APOL1 Genetic Testing in Living Kidney Transplant Donors

Tips for Testing Adults With Suspected Genetic Kidney Disease

Genetic kidney disease is common but often unrecognized. It accounts for most cystic kidney diseases and tubulopathies, many forms of congenital abnormalities of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT), and some glomerulopathies. Genetic kidney disease is typically suspected where the disease usually has a genetic basis or there is another affected family member, a young age at onset, or extrarenal involvement, but there are also many exceptions to these "rules". Genetic testing requires the patient's written informed consent. When a patient declines testing, another later conversation may be worthwhile. Genetic testing not only indicates the diagnosis but also the inheritance pattern, likely at-risk family members, disease in other organs, clinical course, and possibly effective treatments. Sometimes genetic testing does not identify a pathogenic variant even where other evidence is strong. A variant of uncertain significance (VUS) may be reported but should not be used for clinical decision making. It may be reclassified after more information becomes available without necessarily retesting the patient. Patients should be provided with a copy of their genetic test report, the results explained, and at-risk family members offered "cascade" testing. A referral to a clinical geneticist or genetic counselor helps identify affected family members and in providing advice to assist with reproductive decisions.

Evaluating ApoL1 Genetic Testing Policy Options for Transplant Centers: A Delphi Consensus Panel Project with Stakeholders

BACKGROUND

Apolipoprotein L1 (ApoL1) variants G1 and G2 are associated with a higher risk of kidney disease. ApoL1 risk variants are predominantly seen in individuals with sub-Saharan African ancestry. In most transplant centers, potential organ donors are being selectively genetically tested for ApoL1 risk variants. Transplant programs have highly variable ApoL1 testing practices and need guidance on essential ApoL1 clinical policy questions.

METHODS

We conducted a Delphi consensus panel focused on ApoL1 clinical policy questions, including who gets tested, who decides whether testing occurs, how test results are shared, who receives test results, and how test results are used. A total of 27 panelists across seven stakeholder groups participated: living kidney donors ( n =4), deceased donor family members ( n =3), recipients of a deceased donor kidney ( n =4), recipients of a living donor kidney ( n =4), nephrologists ( n =4), transplant surgeons ( n =4), and genetic counselors ( n =4). Nineteen panelists (70%) identified as Black. The Delphi panel process involved two rounds of educational webinars and three rounds of surveys administered to panelists, who were asked to indicate whether they support, could live with, or oppose each policy option.

RESULTS

The panel reached consensus on one or more acceptable policy options for each clinical policy question; panelists supported 18 policy options and opposed 15. Key elements of consensus include the following: ask potential donors about African ancestry rather than race; make testing decisions only after discussion with donors; encourage disclosure of test results to blood relatives and organ recipients but do not require it; use test results to inform decision making, but never for unilateral decisions by transplant programs.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel generally supported policy options involving discussion and shared decision making among patients, donors, and family stakeholders. There was general opposition to unilateral decision making and prohibiting donation altogether.

Racial Equity in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Centers, 2008-2018

Importance

It is unclear whether center-level factors are associated with racial equity in living donor kidney transplant (LDKT).

Objective

To evaluate center-level factors and racial equity in LDKT during an 11-year time period.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort longitudinal study was completed in February 2023, of US transplant centers with at least 12 annual LDKTs from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, identified in the Health Resources Services Administration database and linked to the US Renal Data System and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Observed and model-based estimated Black-White mean LDKT rate ratios (RRs), where an RR of 1 indicates racial equity and values less than 1 indicate a lower rate of LDKT of Black patients compared with White patients. Estimated yearly best-case center-specific LDKT RRs between Black and White individuals, where modifiable center characteristics were set to values that would facilitate access to LDKT.

Results

The final cohorts of patients included 394 625 waitlisted adults, of whom 33.1% were Black and 66.9% were White, and 57 222 adult LDKT recipients, of whom 14.1% were Black and 85.9% were White. Among 89 transplant centers, estimated yearly center-level RRs between Black and White individuals accounting for center and population characteristics ranged from 0.0557 in 2008 to 0.771 in 2018. The yearly median RRs ranged from 0.216 in 2016 to 0.285 in 2010. Model-based estimations for the hypothetical best-case scenario resulted in little change in the minimum RR (from 0.0557 to 0.0549), but a greater positive shift in the maximum RR from 0.771 to 0.895. Relative to the observed 582 LDKT in Black patients and 3837 in White patients, the 2018 hypothetical model estimated an increase of 423 (a 72.7% increase) LDKTs for Black patients and of 1838 (a 47.9% increase) LDKTs for White patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with kidney failure, no substantial improvement occurred over time either in the observed or the covariate-adjusted estimated RRs. Under the best-case hypothetical estimations, modifying centers' participation in the paired exchange and voucher programs and increased access to public insurance may contribute to improved racial equity in LDKT. Additional work is needed to identify center-level and program-specific strategies to improve racial equity in access to LDKT.

