordings to assess at, to our knowledge, an unprecedented scale the functional and pharmacological properties of 79 missense and 2 inframe deletion KCNQ2 variants. Among the variants we studied were 18 known pathogenic variants, 24 mostly rare population variants, and 39 disease-associated variants with unclear functional effects. We analyzed electrophysiological data recorded from 9,480 cells. The functional properties of 18 known pathogenic variants largely matched previously published results and validated automated patch clamp for this purpose. Unlike rare population variants, most disease-associated KCNQ2 variants exhibited prominent loss-of-function with dominant-negative effects, providing strong evidence in support of pathogenicity. All variants responded to retigabine, although there were substantial differences in maximal responses. Our study demonstrated that dominant-negative loss-of-function is a common mechanism associated with missense KCNQ2 variants. Importantly, we observed genotype-dependent differences in the response of KCNQ2 variants to retigabine, a proposed precision therapy for KCNQ2 developmental and epileptic encephalopathy.
Carlos G. Vanoye, Reshma R. Desai, Zhigang Ji, Sneha Adusumilli, Nirvani Jairam, Nora Ghabra, Nishtha Joshi, Eryn Fitch, Katherine L. Helbig, Dianalee McKnight, Amanda S. Lindy, Fanggeng Zou, Ingo Helbig, Edward C. Cooper, Alfred L. George Jr.
Usage data is cumulative from August 2024 through August 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 1,396 | 935 |
154 | 189 | |
Figure | 381 | 5 |
Supplemental data | 322 | 173 |
Citation downloads | 74 | 0 |
Totals | 2,327 | 1,302 |
Total Views | 3,629 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.