Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Genomic medicine for kidney disease

Nature Reviews Nephrology volume 14, pages 83–104 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Key Points

  • Inherited aetiologies are responsible for ∼10% of adult end-stage renal disease and >70% of paediatric hephropathy; sequencing studies of large cohorts will shed further light on genetic contributions across different forms of kidney disease

  • In addition to ending the 'diagnostic odyssey', a genetic diagnosis can provide a deeper understanding of disease pathogenesis, inform prognosis, and guide clinical management

  • Genetic testing is currently recommended for patients with early-onset nephropathy and/or other clinical features consistent with an inherited form of disease as well as for evaluation of living kidney donors

  • Development of disease-specific guidelines and use of population genetic data will help to facilitate accurate clinical sequence interpretation; nevertheless, patient-level assessment results in the continued need for expert judgement

  • The broadening clinical use of genetic testing in nephrology has raised questions regarding the return of results, physician education, testing across different patient subpopulations and many other practical and ethical issues

  • Interdisciplinary research and dialogue will help to address unresolved challenges and inform the creation of best practice guidelines for genomic medicine in nephrology

Abstract

Technologies such as next-generation sequencing and chromosomal microarray have advanced the understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of a variety of renal disorders. Genetic findings are increasingly used to inform the clinical management of many nephropathies, enabling targeted disease surveillance, choice of therapy, and family counselling. Genetic analysis has excellent diagnostic utility in paediatric nephrology, as illustrated by sequencing studies of patients with congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract and steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. Although additional investigation is needed, pilot studies suggest that genetic testing can also provide similar diagnostic insight among adult patients. Reaching a genetic diagnosis first involves choosing the appropriate testing modality, as guided by the clinical presentation of the patient and the number of potential genes associated with the suspected nephropathy. Genome-wide sequencing increases diagnostic sensitivity relative to targeted panels, but holds the challenges of identifying causal variants in the vast amount of data generated and interpreting secondary findings. In order to realize the promise of genomic medicine for kidney disease, many technical, logistical, and ethical questions that accompany the implementation of genetic testing in nephrology must be addressed. The creation of evidence-based guidelines for the utilization and implementation of genetic testing in nephrology will help to translate genetic knowledge into improved clinical outcomes for patients with kidney disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The genomic nephrology workflow: genetic diagnosis and clinical application.

References

  1. Devuyst, O. et al. Rare inherited kidney diseases: challenges, opportunities, and perspectives. Lancet 383, 1844–1859 (2014). This review provides a comprehensive overview of the major Mendelian forms of CKD and examines the existing challenges to and future opportunities for effective clinical detection and management.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Jha, V. et al. Chronic kidney disease: global dimension and perspectives. Lancet 382, 260–272 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wuhl, E. et al. Renal replacement therapy for rare diseases affecting the kidney: an analysis of the ERA-EDTA Registry. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 29 (Suppl. 4), iv1–iv8 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vivante, A. & Hildebrandt, F. Exploring the genetic basis of early-onset chronic kidney disease. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 12, 133–146 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Ingelfinger, J. R., Kalantar-Zadeh, K., Schaefer, F. & World Kidney Day Steering Committee. World Kidney Day 2016: averting the legacy of kidney disease — focus on childhood. Pediatr. Nephrol. 31, 343–348 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Arpegard, J. et al. Comparison of heritability of Cystatin C− and creatinine-based estimates of kidney function and their relation to heritability of cardiovascular disease. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 4, e001467 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Fox, C. S. et al. Genomewide linkage analysis to serum creatinine, GFR, and creatinine clearance in a community-based population: the Framingham Heart Study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 15, 2457–2461 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Moulin, F. et al. A population-based approach to assess the heritability and distribution of renal handling of electrolytes. Kidney Int. 92, 1536–1543 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wilmot, B. et al. Heritability of serum sodium concentration: evidence for sex- and ethnic-specific effects. Physiol. Genomics 44, 220–228 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lieske, J. C., Turner, S. T., Edeh, S. N., Smith, J. A. & Kardia, S. L. Heritability of urinary traits that contribute to nephrolithiasis. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 9, 943–950 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Skrunes, R., Svarstad, E., Reisaeter, A. V. & Vikse, B. E. Familial clustering of ESRD in the Norwegian population. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 9, 1692–1700 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Connaughton, D. M. et al. The Irish Kidney Gene Project — prevalence of family history in patients with kidney disease in Ireland. Nephron 130, 293–301 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. McClellan, W. M. et al. Individuals with a family history of ESRD are a high-risk population for CKD: implications for targeted surveillance and intervention activities. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 53, S100–S106 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Joly, D., Beroud, C. & Grunfeld, J. P. Rare inherited disorders with renal involvement-approach to the patient. Kidney Int. 87, 901–908 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Liapis, H. & Gaut, J. P. The renal biopsy in the genomic era. Pediatr. Nephrol. 28, 1207–1219 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Annual ANZDATA Report (ANZDATA Registry, South Adelaide, Australia, 2016).