Genetic Counseling in Kidney Disease: A Perspective

As genetic testing is increasingly integrated into nephrology practice there is a growing need for partnership with genetic experts. Genetic counselors are ideally suited to fill this role. The value of genetic counseling is born out of the clinical value of genetic test results against the backdrop of the complexity of genetic testing. Genetic counselors who specialize in nephrology are trained to understand and explain the potential effects of genes on kidney disease, which can enable patients to make informed decisions about proceeding with genetic testing, navigating variants of uncertain significance, educating on extrarenal features of hereditary kidney disease, facilitating cascade testing, providing post-test education about testing results, and assisting with family planning. Genetic counselors can partner with the nephrologist and provide the knowledge needed to maximize the use of genetic testing for patients for nephrology consultation. Genetic counseling is more than an element or extension of genetic testing; it is a dynamic, shared conversation between the patient and the genetic counselor where concerns, sentiments, information, and education are exchanged, and value-based decision making is facilitated.

Implementation of a culturally competent APOL1 genetic testing programme into living donor evaluation: A two-site, non-randomised, pre-post trial design

INTRODUCTION

While living donor (LD) kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for patients with kidney failure, LDs assume a higher risk of future kidney failure themselves. LDs of African ancestry have an even greater risk of kidney failure post-donation than White LDs. Because evidence suggests that Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) risk variants contribute to this greater risk, transplant nephrologists are increasingly using APOL1 genetic testing to evaluate LD candidates of African ancestry. However, nephrologists do not consistently perform genetic counselling with LD candidates about APOL1 due to a lack of knowledge and skill in counselling. Without proper counselling, APOL1 testing will magnify LD candidates' decisional conflict about donating, jeopardising their informed consent. Given cultural concerns about genetic testing among people of African ancestry, protecting LD candidates' safety is essential to improve informed decisions about donating. Clinical 'chatbots', mobile apps that provide genetic information to patients, can improve informed treatment decisions. No chatbot on APOL1 is available and no nephrologist training programmes are available to provide culturally competent counselling to LDs about APOL1. Given the shortage of genetic counsellors, increasing nephrologists' genetic literacy is critical to integrating genetic testing into practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using a non-randomised, pre-post trial design in two transplant centres (Chicago, IL, and Washington, DC), we will evaluate the effectiveness of culturally competent APOL1 testing, chatbot and counselling on LD candidates' decisional conflict about donating, preparedness for decision-making, willingness to donate and satisfaction with informed consent and longitudinally evaluate the implementation of this intervention into clinical practice using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will create a model for APOL1 testing of LDs of African ancestry, which can be implemented nationally via implementation science approaches. APOL1 will serve as a model for integrating culturally competent genetic testing into transplant and other practices to improve informed consent. This study involves human participants and was approved by Northwestern University IRB (STU00214038). Participants gave informed consent to participate in the study before taking part.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04910867. Registered 8 May 2021, https://register.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000AWZ6&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0001PPF&ts=7&cx=-8jv7m2 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04999436. Registered 5 November 2021, https://register.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000AYWW&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0001PPF&ts=11&cx=9tny7v.

HIV-Associated Nephropathy in 2022

Background

HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN) is a renal parenchymal disease that occurs exclusively in people living with HIV. It is a serious kidney condition that may possibly lead to end-stage kidney disease, particularly in the HIV-1 seropositive patients.

Summary

The African-American population has increased susceptibility to this comorbidity due to a strong association found in the APOL1 gene, specifically two missense mutations in the G1 allele and a frameshift deletion in the G2 allele, although a "second-hit" event is postulated to have a role in the development of HIVAN. HIVAN presents with proteinuria, particularly in the nephrotic range, as with other kidney diseases. The diagnosis requires biopsy and typically presents with collapsing subtype focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and microcyst formation in the tubulointerstitial region. Gaps still exist in the definitive treatment of HIVAN - concurrent use of antiretroviral therapy and adjunctive management with like renal-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, steroids, or renal replacement therapy showed benefits.

