Rannveig Skrunes1, Einar Svarstad2, Anna Varberg Reisæter3, Bjørn Egil Vikse4. 1. Department of Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; rannveig.skrunes@helse-bergen.no. 2. Department of Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; 3. Department of Transplantation Medicine, Rikshospitalet, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; and. 4. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Department of Medicine, Haugesund Hospital, Haugesund, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies and clinical experience suggest that kidney disease clusters in families, but few population-based studies have been performed. This study investigates risks and causes of ESRD in Norwegians with and without a first-degree relative with ESRD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: On the basis of data from the Norwegian Population Registry, first-degree relatives for most Norwegians were identified. All Norwegians with ESRD (defined as chronic RRT) since 1980 have been registered in the Norwegian Renal Registry. All Norwegians born in Norway who were alive in 1980 and had at least one registered relative were included. For this study, data on ESRD were available through 2009, and individuals without ESRD were censored at December 31, 2009. Data were analyzed in a cohort design, with ESRD in a first-degree relative of the included person as the main explanatory variable. Risks of ESRD and different causes of ESRD were analyzed using Cox regression statistics. RESULTS: In total, 5,119,134 individuals were included, of whom 8203 individuals developed ESRD during follow-up and 27,046 individuals had a first-degree relative with ESRD. Compared with individuals without a first-degree relative with ESRD, individuals with a first-degree relative with ESRD had a relative risk of ESRD of 7.2 (95% confidence interval, 6.5 to 8.1). Similar analyses showed that relative risk of ESRD caused by nonhereditary causes was 3.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 4.4), relative risk of ESRD caused by glomerular disease was 5.2 (95% confidence interval, 4.1 to 6.6), relative risk of ESRD caused by interstitial disease was 4.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 7.3), relative risk of ESRD caused by diabetic nephropathy was 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.1), and relative risk of ESRD caused by hypertensive nephrosclerosis was 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.1). Relative risk of nonhereditary parenchymal renal disease was 3.8 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 4.7). CONCLUSIONS: As expected, ESRD clusters in families. Interestingly, ESRD without known hereditary cause also clusters in families.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies and clinical experience suggest that kidney disease clusters in families, but few population-based studies have been performed. This study investigates risks and causes of ESRD in Norwegians with and without a first-degree relative with ESRD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: On the basis of data from the Norwegian Population Registry, first-degree relatives for most Norwegians were identified. All Norwegians with ESRD (defined as chronic RRT) since 1980 have been registered in the Norwegian Renal Registry. All Norwegians born in Norway who were alive in 1980 and had at least one registered relative were included. For this study, data on ESRD were available through 2009, and individuals without ESRD were censored at December 31, 2009. Data were analyzed in a cohort design, with ESRD in a first-degree relative of the included person as the main explanatory variable. Risks of ESRD and different causes of ESRD were analyzed using Cox regression statistics. RESULTS: In total, 5,119,134 individuals were included, of whom 8203 individuals developed ESRD during follow-up and 27,046 individuals had a first-degree relative with ESRD. Compared with individuals without a first-degree relative with ESRD, individuals with a first-degree relative with ESRD had a relative risk of ESRD of 7.2 (95% confidence interval, 6.5 to 8.1). Similar analyses showed that relative risk of ESRD caused by nonhereditary causes was 3.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 4.4), relative risk of ESRD caused by glomerular disease was 5.2 (95% confidence interval, 4.1 to 6.6), relative risk of ESRD caused by interstitial disease was 4.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 7.3), relative risk of ESRD caused by diabetic nephropathy was 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.1), and relative risk of ESRD caused by hypertensive nephrosclerosis was 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.1). Relative risk of nonhereditary parenchymal renal disease was 3.8 (95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 4.7). CONCLUSIONS: As expected, ESRD clusters in families. Interestingly, ESRD without known hereditary cause also clusters in families.