  17. European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association. ERA-EDTA Annual Report 2015. ERA-EDTA Registry https://www.era-edta-reg.org/files/annualreports/pdf/AnnRep2015.pdf (2017).

  18. United States Renal Data System. USRDS annual data report: epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States (National Institutes of Health, 2017).

  19. James, M. T., Hemmelgarn, B. R. & Tonelli, M. Early recognition and prevention of chronic kidney disease. Lancet 375, 1296–1309 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. KDIGO. KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. Suppl. 3, 19–62 (2013).

  21. Chong, J. X. et al. The genetic basis of mendelian phenotypes: discoveries, challenges, and opportunities. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 97, 199–215 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith, L. D., Willig, L. K. & Kingsmore, S. F. Whole-exome sequencing and whole-genome sequencing in critically ill neonates suspected to have single-gene disorders. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 6, a023168 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Miller, D. T. et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 86, 749–764 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Guttmacher, A. E. & Collins, F. S. Genomic medicine — a primer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347, 1512–1520 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dixon-Salazar, T. J. et al. Exome sequencing can improve diagnosis and alter patient management. Sci. Transl Med. 4, 138ra178 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee, H. et al. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA 312, 1880–1887 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Valencia, C. A. et al. Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of whole exome sequencing as a diagnostic tool: a Pediatric Center's Experience. Front. Pediatr. 3, 67 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Stokman, M. F. et al. The expanding phenotypic spectra of kidney diseases: insights from genetic studies. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 12, 472–483 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Genomes Project Consortium et al. A global reference for human genetic variation. Nature 526, 68–74 (2015).

  30. Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man. OMIM Gene Map Statistics. OMIM https://www.omim.org/statistics/geneMap (2017).