Key Message

This study reviews the current understanding of HIVAN including its epidemiology, mechanism of disease, related genetic factors, clinical profile, and pathophysiologic effects of management options for patients.

Apolipoprotein L1 Opinions of African American Living Kidney Donors, Kidney Transplant Patients, and Nonpatients

INTRODUCTION

The discovery of apolipoprotein L1 (ApoL1) has raised important ethical and clinical questions about genetic testing in the context of living and deceased kidney donation. Largely missing from this discussion are the perspectives of those African Americans (AA) most likely to be impacted by ApoL1 testing.

METHODS

We surveyed 331 AA potential and former living kidney donors (LKDs), kidney transplant candidates and recipients, and nonpatients at three United States transplant programs about their ApoL1 testing attitudes.

RESULTS

Overall, 72% felt that transplant programs should offer ApoL1 testing to AA potential LKDs. If a potential LKD has the high-risk genotype, 79% felt that the LKD should be allowed to make their own donation decision or participate in shared decision-making with transplant doctors. More than half of the potential LKDs (58%) would undergo ApoL1 testing and 81% of former LKDs would take the test now if offered. Most transplant candidates expressed a low likelihood of accepting a kidney from a LKD (79%) or a deceased donor (67%) with the high-risk genotype.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong support among LKDs and transplant patients for ApoL1 testing when evaluating potential kidney donors of African ancestry. Inclusion of AA stakeholders in developing guidelines and educational programs for ApoL1 testing is critical.

Impact of education on APOL1 testing attitudes among prospective living kidney donors

It is unknown how providing prospective living donors with information about APOL1, including the benefits and drawbacks of testing, influences their desire for testing. In this study, we surveyed 102 participants with self-reported African ancestry and positive family history of kidney disease, recruited from our nephrology waiting room. We assessed views on APOL1 testing before and after presentation of a set of potential benefits and drawbacks of testing and quantified the self-reported level of influence individual benefits and drawbacks had on participants' desire for testing in the proposed context of living donation. The majority of participants (92%) were aware of organ donation and more than half (56%) had considered living donation. And though we found no significant change in response following presentation of the potential benefits and the drawbacks of APOL1 testing by study end significance, across all participants, "becoming aware of the potential risk of kidney disease among your immediate family" was the benefit with the highest mean influence (3.3±1.4), while the drawback with the highest mean influence (2.9±1.5) was "some transplant centers may not allow you to donate to a loved one". This study provides insights into the priorities of prospective living donors and suggests concern for how the information affects family members may strongly influence desires for testing. It also highlights the need for greater community engagement to gain a deeper understanding of the priorities that influence decision making on APOL1 testing.

Practice Patterns in the Acceptance of Medically Complex Living Kidney Donors with Obesity, Hypertension, Family History of Kidney Disease, or Donor-Recipient Age Discrepancy

Background  To assess the practice patterns of the acceptance of medically complex living kidney donors (MCLKDs).

Methods  We distributed a survey to nephrologists and transplant surgeons (TS) across the world through major international transplant societies. The survey contained questions regarding obesity, abnormal blood glucose profile, mild hypertension, donor-recipient age discrepancy, or family history of kidney disease of unknown etiology.

Results  In total, 239 respondents from 29 countries (42% were nephrologists and 58% were TS).

Most respondents would allow donations from obese donors, especially if they intended to lose weight but would be cautious if these donors had abnormal blood glucose or family history of diabetes mellitus. In hypertensive donors, future pregnancy plans mattered in decisions regarding the acceptance of female donors. Most respondents would allow young donors but would be more cautious if they had a future risk of hypertension or a family history of kidney disease of unknown etiology. They would also allow donations from an older person if prolonged waiting time was anticipated. We found multiple areas of consensus of practice among the diverse members of international transplant societies, with some interesting variations among nephrologists and TS.

Conclusions  This survey highlights the practice patterns of the acceptance of MCLKDs among the international community. In the absence of clear guidelines, this survey provides additional information to counsel kidney donors with these conditions.

