Susan L Murray1,2, Anthony Dorman3,4, Katherine A Benson5, Dervla M Connaughton6,7, Caragh P Stapleton5, Neil K Fennelly3, Claire Kennedy6, Ciara A McDonnell6, Kendrah Kidd8, Sarah M Cormican6, Louise A Ryan6, Peter Lavin9, Mark A Little10, Anthony J Bleyer8, Brendan Doyle3, Gianpiero L Cavalleri5, Friedhelm Hildebrandt7, Peter J Conlon6,11. 1. Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland, susanmurray@beaumont.ie. 2. Department of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland, susanmurray@beaumont.ie. 3. Department of Pathology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Department of Pathology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 5. Department of Molecular and Cellular Therapeutics, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 6. Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 7. Department of Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 8. Section on Nephrology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA. 9. Department of Nephrology, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 10. Trinity Health Kidney Centre, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 11. Department of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Renal biopsy is the mainstay of renal pathological diagnosis. Despite sophisticated diagnostic techniques, it is not always possible to make a precise pathological diagnosis. Our aim was to identify a genetic cause of disease in patients who had undergone renal biopsy and determine if genetic testing altered diagnosis or treatment. METHODS: Patients with suspected familial kidney disease underwent a variety of next-generation sequencing (NGS) strategies. The subset of these patients who had also undergone native kidney biopsy was identified. Histological specimens were reviewed by a consultant pathologist, and genetic and pathological diagnoses were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients in 47 families underwent genetic sequencing and renal biopsy. Patients were grouped into 5 diagnostic categories based on pathological diagnosis: tubulointerstitial kidney disease (TIKD; n = 18); glomerulonephritis (GN; n = 15); focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and Alport Syndrome (n = 11); thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA; n = 17); and nonspecific pathological changes (n = 14). Thirty-nine patients (52%) in 21 families (45%) received a genetic diagnosis; 13 cases (72%) with TIKD, 4 (27%) with GN, 6 (55%) with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis/Alport syndrome, and 10 (59%) with TMA and 6 cases (43%) with nonspecific features. Genetic testing resulted in changes in understanding of disease mechanism in 21 individuals (54%) in 12 families (57%). Treatment would have been altered in at least 26% of cases (10/39). CONCLUSIONS: An accurate genetic diagnosis can result in changes in clinical diagnosis, understanding of pathological mechanism, and treatment. NGS should be considered as a complementary diagnostic technique to kidney biopsy in the evaluation of patients with kidney disease.
BACKGROUND: Renal biopsy is the mainstay of renal pathological diagnosis. Despite sophisticated diagnostic techniques, it is not always possible to make a precise pathological diagnosis. Our aim was to identify a genetic cause of disease in patients who had undergone renal biopsy and determine if genetic testing altered diagnosis or treatment. METHODS:Patients with suspected familial kidney disease underwent a variety of next-generation sequencing (NGS) strategies. The subset of these patients who had also undergone native kidney biopsy was identified. Histological specimens were reviewed by a consultant pathologist, and genetic and pathological diagnoses were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients in 47 families underwent genetic sequencing and renal biopsy. Patients were grouped into 5 diagnostic categories based on pathological diagnosis: tubulointerstitial kidney disease (TIKD; n = 18); glomerulonephritis (GN; n = 15); focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and Alport Syndrome (n = 11); thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA; n = 17); and nonspecific pathological changes (n = 14). Thirty-nine patients (52%) in 21 families (45%) received a genetic diagnosis; 13 cases (72%) with TIKD, 4 (27%) with GN, 6 (55%) with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis/Alport syndrome, and 10 (59%) with TMA and 6 cases (43%) with nonspecific features. Genetic testing resulted in changes in understanding of disease mechanism in 21 individuals (54%) in 12 families (57%). Treatment would have been altered in at least 26% of cases (10/39). CONCLUSIONS: An accurate genetic diagnosis can result in changes in clinical diagnosis, understanding of pathological mechanism, and treatment. NGS should be considered as a complementary diagnostic technique to kidney biopsy in the evaluation of patients with kidney disease.
Authors: Matthias Kretzler; Clemens D Cohen; Peter Doran; Anna Henger; Stephen Madden; Elisabeth F Gröne; Peter J Nelson; Detlef Schlöndorff; Hermann-Josef Gröne Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: J Reeve; J Sellarés; M Mengel; B Sis; A Skene; L Hidalgo; D G de Freitas; K S Famulski; P F Halloran Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 8.086
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
Authors: Jan J Weening; Vivette D D'Agati; Melvin M Schwartz; Surya V Seshan; Charles E Alpers; Gerald B Appel; James E Balow; Jan A Bruijn; Terence Cook; Franco Ferrario; Agnes B Fogo; Ellen M Ginzler; Lee Hebert; Gary Hill; Prue Hill; J Charles Jennette; Norella C Kong; Philippe Lesavre; Michael Lockshin; Lai-Meng Looi; Hirofumi Makino; Luiz A Moura; Michio Nagata Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Sue Richards; Nazneen Aziz; Sherri Bale; David Bick; Soma Das; Julie Gastier-Foster; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Elaine Spector; Karl Voelkerding; Heidi L Rehm Journal: Genet Med Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Jennifer D Varner; Megan Chryst-Stangl; Christopher Imokhuede Esezobor; Adaobi Solarin; Guanghong Wu; Brandon Lane; Gentzon Hall; Asiri Abeyagunawardena; Ayo Matory; Tracy E Hunley; Jen Jar Lin; David Howell; Rasheed Gbadegesin Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 3.418
Authors: Anthony J Bleyer; Maggie Westemeyer; Jing Xie; Michelle S Bloom; Katya Brossart; Jason J Eckel; Frederick Jones; Miklos Z Molnar; Wayne Kotzker; Prince Anand; Stanislav Kmoch; Yuan Xue; Samuel Strom; Sumit Punj; Zachary P Demko; Hossein Tabriziani; Paul R Billings; Trudy McKanna Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 4.605