Practical Considerations for APOL1 Genotyping in the Living Kidney Donor Evaluation

APOL1 nephropathy - a population genetics success story

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

More than a decade ago, apolipoprotein L1 ( APOL1 ) risk alleles designated G1 and G2, were discovered to be causally associated with markedly increased risk for progressive kidney disease in individuals of recent African ancestry. Gratifying progress has been made during the intervening years, extending to the development and clinical testing of genomically precise small molecule therapy accompanied by emergence of RNA medicine platforms and clinical testing within just over a decade.

RECENT FINDINGS

Given the plethora of excellent prior review articles, we will focus on new findings regarding unresolved questions relating mechanism of cell injury with mode of inheritance, regulation and modulation of APOL1 activity, modifiers and triggers for APOL1 kidney risk penetrance, the pleiotropic spectrum of APOL1 related disease beyond the kidney - all within the context of relevance to therapeutic advances.

SUMMARY

Notwithstanding remaining controversies and uncertainties, promising genomically precise therapies targeted at APOL1 mRNA using antisense oligonucleotides (ASO), inhibitors of APOL1 expression, and small molecules that specifically bind and inhibit APOL1 cation flux are emerging, many already at the clinical trial stage. These therapies hold great promise for mitigating APOL1 kidney injury and possibly other systemic phenotypes as well. A challenge will be to develop guidelines for appropriate use in susceptible individuals who will derive the greatest benefit.

Reviewing Racial Disparities in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: a Socioecological Approach

Despite kidney transplantation having superior outcomes to dialytic therapies, disparities continue to exist among rates of kidney transplantation between Black and non-Hispanic White patients, which cannot be explained by differences in individual characteristics. To better evaluate the persistent Black/White disparities in living kidney transplantation, we review the extant literature and include the critical factors and recent development in living kidney transplantation in the socioecological approach. We also emphasize the potential vertical and hierarchical associations among factors in the socioecological model. Specifically, this review explores the possibility that the relatively low living kidney transplantation among Blacks may be a consequence of individual, interpersonal, and structural inequalities in various social and cultural dimensions. At the individual level, the Black/White differences in socioeconomic conditions and transplant knowledge may account for the low transplantation rates among Blacks. Interpersonally, the relatively weak social support and poor communication between Black patients and their providers may contribute to disparities. At the structural level, the race-based glomerular filtration rate (GFR) calculation that is widely used to screen Black donors is a barrier to receiving living kidney transplantation. This factor is directly related to structural racism in the health care system but its potential impact on living donor transplantation is underexplored. Finally, this literature review emphasizes the current perspective that a race-free GFR should be considered and a multidisciplinary and interprofessional perspective is necessary to devise strategies and interventions to reduce the Black/White disparities in living donor kidney transplantation in the U.S.

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.

Genetic evaluation of living kidney donor candidates: a review and recommendations for best practices

The growing accessibility and falling costs of genetic sequencing techniques has expanded the utilization of genetic testing in clinical practice. For living kidney donation, genetic evaluation has been increasingly used to identify genetic kidney disease in potential candidates, especially in those of younger ages. However, genetic testing on asymptomatic living kidney donors remains fraught with many challenges and uncertainties. Not all transplant practitioners are aware of the limitations of genetic testing, are comfortable with selecting testing methods, comprehending test results, or providing counsel, and many do not have access to a renal genetic counselor or a clinical geneticist. Although genetic testing can be a valuable tool in living kidney donor evaluation, its overall benefit in donor evaluation has not been demonstrated and it can also lead to confusion, inappropriate donor exclusion, or misleading reassurance. Until more published data become available, this practice resource should provide guidance for centers and transplant practitioners on the responsible use of genetic testing in the evaluation of living kidney donor candidates.

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.