  31. Goldstein, D. B. et al. Sequencing studies in human genetics: design and interpretation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 460–470 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Katsanis, S. H. & Katsanis, N. Molecular genetic testing and the future of clinical genomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 415–426 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Rehm, H. L. Disease-targeted sequencing: a cornerstone in the clinic. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 295–300 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Petersen, B. S., Fredrich, B., Hoeppner, M. P., Ellinghaus, D. & Franke, A. Opportunities and challenges of whole-genome and -exome sequencing. BMC Genet. 18, 14 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Xue, Y., Ankala, A., Wilcox, W. R. & Hegde, M. R. Solving the molecular diagnostic testing conundrum for Mendelian disorders in the era of next-generation sequencing: single-gene, gene panel, or exome/genome sequencing. Genet. Med. 17, 444–451 (2015). This review compares the major diagnostic genetic testing modalities and provides a generalized algorithm to help select the most appropriate test given a patient's clinical presentation.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Carvalho, C. M. & Lupski, J. R. Mechanisms underlying structural variant formation in genomic disorders. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 224–238 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Watson, C. T., Marques-Bonet, T., Sharp, A. J. & Mefford, H. C. The genetics of microdeletion and microduplication syndromes: an update. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 15, 215–244 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Carter, N. P. Methods and strategies for analyzing copy number variation using DNA microarrays. Nat. Genet. 39, S16–S21 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Schaaf, C. P., Wiszniewska, J. & Beaudet, A. L. Copy number and SNP arrays in clinical diagnostics. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 12, 25–51 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Vermeesch, J. R., Brady, P. D., Sanlaville, D., Kok, K. & Hastings, R. J. Genome-wide arrays: quality criteria and platforms to be used in routine diagnostics. Hum. Mutat. 33, 906–915 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kearney, H. M. et al. American College of Medical Genetics standards and guidelines for interpretation and reporting of postnatal constitutional copy number variants. Genet. Med. 13, 680–685 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Reddy, U. M. et al. Karyotype versus microarray testing for genetic abnormalities after stillbirth. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 2185–2193 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Wapner, R. J. et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 2175–2184 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. South, S. T. et al. ACMG Standards and Guidelines for constitutional cytogenomic microarray analysis, including postnatal and prenatal applications: revision 2013. Genet. Med. 15, 901–909 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Pinto, D. et al. Comprehensive assessment of array-based platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variants. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 512–520 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Alkan, C., Coe, B. P. & Eichler, E. E. Genome structural variation discovery and genotyping. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 363–376 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Harambat, J., van Stralen, K. J., Kim, J. J. & Tizard, E. J. Epidemiology of chronic kidney disease in children. Pediatr. Nephrol. 27, 363–373 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nicolaou, N., Renkema, K. Y., Bongers, E. M., Giles, R. H. & Knoers, N. V. Genetic, environmental, and epigenetic factors involved in CAKUT. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 11, 720–731 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Weber, S. et al. Mapping candidate regions and genes for congenital anomalies of the kidneys and urinary tract (CAKUT) by array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 26, 136–143 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Sanna-Cherchi, S. et al. Copy-number disorders are a common cause of congenital kidney malformations. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 91, 987–997 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Tammimies, K. et al. Molecular diagnostic yield of chromosomal microarray analysis and whole-exome sequencing in children with autism spectrum disorder. JAMA 314, 895–903 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Caruana, G. et al. Copy-number variation associated with congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract. Pediatr. Nephrol. 30, 487–495 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Faure, A. et al. DNA copy number variants: a potentially useful predictor of early onset renal failure in boys with posterior urethral valves. J. Pediatr. Urol. 12, 227.e1–227.e7 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Westland, R. et al. Copy number variation analysis identifies novel CAKUT candidate genes in children with a solitary functioning kidney. Kidney Int. 88, 1402–1410 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Verbitsky, M. et al. Genomic imbalances in pediatric patients with chronic kidney disease. J. Clin. Invest. 125, 2171–2178 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Fu, F. et al. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal multicystic dysplastic kidney via high-resolution whole-genome array. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 31, 1693–1698 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Moreira, J. M., Bouissou Morais Soares, C. M., Teixeira, A. L., Simoes, E. S. A. C. & Kummer, A. M. Anxiety, depression, resilience and quality of life in children and adolescents with pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease. Pediatr. Nephrol. 