Dahl, Neera K

Key Points Kidney stones are common in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease compared with matched controls with CKD. The increase in imaging seen in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease correlates with the kidney stone burden in these patients. Background Patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) may have more imaging studies than patients with other forms of CKD. We characterized the imaging burden of patients with ADPKD relative to a CKD population to determine which factors lead to increased imaging in patients with ADPKD. Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients seen at Yale Nephrology between January 2012 and January 2021. We collected demographic, clinical, and imaging data through automated query and manual chart review. Eight hundred seven patients with ADPKD were matched to 4035 CKD controls on the basis of criteria of sex, race, ethnicity, CKD stage, hypertension, and diabetes, but not age. The number of abdominal imaging studies were compared between ADPKD and CKD groups, and the effect of kidney stone diagnosis was further evaluated. Chi-square and t tests were used to evaluate demographic variables, and Kruskal Wallis and negative binomial regression models were used to evaluate differences between abdominal imaging studies. Results Patients with ADPKD had a greater number of total abdominal imaging studies ( P < 0.0001), ultrasounds ( P < 0.0001), and magnetic resonance imagings ( P = 0.02) compared with controls. In patients with preserved renal function (eGFR >60 ml/min per m 2 ), these differences persisted. Kidney stones were significantly more common among patients with ADPKD ( P < 0.0001). In multivariable assessment of imaging study counts using a negative binomial model controlling for kidney stones, ADPKD was no longer a significant predictor. In patients with ADPKD, pyelonephritis; cyst complications; lower eGFR; diabetes; coronary artery disease; kidney stones; lower body mass index; and being male, Black, and younger increased the likelihood of having more imaging studies. Conclusions The higher prevalence of abdominal imaging studies in patients with ADPKD correlated with the increased incidence of kidney stones observed in this population.

Patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease benefit from specialized care over their lifetimes, starting with diagnosis of the condition with ongoing discussion of both the renal course and extra-renal issues. Both renal and extra-renal issues may continue to cause major morbidity even after successful kidney transplant or initiation of RRT, and extra-renal disease aspects should always be considered as part of routine management. In this review, we will focus on updates in pain/depression screening, cardiac manifestations, liver and pancreatic cysts, kidney stone management, and genetic counseling. In some instances, we have shared our current clinical practice rather than an evidence-based guideline. We anticipate more standardization of care after the release of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines for management in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease later this year.

Genetic testing in nephrology is becoming increasingly important to diagnose patients and to provide appropriate care. This is especially true for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) because this is a common cause of kidney failure and genetically complex. In addition to the major genes, PKD1 and PKD2 , there are at least six minor loci, and phenotypic, and in some cases, genetic overlap with other cystic disorders. Targeted next-generation sequencing, a low-cost, high-throughput technique, has made routine genetic testing viable in nephrology clinics. Appropriate pre- and post-testing genetic counseling is essential to the testing process. Carefully assessing variants is also critical, with the genetic report classifying variants in accordance with American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guidelines. However, variant of uncertain significance (VUSs) may pose a significant challenge for the ordering clinician. In ADPKD, and particularly within PKD1 , there is high allelic heterogeneity; no single variant is present in more than 2% of families. The Mayo/Polycystic Kidney Disease Foundation variant database, a research tool, is the best current database of PKD1 and PKD2 variants containing over 2300 variants identified in individuals with polycystic kidney disease, but novel variants are often identified. In patients with a high pretest probability of ADPKD on the basis of clinical criteria, but no finding of a pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) variant in a cystic kidney gene, additional evaluation of cystic gene VUS can be helpful. In this case-based review, we propose an algorithm for the assessment of such variants in a clinical setting and show how some can be reassigned to a diagnostic grouping. When assessing the relevance of a VUS, we consider both patient/family-specific and allele-related factors using population and variant databases and available prediction tools, as well as genetic expertise. This analysis plus further family studies can aid in making a genetic diagnosis.

There is a broad phenotypic spectrum of monogenic polycystic kidney diseases (PKDs). These disorders often involve cilia-related genes and lead to the development of fluid-filled cysts and eventual kidney function decline and failure. Preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic (PGT-M) disorders has moved into the clinical realm. It allows prospective parents to avoid passing on heritable diseases to their children, including monogenic PKD. The PGT-M process involves embryo generation through in vitro fertilization, with subsequent testing of embryos and selective transfer of those that do not harbor the specific disease-causing variant(s). There is a growing body of literature supporting the success of PGT-M for autosomal-dominant and autosomal-recessive PKD, although with important technical limitations in some cases. This technology can be applied to many other types of monogenic PKD and ciliopathies despite the lack of existing reports in the literature. PGT-M for monogenic PKD, like other forms of assisted reproductive technology, raises important ethical questions. When considering PGT-M for kidney diseases, as well as the potential to avoid disease in future generations, there are regulatory and ethical considerations. These include limited government regulation and unstandardized consent processes, potential technical errors, high cost and equity concerns, risks associated with pregnancy for mothers with kidney disease, and the impact on all involved in the process, including the children who were made possible with this technology.

