Predicting the Risk of Progression in Indian ADPKD Cohort using PROPKD Score - A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Progression to kidney failure in ADPKD: the PROPKD score underestimates the risk assessed by the Mayo imaging classification

Autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common inherited kidney disease and fourth leading cause for renal replacement therapy worldwide. Disease progression is tightly linked to genotype, however, factors like genetic modifiers and environmental factors are responsible for a high phenotypic variability within- as well as between families. Individual's risk of progression to kidney failure is assessed using prediction- or risk-assessment tools such as the predicting renal outcomes in ADPKD score (PROPKD score) and the Mayo Imaging Classification (MIC). The PROPKD score encompasses genetic and phenotypic parameters, while the MIC relies on renal imaging, height, and age of patients. Both methods categorize patients into low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk for progression to kidney failure. In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, we calculated the risk of progression to kidney failure in our population and analyzed the agreement between the methods in three separate models with alternating stratification of MIC risk categories. We found a mismatch for risk assessment between the respective risk categories, indicating that the PROPKD score and MIC should not be used interchangeably. Preferably, the MIC should be used as a base for risk assessment and may be enhanced by genotypic and phenotypic information.

Genotype-phenotype of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease in Malta

BACKGROUND

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is characterized by the development of multiple renal cysts causing kidney enlargement and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in half the patients by 60 years of age. The aim of the study was to determine the genetic aetiology in Maltese patients clinically diagnosed with ADPKD and correlate the clinical features.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients over 18 years of age clinically diagnosed with ADPKD were studied using a customized panel of genes that had sufficient evidence of disease diagnosis using next generation sequencing (NGS). The genes studied were PKD1, PKD2, GANAB, DNAJB11, PKHD1 and DZIP1L. Selected variants were confirmed by bidirectional Sanger sequencing with specifically designed primers. Cases where no clinically significant variant was identified by the customized gene panel were then studied by Whole Exome Sequencing (WES). Microsatellite analysis was performed to determine the origin of an identified recurrent variant in the PKD2 gene. Clinical features were studied for statistical correlation with genetic results.

RESULTS

Genetic diagnosis was reached in 49 (82%) of cases studied. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants PKD1 and PKD2 gene were found in 25 and in 23 cases respectively. The relative proportion of genetically diagnosed PKD1:PKD2 cases was 42:38. A pathogenic variant in the GANAB gene was identified in 1 (2%) case. A potentially significant heterozygous likely pathogenic variant was identified in PKHD1 in 1 (2%) case. Potentially significant variants of uncertain significance were seen in 4 (7%) cases of the study cohort. No variants in DNAJB11 and DZIP1L were observed. Whole exome sequencing (WES) added the diagnostic yield by 10% over the gene panel analysis. Overall no clinically significant variant was detected in 6 (10%) cases of the study population by a customized gene panel and WES. One recurrent variant the PKD2 c.709+1G > A was observed in 19 (32%) cases. Microsatellite analysis showed that all variant cases shared the same haplotype indicating that their families may have originated from a common ancestor and confirmed it to be a founder variant in the Maltese population. The rate of decline in eGFR was steeper and progression to ESRD was earlier in cases with PKD1 variants when compared to cases with PKD2 variants. Cases segregating truncating variants in PKD1 showed a significantly earlier onset of ESRD and this was significantly worse in cases with frameshift variants. Overall extrarenal manifestations were commoner in cases segregating truncating variants in PKD1.

CONCLUSIONS

This study helps to show that a customized gene panel is the first-line method of choice for studying patients with ADPKD followed by WES which increased the detection of variants present in the PKD1 pseudogene region. A founder variant in the PKD2 gene was identified in our Maltese cohort with ADPKD. Phenotype of patients with ADPKD is significantly related to the genotype confirming the important role of molecular investigations in the diagnosis and prognosis of polycystic kidney disease. Moreover, the findings also highlight the variability in the clinical phenotype and indicate that other factors including epigenetic and environmental maybe be important determinants in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.