30, 2153–2162 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Hooper, S. R. et al. Neurocognitive functioning of children and adolescents with mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 6, 1824–1830 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Ruebner, R. L. et al. Neurocognitive dysfunction in children, adolescents, and young adults with CKD. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 67, 567–575 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Verbitsky, M. et al. Genomic disorders and neurocognitive impairment in pediatric CKD. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2016101108 (2017). This article shows that paediatric patients with CKD owing to genomic disorders have poorer neurocognitive function than those without independent of the severity of renal dysfunction. These results suggest that for some patients, neurocognitive impairment and nephropathy have a common genetic basis, informing clinical expectations and management.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Goodwin, S., McPherson, J. D. & McCombie, W. R. Coming of age: ten years of next-generation sequencing technologies. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 333–351 (2016). This Review provides an excellent technical summary of existing and emerging NGS-based approaches for genomic sequencing.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Levy, S. E. & Myers, R. M. Advancements in next-generation sequencing. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 17, 95–115 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Rehm, H. L. Evolving health care through personal genomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 259–267 (2017). This Review highlights the different uses of genetic testing to achieve personalized health care in a range of clinical contexts and discusses key challenges to broadly implementing genomics into everyday medical practice.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Ashley, E. A. Towards precision medicine. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 507–522 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Chakravorty, S. & Hegde, M. Gene and variant annotation for mendelian disorders in the era of advanced sequencing technologies. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 18, 229–256 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Rehm, H. L. et al. ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing. Genet. Med. 15, 733–747 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Wallis, Y. et al. Practice Guidelines for the Evaluation of Pathogenicity and the Reporting of Sequence Variants in Clinical Molecular Genetics (Association for Clinical Genetic Science, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Matthijs, G. et al. Guidelines for diagnostic next-generation sequencing. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 2–5 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Shashi, V. et al. The utility of the traditional medical genetics diagnostic evaluation in the context of next-generation sequencing for undiagnosed genetic disorders. Genet. Med. 16, 176–182 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sadowski, C. E. et al. A single-gene cause in 29.5% of cases of steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 26, 1279–1289 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. McCarthy, H. J. et al. Simultaneous sequencing of 24 genes associated with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 8, 637–648 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Braun, D. A. et al. Prevalence of monogenic causes in pediatric patients with nephrolithiasis or nephrocalcinosis. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 11, 664–672 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Halbritter, J. et al. Fourteen monogenic genes account for 15% of nephrolithiasis/nephrocalcinosis. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 26, 543–551 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Schueler, M. et al. Large-scale targeted sequencing comparison highlights extreme genetic heterogeneity in nephronophthisis-related ciliopathies. J. Med. Genet. 53, 208–214 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Halbritter, J. et al. High-throughput mutation analysis in patients with a nephronophthisis-associated ciliopathy applying multiplexed barcoded array-based PCR amplification and next-generation sequencing. J. Med. Genet. 49, 756–767 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hwang, D. Y. et al. Mutations in 12 known dominant disease-causing genes clarify many congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract. Kidney Int. 85, 1429–1433 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Kohl, S. et al. Mild recessive mutations in six Fraser syndrome-related genes cause isolated congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 25, 1917–1922 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Gross, O. et al. Advances and unmet needs in genetic, basic and clinical science in Alport syndrome: report from the 2015 International Workshop on Alport Syndrome. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 32, 916–924 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Savige, J. et al. Expert guidelines for the management of Alport syndrome and thin basement membrane nephropathy. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 24, 364–375 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Moriniere, V. et al. Improving mutation screening in familial hematuric nephropathies through next generation sequencing. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 25, 2740–2751 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Nicolaou, N. et al. Prioritization and burden analysis of rare variants in 208 candidate genes suggest they do not play a major role in CAKUT. Kidney Int. 89, 476–486 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Heidet, L. et al. Targeted exome sequencing identifies PBX1 as involved in monogenic congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 28, 2901–2914 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Delio, M. et al. Development of a targeted multi-disorder high-throughput sequencing assay for the effective identification of disease-causing variants. PLoS ONE 10, e0133742 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Saudi Mendeliome, G. Comprehensive gene panels provide advantages over clinical exome sequencing for Mendelian diseases. Genome Biol. 16, 134 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Zemojtel, T. et al. Effective diagnosis of genetic disease by computational phenotype analysis of the disease-associated genome. Sci. Transl Med. 6, 252ra123 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Bamshad, M. J. et al. Exome sequencing as a tool for Mendelian disease gene discovery. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 745–755 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gilissen, C., Hoischen, A., Brunner, H. G. & Veltman, J. A. Disease gene identification strategies for exome sequencing. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 20, 490–497 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Eldomery, M. K. et al. Lessons learned from additional research analyses of unsolved clinical exome cases. Genome Med. 9, 26 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Wenger, A. M., Guturu, H., Bernstein, J. A. & Bejerano, G. Systematic reanalysis of clinical exome data yields additional diagnoses: implications for providers. Genet. Med. 19, 209–214 (2016). This study identified newly diagnostic mutations in 10% of patients with initially nondiagnostic WES results, highlighting the importance of regular sequence reanalysis in clinical testing.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Need, A. C., Shashi, V., Schoch, K., Petrovski, S. & Goldstein, D. B. The importance of dynamic re-analysis in diagnostic whole exome sequencing. J. Med. Genet. 54, 155–156 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Bowling, K. M. et al. Genomic diagnosis for children with intellectual disability and/or developmental delay. Genome Med. 9, 43 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. LaDuca, H. et al. Exome sequencing covers >98% of mutations identified on targeted next generation sequencing panels. PLoS ONE 12, e0170843 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Mandelker, D. et al. Navigating highly homologous genes in a molecular diagnostic setting: a resource for clinical next-generation sequencing. Genet. Med. 18, 1282–1289 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Park, J. Y. et al. Clinical exome performance for reporting secondary genetic findings. Clin. Chem. 61, 213–220 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Botstein, D. & Risch, N. Discovering genotypes underlying human phenotypes: past successes for mendelian disease, future approaches for complex disease. Nat. Genet. 33 (Suppl.), 228–237 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Cooper, D. N. et al. Genes, mutations, and human inherited disease at the dawn of the age of personalized genomics. Hum. Mutat. 31, 631–655 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Boycott, K. M., Vanstone, M. R., Bulman, D. E. & MacKenzie, A. E. Rare-disease genetics in the era of next-generation sequencing: discovery to translation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 681–691 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Ku, C. S., Naidoo, N. & Pawitan, Y. Revisiting Mendelian disorders through exome sequencing. Hum. Genet. 129, 351–370 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Taylor, J. C. et al. Factors influencing success of clinical genome sequencing across a broad spectrum of disorders. Nat. Genet. 47, 717–726 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Lupski, J. R. et al. Whole-genome sequencing in a patient with Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 1181–1191 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Saunders, C. J. et al. Rapid whole-genome sequencing for genetic disease diagnosis in neonatal intensive care units. Sci. Transl Med. 4, 154ra135 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Yuen, R. K. et al. Whole-genome sequencing of quartet families with autism spectrum disorder. Nat. Med. 21, 185–191 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Mele, C. et al. Characterization of a new DGKE intronic mutation in genetically unsolved cases of familial atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 10, 1011–1019 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. King, K., Flinter, F. A., Nihalani, V. & Green, P. M. Unusual deep intronic mutations in the COL4A5 gene cause X linked Alport syndrome. Hum. Genet. 111, 548–554 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Carroll, C., Hunley, T. E., Guo, Y. & Cortez, D. A novel splice site mutation in SMARCAL1 results in aberrant exon definition in a child with Schimke immunoosseous dysplasia. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 167A, 2260–2264 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Lo, Y. F. et al. Recurrent deep intronic mutations in the SLC12A3 gene responsible for Gitelman's syndrome. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 6, 630–639 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Cabezas, O. R. et al. Polycystic kidney disease with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia caused by a promoter mutation in phosphomannomutase 2. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 28, 2529–2539 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Belkadi, A. et al. Whole-genome sequencing is more powerful than whole-exome sequencing for detecting exome variants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 5473–5478 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  109. Lelieveld, S. H., Spielmann, M., Mundlos, S., Veltman, J. A. & Gilissen, C. Comparison of exome and genome sequencing technologies for the complete capture of protein-coding regions. Hum. Mutat. 36, 815–822 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Mallawaarachchi, A. C. et al. Whole-genome sequencing overcomes pseudogene homology to diagnose autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 1584–1590 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Watson, C. M. et al. Enhanced diagnostic yield in Meckel–Gruber and Joubert syndrome through exome sequencing supplemented with split-read mapping. BMC Med. Genet. 