Significance Statement Accurate diagnosis of a patient's underlying cause of CKD can influence management and ultimately overall health. The single-arm, interventional, prospective Renasight Clinical Application, Review, and Evaluation study assessed the utility of genetic testing with a 385 gene kidney disease panel on the diagnosis and management of 1623 patients with CKD. Among 20.8% of patients who had positive genetic findings, half resulted in a new or reclassified diagnosis. In addition, a change in management because of genetic testing was reported for 90.7% of patients with positive findings, including treatment changes in 32.9%. These findings demonstrate that genetic testing has a significant effect on both CKD diagnosis and management. Background Genetic testing in CKD has recently been shown to have diagnostic utility with many predicted implications for clinical management, but its effect on management has not been prospectively evaluated. Methods Renasight Clinical Application, Review, and Evaluation RenaCARE (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05846113) is a single-arm, interventional, prospective, multicenter study that evaluated the utility of genetic testing with a broad, 385 gene panel (the Renasight TM test) on the diagnosis and management of adult patients with CKD recruited from 31 US-based community and academic medical centers. Patient medical history and clinical CKD diagnosis were collected at enrollment. Physician responses to questionnaires regarding patient disease categorization and management were collected before genetic testing and 1 month after the return of test results. Changes in CKD diagnosis and management after genetic testing were assessed. Results Of 1623 patients with CKD in 13 predefined clinical disease categories (ages, 18–96; median, 55 years), 20.8% ( n =338) had positive genetic findings spanning 54 genes. Positive genetic findings provided a new diagnosis or reclassified a prior diagnosis in 48.8% of those patients. Physicians reported that genetic results altered the management of 90.7% of patients with a positive genetic finding, including changes in treatment plan, which were reported in 32.9% of these patients. Conclusions Genetic testing with a CKD-focused 385 gene panel substantially refined clinical diagnoses and had widespread implications for clinical management, including appropriate treatment strategies. These data support the utility of broader integration of panels of genetic tests into the clinical care paradigm for patients with CKD. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05846113.

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is a genetic disorder characterized by kidney cyst formation and progressive kidney function loss. Dietary interventions such as caloric restriction, intermittent fasting, and ketogenic diet have recently emerged as potential strategies to induce metabolic reprogramming and slow ADPKD progression. We review the available evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of these interventions in ADPKD. Dietary interventions show promise in managing ADPKD by improving metabolic health and reducing oxidative stress. However, while preclinical studies have shown favorable outcomes, limited clinical evidence supports their effectiveness. In addition, the long-term consequences of these dietary interventions, including their effect on adverse events in patients with ADPKD, remain uncertain. To optimize ADPKD management, patients are advised to follow a dietary regimen that aims to achieve or maintain an ideal body weight and includes high fluid intake, low sodium, and limited concentrated sweets. Caloric restriction seems particularly beneficial for patients with overweight or obesity because it promotes weight loss and improves metabolic parameters. Supplementation with curcumin, ginkgolide B, saponins, vitamin E, niacinamide, or triptolide has demonstrated uncertain clinical benefit in patients with ADPKD. Notably, β -hydroxybutyrate supplements have shown promise in animal models; however, their safety and efficacy in ADPKD require further evaluation through well-designed clinical trials. Therefore, the use of these supplements is not currently recommended for patients with ADPKD. In summary, dietary interventions such as caloric restriction, intermittent fasting, and ketogenic diet hold promise in ADPKD management by enhancing metabolic health. However, extensive clinical research is necessary to establish their effectiveness and long-term effects. Adhering to personalized dietary guidelines, including weight management and specific nutritional restrictions, can contribute to optimal ADPKD management. Future research should prioritize well-designed clinical trials to determine the benefits and safety of dietary interventions and supplementation in ADPKD.

In the past, the treatment of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) has been limited to the management of its symptoms and complications. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved tolvaptan as the first drug treatment to slow kidney function decline in adults at risk of rapidly progressing ADPKD. Full prescribing information approved by the FDA provides helpful guidelines but does not address practical questions that are being raised by nephrologists, internists, and general practitioners taking care of patients with ADPKD, and by the patients themselves. In this review, we provide practical guidance and discuss steps that require consideration before and after prescribing tolvaptan to patients with ADPKD to ensure that this treatment is implemented safely and effectively. These steps include confirmation of diagnosis; identification of rapidly progressive disease; implementation of basic renal protective measures; counseling of patients on potential benefits and harms; exclusions to use; education of patients on aquaresis and its expected consequences; initiation, titration, and optimization of tolvaptan treatment; prevention of aquaresis-related complications; evaluation and management of liver enzyme elevations; and monitoring of treatment efficacy. Our recommendations are made on the basis of published evidence and our collective experiences during the randomized, clinical trials and open-label extension studies of tolvaptan in ADPKD.