Authors: Afshin Parsa; W H Linda Kao; Dawei Xie; Brad C Astor; Man Li; Chi-yuan Hsu; Harold I Feldman; Rulan S Parekh; John W Kusek; Tom H Greene; Jeffrey C Fink; Amanda H Anderson; Michael J Choi; Jackson T Wright; James P Lash; Barry I Freedman; Akinlolu Ojo; Cheryl A Winkler; Dominic S Raj; Jeffrey B Kopp; Jiang He; Nancy G Jensvold; Kaixiang Tao; Michael S Lipkowitz; Lawrence J Appel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-11-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeffrey B Kopp; Michael W Smith; George W Nelson; Randall C Johnson; Barry I Freedman; Donald W Bowden; Taras Oleksyk; Louise M McKenzie; Hiroshi Kajiyama; Tejinder S Ahuja; Jeffrey S Berns; William Briggs; Monique E Cho; Richard A Dart; Paul L Kimmel; Stephen M Korbet; Donna M Michel; Michele H Mokrzycki; Jeffrey R Schelling; Eric Simon; Howard Trachtman; David Vlahov; Cheryl A Winkler Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2008-09-14 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Barry I Freedman; Nataliya V Volkova; Scott G Satko; Jenna Krisher; Claudine Jurkovitz; J Michael Soucie; William M McClellan Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 3.754
Authors: P C van Dijk; K J Jager; F de Charro; F Collart; R Cornet; F W Dekker; C Grönhagen-Riska; R Kramar; T Leivestad; K Simpson; J D Briggs Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: William McClellan; Rebecca Speckman; Leslie McClure; Virginia Howard; Ruth C Campbell; Mary Cushman; Paul Audhya; George Howard; David G Warnock Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2007-03-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Hassan N Ibrahim; Robert N Foley; Scott A Reule; Richard Spong; Aleksandra Kukla; Naim Issa; Danielle M Berglund; Gretchen K Sieger; Arthur J Matas Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Krista L Lentine; Mark A Schnitzler; Amit X Garg; Huiling Xiao; David Axelrod; Janet E Tuttle-Newhall; Daniel C Brennan; Dorry L Segev Journal: Transplantation Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Sneh Lata; Maddalena Marasa; Yifu Li; David A Fasel; Emily Groopman; Vaidehi Jobanputra; Hila Rasouly; Adele Mitrotti; Rik Westland; Miguel Verbitsky; Jordan Nestor; Lindsey M Slater; Vivette D'Agati; Marcin Zaniew; Anna Materna-Kiryluk; Francesca Lugani; Gianluca Caridi; Luca Rampoldi; Aditya Mattoo; Chad A Newton; Maya K Rao; Jai Radhakrishnan; Wooin Ahn; Pietro A Canetta; Andrew S Bomback; Gerald B Appel; Corinne Antignac; Glen S Markowitz; Christine K Garcia; Krzysztof Kiryluk; Simone Sanna-Cherchi; Ali G Gharavi Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Dervla M Connaughton; Claire Kennedy; Shirlee Shril; Nina Mann; Susan L Murray; Patrick A Williams; Eoin Conlon; Makiko Nakayama; Amelie T van der Ven; Hadas Ityel; Franziska Kause; Caroline M Kolvenbach; Rufeng Dai; Asaf Vivante; Daniela A Braun; Ronen Schneider; Thomas M Kitzler; Brona Moloney; Conor P Moran; John S Smyth; Alan Kennedy; Katherine Benson; Caragh Stapleton; Mark Denton; Colm Magee; Conall M O'Seaghdha; William D Plant; Matthew D Griffin; Atif Awan; Clodagh Sweeney; Shrikant M Mane; Richard P Lifton; Brenda Griffin; Sean Leavey; Liam Casserly; Declan G de Freitas; John Holian; Anthony Dorman; Brendan Doyle; Peter J Lavin; Mark A Little; Peter J Conlon; Friedhelm Hildebrandt Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2019-02-14 Impact factor: 10.612