Sequential genetic testing of living-related donors for inherited renal disease to promote informed choice and enhance safety of living donation

Living kidney donors (LKDs) with a family history of renal disease are at risk of kidney disease as compared to LKDs without such history suggesting that some LKDs may be pre-symptomatic for monogenic kidney disease. LKDs with related transplant candidates whose kidney disease was considered genetic in origin were selected for genetic testing. In each case, the transplant candidate was first tested to verify the genetic diagnosis. A genetic diagnosis was confirmed in 12 of 24 transplant candidates (ADPKD-PKD1: 6, ALPORT-COL4A3: 2, ALPORT-COL4A5: 1: nephronophthisis-SDCCAG8: 1; CAKUT-HNF1B and ADTKD-MUC1: 1 each) and 2 had variants of unknown significance (VUS) in phenotype-relevant genes. Focused genetic testing was then done in 20 of 34 LKDs. 12 LKDs screened negative for the familial variant and were permitted to donate; seven screened positive and were counseled against donation. One, the heterozygous carrier of a recessive disorder was also cleared. Six of seven LKDs with a family history of ADPKD were under 30 years and in 5, by excluding ADPKD, allowed donation to safely proceed. The inclusion of genetic testing clarified the diagnosis in recipient candidates, improving safety or informed decision-making in LKDs.

Disparities in living donation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Living organ donation provides improved access to transplantation, thereby shortening transplant wait times and allowing for more deceased organ transplants. However, disparity in access to living donation has resulted in decreased rates of living donor transplants for some populations of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Though there have been marked improvements in deceased donor equity, there are still challenges as it relates to gender, racial/ethnic, and socio-economic disparity. Improvements in living donation rates in Hispanic and Asian populations are tempered by challenges in African American rates of organ donation. Socio-economic disparity may drive gender disparities in organ donation resulting in disproportionate female living donors. Tailored approaches relating to language-specific interventions as well as directed educational efforts have helped mitigate disparity. Additionally, the use of apolipoprotein1 testing and modifications of glomerular filtration rate calculators may improve rates of African American donation. This review will evaluate recent data in living donor disparity as well as highlight successes in mitigating disparity.

SUMMARY

Though there are still challenges in living donor disparity, many efforts at tailoring education and access as well as modifying living donor evaluation and identifying systemic policy changes may result in improvements in living donation rates.

Outcomes of Living Kidney Donor Candidate Evaluations in the Living Donor Collective Pilot Registry

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background.

Gaps in our knowledge of long-term outcomes affect decision making for potential living kidney donors.

Methods.

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was asked to determine the feasibility of a candidate registry.

Results.

Ten living kidney donor programs evaluated 2107 consecutive kidney donor candidates; 2099 of 2107 (99.6%) completed evaluations, 1578 of 2099 (75.2%) had a decision, and 790 of 1578 (50.1%) were approved to donate as of March 12, 2020. By logistic regression, candidates most likely to be approved were married or had attended college or technical school; those least likely to be approved had ≥1 of the following characteristics: Black race, history of cigarette smoking, and higher blood pressure, higher triglycerides, or higher urine albumin-to-creatinine ratios. Reasons for 617 candidates not being approved included medical issues other than chronic kidney disease risk (25.3%), chronic kidney disease risk (18.5%), candidate withdrawal (15.2%), recipient reason (13.6%), anatomical risk to the recipient (10.3%), noneconomic psychosocial (10.3%), economic (0.5%), and other reasons (6.4%).

Conclusions.

These results suggest that a comprehensive living donor registry is both feasible and necessary to assess long-term outcomes that may inform decision making for future living donor candidates. There may be socioeconomic barriers to donation that require more granular identification so that active measures can address inequities. Some candidates who did not donate may be suitable controls for discerning the appropriateness of acceptance decisions and the long-term outcomes attributable to donation. We anticipate that these issues will be better identified with modifications to the data collection and expansion of the registry to all centers over the next several years.

Association Between Donor-Recipient Biological Relationship and Allograft Outcomes After Living Donor Kidney Transplant

IMPORTANCE

The proportion of living donor kidney transplants from donors unrelated to their recipients is increasing in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between donor-recipient biological relationship and allograft survival after living donor kidney transplant.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data on US adult living donor kidney transplants (n = 86 154) performed from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2014, excluding cases in which recipients previously received a kidney transplant (n = 10 342) or key data were missing (n = 2832). Last follow-up was March 20, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Donor-recipient biological relationship.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was death-censored allograft failure. Univariate and multivariable time-to-event analyses were performed for death-censored allograft failure for the overall cohort, then separately for recipients with and without primary diagnoses of cystic kidney disease and for transplants from African American and non-African American donors.