Vignette-Based Reflections to Inform Genetic Testing Policies in Living Kidney Donors

Family history of kidney disease increases risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in donors. Pre-donation genetic testing is recommended in evaluation guidelines and regulatory policy. Collaborating across several institutions, we describe cases to illustrate the utility as well as practical issues in incorporating genetic testing in transplant protocols. Case 1 is from 2009, before pervasive genetic testing. A healthy 27-year-old Caucasian male had an uneventful donor evaluation for his mother, who had early onset ESKD of unclear cause. He participated in paired-exchange kidney donation, but developed progressive kidney disease and gout over the next 10 years. A uromodulin gene mutation (NM_003361.3(UMOD):c.377 G>A p.C126Y) was detected and kidney biopsy showed tubulointerstitial kidney disease. The patient subsequently required kidney transplantation himself. Case 2 was a 36-year-old African American female who had an uneventful kidney donor evaluation. She underwent gene panel-based testing to rule out ApolipoproteinL1 risk variants, for which was negative. Incidentally, a sickle-cell trait (NM_000518.5(HBB):c.20A>T p.Glu7Val) was noted, and she was declined for kidney donation. This led to significant patient anguish. Case 3 was a 26-year-old Caucasian female who underwent panel-based testing because the potential recipient, her cousin, carried a variant of uncertain significance in the hepatocyte nuclear factor-1-β (HNF1B) gene. While the potential donor did not harbor this variant, she was found to have a likely pathogenic variant in complement factor I (NM_000204.4(CFI):c.1311dup:p.Asp438Argfs*8), precluding kidney donation. Our cases emphasize that while genetic testing can be invaluable in donor evaluation, transplant centers should utilize detailed informed consent, develop care pathways for secondary genetic findings, and share experience to develop best practices around genetic testing in donors.

The evolving story of apolipoprotein L1 nephropathy: the end of the beginning

Genetic coding variants in APOL1, which encodes apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1), were identified in 2010 and are relatively common among individuals of sub-Saharan African ancestry. Approximately 13% of African Americans carry two APOL1 risk alleles. These variants, termed G1 and G2, are a frequent cause of kidney disease — termed APOL1 nephropathy — that typically manifests as focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and the clinical syndrome of hypertension and arterionephrosclerosis. Cell culture studies suggest that APOL1 variants cause cell dysfunction through several processes, including alterations in cation channel activity, inflammasome activation, increased endoplasmic reticulum stress, activation of protein kinase R, mitochondrial dysfunction and disruption of APOL1 ubiquitinylation. Risk of APOL1 nephropathy is mostly confined to individuals with two APOL1 risk variants. However, only a minority of individuals with two APOL1 risk alleles develop kidney disease, suggesting the need for a ‘second hit’. The best recognized factor responsible for this ‘second hit’ is a chronic viral infection, particularly HIV-1, resulting in interferon-mediated activation of the APOL1 promoter, although most individuals with APOL1 nephropathy do not have an obvious cofactor. Current therapies for APOL1 nephropathies are not adequate to halt progression of chronic kidney disease, and new targeted molecular therapies are in clinical trials.

This Review summarizes current understanding of the role of APOL1 variants in kidney disease. The authors discuss the genetics, protein structure and biological functions of APOL1 variants and provide an overview of promising therapeutic strategies.

In contrast to other APOL family members, which are primarily intracellular, APOL1 contains a unique secretory signal peptide, resulting in its secretion into plasma.

APOL1 renal risk alleles provide protection from African human trypanosomiasis but are a risk factor for progressive kidney disease in those carrying two risk alleles.

APOL1 risk allele frequency is ~35% in the African American population in the United States, with ~13% of individuals having two risk alleles; the highest allele frequencies are found in West African populations and their descendants.

Cell and mouse models implicate endolysosomal and mitochondrial dysfunction, altered ion channel activity, altered autophagy, and activation of protein kinase R in the pathogenesis of APOL1-associated kidney disease; however, the relevance of these injury pathways to human disease has not been resolved.

APOL1 kidney disease tends to be progressive, and current standard therapies are generally ineffective; targeted therapeutic strategies hold the most promise.

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.

