Citations

Key Points The growing knowledge of single-gene causes of pediatric-onset kidney diseases necessitates a structured application of genetic testing in practice. The clinical application of a combined nephrogenetics approach for management of kidney diseases is not well described in pediatric settings. Real-world application of a kidney genetics workflow highlights clinical value and challenges to be addressed for its successful implementation. Background The expanding knowledge of identifiable genetic contributions to pediatric inherited kidney diseases, and the increasing availability of genetic testing resources necessitates a combined nephrogenetics clinical approach. Although such models are described for adults, the effect of a structured nephrogenetics workflow on children with inherited kidney disease has not been rigorously evaluated. Methods Clinical and genetic data of patients aged younger than 1–21 years over a 10-year period between 2014 and 2024 from a single-center pediatric inherited kidney disease outpatient program were evaluated. Genetic variants were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic and variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Patients were grouped into “informative” or “uninformative” groups based on the effect of genetic test results on disease management and outcomes. Results Of the N =356 patients evaluated for a known or suspected inherited kidney disease, N =188 received clinical genetic testing. Of these, N =147 had an “informative” genetic test affecting at least one positive clinical outcome. Patients with an “informative” genetic test mostly harbored a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant ( N =122). An additional N =25 had a VUS reclassified as a “VUS-of-interest” affecting a positive outcome measure. Genetic test results led to change in clinical diagnosis (reverse phenotyping, 46%), informed specific diagnosis-based treatment (46%), avoided unnecessary immunosuppression (27%) or kidney biopsy (18%), and guided extrarenal evaluation (72%) in patients with an informative test. Patients with a glomerular (odds ratio [OR]=5.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96 to 13.96) or a tubular functional disease (OR=2.17; 95% CI, 1.31 to 5.59) were more likely and those with a structural kidney disease (OR=0.39; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.60) were less likely to receive a genetic test when compared with all other disease categories combined. Conclusions This workflow integrated multidisciplinary care for children with inherited kidney disease and describes a model for actionable clinical care plans after genetic testing. Informative genetic tests were associated with positive outcomes, and notable challenges include access to combined nephrology and genetics expertise for informed testing and an effective result return including VUS interpretation.

AbstractBackgroundBrain amyloid‐β (Aβ) is the pathological hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In logistic disease models, Aβ accumulation is a sigmoid function of time‐since‐disease‐onset (TSDO) (figure 1). Previous positron emission tomography (PET)‐based models vary accumulation onset(t50) and duration(r) globally; capacity(K) and baseline(NS) regionally (Whittington2018). We confirm existing approaches and propose a more powerful ICA‐based approach to quantify disease severity and estimate TSDO.MethodWe used 1071 18F‐florbetapir standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) images from the ADNI‐2 study (adni.loni.usc.edu/data‐samples/data‐types/pet). Images were mapped into MNI space. Averages were extracted using the Harvard‐Oxford brain‐atlas. Whole‐brain tracer‐specific sigmoid parameters (Jack2013) obtained from the literature were used to estimate TSDO.Of 16 models of regional Aβ accumulation (each of the 4 regional sigmoid parameters varied either regionally or globally), the optimal Bayesian information criterion was found with global t50 and r, and regional NS and K (figure 1) with global values r = 6.16y and t50 = 4.10y.Linearised maps of NS and K were obtained by regressing the SUVR maps onto the global sigmoid. We also estimated these maps as independent components, using a 2‐component ICA on the SUVR maps. Both outcomes were used to quantify Aβ accumulation from SUVR images as weighting factors of the accumulation map.We compared the weights from the logistic model and the ICA model in ADNI, using effect size measured with Hedges' g between cognitively normal (CN), subjective memory complaints (SMC), mild cognitive impairment (EMCI/MCI/LMCI) and AD groups. We compared 3 longitudinal visits (N = 112) in the OASIS‐3 study (see www.oasis‐brains.org) with both methods, global SUVR and Centiloid (Klunk2015) using 11C‐PiB PET SUVR images.ResultMaps of accumulation capacity from both models had spatial correlation of 0.86 (figure 2); baseline maps had spatial correlation of 0.95. Hedges' g between ADNI groups was 2.25 for K, and 2.42 for ICA (1.46 for global SUVR). In OASIS‐3, Hedges' g between visits was 1.24 for K, 1.46 for ICA (global SUVR 0.15, Centiloid 0.4).ConclusionWe demonstrate that linear accumulation models can be used to quantify brain Aβ with PET; maps obtained by ICA yield larger effect sizes than the logistic method for differentiating groups and measuring changes between visits.

AbstractBackgroundBrain amyloid‐β (Aβ) is the pathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). In logistic disease models, Aβ accumulation is a sigmoid function of time‐since‐disease‐onset (TSDO) (figure 1). Previous positron emission tomography (PET)‐based models vary accumulation onset(t50) and duration(r) globally; capacity(K) and baseline(NS) regionally (Whittington2018). We confirm existing approaches and propose a more powerful ICA‐based approach to quantify disease severity and estimate TSDO.MethodWe used 1071 18F‐florbetapir standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) images from the ADNI‐2 study (adni.loni.usc.edu/data‐samples/data‐types/pet). Images were mapped into MNI space. Averages were extracted using the Harvard‐Oxford brain‐atlas. Whole‐brain tracer‐specific sigmoid parameters (Jack2013) obtained from the literature were used to estimate TSDO.Of 16 models of regional Aβ accumulation (each of the 4 regional sigmoid parameters varied either regionally or globally), the optimal Bayesian information criterion was found with global t50 and r, and regional NS and K (figure 1) with global values r=6.16y and t50=4.10y.Linearised maps of NS and K were obtained by regressing the SUVR maps onto the global sigmoid. We also estimated these maps as independent components, using a 2‐component ICA on the SUVR maps. Both outcomes were used to quantify Aβ accumulation from SUVR images as weighting factors of the accumulation map.We compared the weights from the logistic model and the ICA model in ADNI, using effect size measured with Hedges' g between cognitively normal (CN), subjective memory complaints (SMC), mild cognitive impairment (EMCI/MCI/LMCI) and AD groups. We compared 3 longitudinal visits (N=112) in the OASIS‐3 study (see www.oasis‐brains.org) with both methods, global SUVR and Centiloid (Klunk2015) using 11C‐PiB PET SUVR images.ResultMaps of accumulation capacity from both models had spatial correlation of 0.86 (figure 2); baseline maps had spatial correlation of 0.95. Hedges' g between ADNI groups was 2.25 for K, and 2.42 for ICA (1.46 for global SUVR). In OASIS‐3, Hedges' g between visits was 1.24 for K, 1.46 for ICA (global SUVR 0.15, Centiloid 0.4).ConclusionWe demonstrate that linear accumulation models can be used to quantify brain Aβ with PET; maps obtained by ICA yield larger effect sizes than the logistic method for differentiating groups and measuring changes between visits.