RESULTS

Among the 72 980 transplant donor and recipients included in the study (median donor age, 41 years; interquartile range [IQR], 32-50 years; 43 990 [60%] female; 50 014 [69%] White), 43 174 (59%) donors and recipients were biologically related and 29 806 (41%) were unrelated. Donors related to their recipients were younger (median [IQR] age, 39 [31-48] vs 44 [35-52] years) and less likely to be female (24 848 [58%] vs 19 142 [64%]) or White (26 933 [62%] vs 23 081 [77%]). Recipients related to their donors were younger (median [IQR] age, 48 [34-58] vs 50 [40-58] years), more likely to be female (18 035 [42%] vs 10 530 [35%]), and less likely to have cystic kidney disease (2530 [6%] vs 4600 [15%]). Related pairs had fewer HLA mismatches overall (median [IQR], 3 [2-3] vs 5 [4-5]). After adjustment for HLA mismatches, donor and recipient characteristics, and transplant era, donor-recipient biological relationship was associated with higher death-censored allograft failure (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; P = .03). When stratified by primary disease, this association persisted only for recipients without cystic kidney disease. When stratified by donor race, this association persisted only for transplants from African American donors.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, living donor kidney transplants from donors biologically related to their recipients had higher rates of allograft failure than transplants from donors unrelated to their recipients after HLA matching was accounted for. Further study is needed to determine which genetic or socioenvironmental factors are associated with this finding.

Opinions of African American adults about the use of apolipoprotein L1 (ApoL1) genetic testing in living kidney donation and transplantation

Apolipoprotein L1 (ApoL1) predictive genetic testing for kidney disease, and its emerging role in transplantation, remains controversial as it may exacerbate underlying disparities among African Americans (AAs) at increased risk. We conducted an online simulation among AAs (N = 585) about interest in ApoL1 testing and its cofactors, under 2 scenarios: as a potential living donor (PLD), and as a patient awaiting transplantation. Most respondents (61%) expressed high interest in genetic testing as a PLD: age ≥35 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18, 2.60, P = .01), AA identity (aOR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02, 2.72, P = .04), perceived kidney disease risk following donation (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.03, 2.73, P = .03), interest in genetics (aOR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.95, 4.29, P = .001), and genetics self-efficacy (aOR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.54, 3.67, P = .001) were positively associated with ApoL1 test interest. If awaiting transplantation, most (89%) believed that ApoL1 testing should be done on AA deceased donors, and older age (aOR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.03, 3.32, P = .04) and greater interest in genetics (aOR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.41, 4.81, P = .002) were associated with interest in testing deceased donors. Findings highlight strong support for ApoL1 testing in AAs and the need to examine such opinions among PLDs and transplant patients to enhance patient education efforts.

Apolipoprotein L1: role in the evaluation of kidney transplant donors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current state of evidence regarding the role of apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) genotyping in evaluating donors for kidney transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

African ancestry is associated with an increased risk of kidney failure following living donation. Moreover, kidney transplants from African ancestry deceased donors have an increased risk of graft failure. Preliminary evidence suggests that APOL1 genotype may mediate at least a portion of this racial variation, with high-risk APOL1 genotypes defined by presence of two renal risk variants (RRVs). A pilot study 136 African ancestry living donors found that those with APOL1 high-risk genotypes had lower baseline kidney function and faster rates of kidney function decline after donation. To date, three retrospective studies identified a two-to-three times greater risk of allograft failure associated with kidneys from donors with high-risk APOL1 genotype. Active research initiatives seek to address unanswered questions, including reproducibility in large national samples, the role of 'second hits' injuries, and impact of recipient genotype, with a goal to build consensus on applications for policy and practice.

SUMMARY

As evidence evolves, APOL1 genotyping may have applications for organ quality scoring in deceased donor kidney allocation, and for the evaluation and selection of living donor candidates.

Using race in the estimation of glomerular filtration rates: time for a reversal?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bedside estimates of renal function are essential for clinical practice in the modern era and have largely relied on serum creatinine concentrations despite the known drawbacks associated with this choice of biomarker, including the fact that creatinine clearance overestimates the glomerular filtration rate.