Diagnosis, Education, and Care of Patients with APOL1-Associated Nephropathy: A Delphi Consensus and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

APOL1 variants contribute to the markedly higher incidence of ESKD in Blacks compared with Whites. Genetic testing for these variants in patients with African ancestry who have nephropathy is uncommon, and no specific treatment or management protocol for APOL1-associated nephropathy currently exists.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary, racially diverse group of 14 experts and patient advocates participated in a Delphi consensus process to establish practical guidance for clinicians caring for patients who may have APOL1-associated nephropathy. Consensus group members took part in three anonymous voting rounds to develop consensus statements relating to the following: (1) counseling, genotyping, and diagnosis; (2) disease awareness and education; and (3) a vision for management of APOL1-associated nephropathy in a future when treatment is available. A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was conducted to identify relevant evidence published from January 1, 2009 to July 14, 2020.

RESULTS

The consensus group agreed on 55 consensus statements covering such topics as demographic and clinical factors that suggest a patient has APOL1-associated nephropathy, as well as key considerations for counseling, testing, and diagnosis in current clinical practice. They achieved consensus on the need to increase awareness among key stakeholders of racial health disparities in kidney disease and of APOL1-associated nephropathy and on features of a successful education program to raise awareness among the patient community. The group also highlighted the unmet need for a specific treatment and agreed on best practice for management of these patients should a treatment become available.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary group of experts and patient advocates defined consensus-based guidance on the care of patients who may have APOL1-associated nephropathy.

Apolipoprotein L1 and mechanisms of kidney disease susceptibility

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allelic variants in the gene for apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1), found only in individuals of African ancestry, explain a majority of the excess risk of kidney disease in African Americans. However, a clear understanding how the disease-associated APOL1 variants cause kidney injury and the identity of environmental stressors that trigger the injury process have not been determined.

RECENT FINDINGS

Basic mechanistic studies of APOL1 biochemistry and cell biology, bolstered by new antibody reagents and inducible pluripotent stem cell-derived cell systems, have focused on the cytotoxic effect of the risk variants when APOL1 gene expression is induced. Since the APOL1 variants evolved to alter a key protein-protein interaction with the trypanosome serum resistance-associated protein, additional studies have begun to address differences in APOL1 interactions with other proteins expressed in podocytes, including new observations that APOL1 variants may alter podocyte cytoskeleton dynamics.

SUMMARY

A unified mechanism of pathogenesis for the various APOL1 nephropathies still remains unclear and controversial. As ongoing studies have consistently implicated the pathogenic gain-of-function effects of the variant proteins, novel therapeutic development inhibiting the synthesis or function of APOL1 proteins is moving toward clinical trials.

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.

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.

APOL1 Nephropathy: From Genetics to Clinical Applications

Rates of many types of severe kidney disease are much higher in Black individuals than most other ethnic groups. Much of this disparity can now be attributed to genetic variants in the apoL1 (APOL1) gene found only in individuals with recent African ancestry. These variants greatly increase rates of hypertension-associated ESKD, FSGS, HIV-associated nephropathy, and other forms of nondiabetic kidney disease. We discuss the population genetics of APOL1 risk variants and the clinical spectrum of APOL1 nephropathy. We then consider clinical issues that arise for the practicing nephrologist caring for the patient who may have APOL1 kidney disease.

Clinical Applications of Genetic Discoveries in Kidney Transplantation: a Review

Growth in knowledge of the genetics of kidney disease has revealed that significant percentages of patients with diverse types of nephropathy have causative mutations. Genetic testing is poised to play an increasing role in the care of patients with kidney disease. The role of genetic testing in kidney transplantation is not well established. This review will explore the ways in which genetic testing may be applied to improve the care of kidney transplant recipients and donors.

Living Kidney Donor Evaluation

Long-term safety of living kidney donation (LKD), especially for young donors, has become a real matter of concern in the transplant community and may contribute to creating resistance to LKD. In this context, the criteria that govern living donor donations must live up to very demanding standards as well as adjust to this novel reality. In the first part, we review the existing guidelines published after 2010 and critically examine their recommendations to see how they do not necessarily lead to consistent and universal practices in the choice of specific thresholds for a parameter used to accept or reject a living donor candidate. In the second part, we present the emergence of a new paradigm for LKD developed in the 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines with the introduction of an integrative risk-based approach. Finally, we focus on predonation renal function evaluation, a criteria that remain central in the selection process, and discuss several issues surrounding the donor candidate's glomerular filtration rate assessment.