RECENT FINDINGS

Initial estimates relied primarily on equations that incorporated factors known to influence creatinine concentrations such as age, sex and anthropometric measures. More recent estimates of glomerular filtration rate have replaced the anthropometric measures with the social construct of race, suggesting that glomerular filtration rates for black individuals are higher at the same concentration of creatinine. This approach has led to large variations in the estimated differences in glomerular filtration rate between black and nonblack individuals in the United States that have not been reproducible, resulting in a plethora of population-specific formulae across the country.

SUMMARY

The introduction of race in estimated glomerular filtration rate equations may have potential unintended negative consequences for the very population with the greatest burden of kidney disease. These potential disadvantages underscore the need to perhaps return to the replacement of race with more objective anthropometric measures without the loss of precision.

APOL1 Long-term Kidney Transplantation Outcomes Network (APOLLO): Design and Rationale

INTRODUCTION

Much of the higher risk for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in African American individuals relates to ancestry-specific variation in the apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1). Relative to kidneys from European American deceased-donors, kidneys from African American deceased-donors have shorter allograft survival and African American living-kidney donors more often develop ESKD. The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-sponsored APOL1 Long-term Kidney Transplantation Outcomes Network (APOLLO) is prospectively assessing kidney allograft survival from donors with recent African ancestry based on donor and recipient APOL1 genotypes.

METHODS

APOLLO will evaluate outcomes from 2614 deceased kidney donor-recipient pairs, as well as additional living-kidney donor-recipient pairs and unpaired deceased-donor kidneys.

RESULTS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, American Society of Transplantation, American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, and nearly all U.S. kidney transplant programs, organ procurement organizations (OPOs), and histocompatibility laboratories are participating in this observational study. APOLLO employs a central institutional review board (cIRB) and maintains voluntary partnerships with OPOs and histocompatibility laboratories. A Community Advisory Council composed of African American individuals with a personal or family history of kidney disease has advised the NIH Project Office and Steering Committee since inception. UNOS is providing data for outcome analyses.

CONCLUSION

This article describes unique aspects of the protocol, design, and performance of APOLLO. Results will guide use of APOL1 genotypic data to improve the assessment of quality in deceased-donor kidneys and could increase numbers of transplanted kidneys, reduce rates of discard, and improve the safety of living-kidney donation.

Variation of ApoL1 Testing Practices for Living Kidney Donors

INTRODUCTION

Tests exist for ApoL1 genetic variants to determine whether a potential donor's kidneys are at increased risk of kidney failure. Variants of the ApoL1 gene associated with increased risk are primarily found in people with West African ancestry. Given uncertainty about clinical implications of ApoL1 test results for living kidney donors and recipients and the lack of uniform guidelines for ApoL1 testing, transplant centers across the United States vary in ApoL1 testing practices.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

(1) What approach do transplant centers take to determine whether prospective donors are of West African ancestry? (2)How do transplant centers engage potential donors during the ApoL1 testing process? (3) What do transplant centers identify as concerns and barriers to ApoL1 testing? and (4) What actions do transplant centers take when a potential donor has 2 ApoL1 risk variants?

DESIGN

We explored the current practices of transplant centers by surveying nephrologists and transplant surgeons at transplant centers evaluating the majority of black living donors in the United States.

RESULTS

About half of these transplant centers offered ApoL1 testing. Of those who offered ApoL1 testing, only half involved the donor in decision-making about donation when the donor has 2 risk variants.

DISCUSSION

Unaddressed differences in the priorities of transplant centers and black living donors may stigmatize black donors and undermine trust in the health-care and organ donation systems. Variation in transplant center testing practices points to the critical need for further research and community engagement to inform the development of guidelines for ApoL1 testing.

Cases in Precision Medicine: APOL1 and Genetic Testing in the Evaluation of Chronic Kidney Disease and Potential Transplant

This article discusses potential indications for genetic testing in an African American patient with chronic kidney disease who is being evaluated for a kidney transplant. Two known risk variants in the APOL1 (apolipoprotein L1) gene predispose to kidney disease and are found almost exclusively in persons of African ancestry. APOL1 risk variants are considered, including whether clinicians should incorporate genetic testing in the screening process for living kidney donors. In addition to APOL1 testing, the role of diagnostic exome sequencing in evaluating potential transplant recipients and donors with a positive family history of kidney disease is discussed.