17, 1 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Carss, K. J. et al. Comprehensive rare variant analysis via whole-genome sequencing to determine the molecular pathology of inherited retinal disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 75–90 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Gilissen, C. et al. Genome sequencing identifies major causes of severe intellectual disability. Nature 511, 344–347 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Stavropoulos, D. J. et al. Whole genome sequencing expands diagnostic utility and improves clinical management in pediatric medicine. NPJ Genomics Med. 1, 15012 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Kirby, A. et al. Mutations causing medullary cystic kidney disease type 1 lie in a large VNTR in MUC1 missed by massively parallel sequencing. Nat. Genet. 45, 299–303 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  116. Blumenstiel, B. et al. Development and validation of a mass spectrometry-based assay for the molecular diagnosis of mucin-1 kidney disease. J. Mol. Diagn. 18, 566–571 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Dewey, F. E. et al. Clinical interpretation and implications of whole-genome sequencing. JAMA 311, 1035–1045 (2014). This article demonstrates the technical and interpretative challenges of using WGS in a clinical setting, highlighting key priorities to be addressed in order for this modality to be employed in patient care.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Chrystoja, C. C. & Diamandis, E. P. Whole genome sequencing as a diagnostic test: challenges and opportunities. Clin. Chem. 60, 724–733 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Braun, D. A. & Hildebrandt, F. Ciliopathies. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 9, a028191 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Renkema, K. Y., Stokman, M. F., Giles, R. H. & Knoers, N. V. Next-generation sequencing for research and diagnostics in kidney disease. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 10, 433–444 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Halbritter, J. et al. Identification of 99 novel mutations in a worldwide cohort of 1,056 patients with a nephronophthisis-related ciliopathy. Hum. Genet. 132, 865–884 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Braun, D. A. et al. Whole exome sequencing identifies causative mutations in the majority of consanguineous or familial cases with childhood-onset increased renal echogenicity. Kidney Int. 89, 468–475 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  123. Gee, H. Y. et al. Whole-exome resequencing distinguishes cystic kidney diseases from phenocopies in renal ciliopathies. Kidney Int. 85, 880–887 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Bierzynska, A. et al. Genomic and clinical profiling of a national nephrotic syndrome cohort advocates a precision medicine approach to disease management. Kidney Int. 91, 937–947 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Heyer, C. M. et al. Predicted mutation strength of nontruncating PKD1 mutations aids genotype–phenotype correlations in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 27, 2872–2884 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Audrezet, M. P. et al. Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: comprehensive mutation analysis of PKD1 and PKD2 in 700 unrelated patients. Hum. Mutat. 33, 1239–1250 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Gunay-Aygun, M. et al. PKHD1 sequence variations in 78 children and adults with autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease and congenital hepatic fibrosis. Mol. Genet. Metab. 99, 160–173 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Krall, P. et al. Cost-effective PKHD1 genetic testing for autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease. Pediatr. Nephrol. 29, 223–234 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Porath, B. et al. Mutations in GANAB, encoding the glucosidase IIalpha subunit, cause autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney and liver disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 1193–1207 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Lu, H. et al. Mutations in DZIP1L, which encodes a ciliary-transition-zone protein, cause autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease. Nat. Genet. 49, 1025–1034 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  131. Gast, C. et al. Collagen (COL4A) mutations are the most frequent mutations underlying adult focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 31, 961–970 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Malone, A. F. et al. Rare hereditary COL4A3/COL4A4 variants may be mistaken for familial focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Kidney Int. 86, 1253–1259 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  133. Verhave, J. C., Bech, A. P., Wetzels, J. F. & Nijenhuis, T. Hepatocyte nuclear factor 1beta-associated kidney disease: more than renal cysts and diabetes. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 27, 345–353 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Clissold, R. L., Hamilton, A. J., Hattersley, A. T., Ellard, S. & Bingham, C. HNF1B-associated renal and extra-renal disease-an expanding clinical spectrum. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 11, 102–112 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Barua, M. et al. Mutations in PAX2 associate with adult-onset FSGS. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 25, 1942–1953 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  136. Huynh Cong, E. et al. A homozygous missense mutation in the ciliary gene TTC21B causes familial FSGS. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 25, 2435–2443 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Bullich, G. et al. Contribution of the TTC21B gene to glomerular and cystic kidney diseases. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 32, 151–156 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Scolari, F., Izzi, C. & Ghiggeri, G. M. Uromodulin: from monogenic to multifactorial diseases. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 30, 1250–1256 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Besbas, N., Ozaltin, F., Jeck, N., Seyberth, H. & Ludwig, M. CLCN5 mutation (R347X) associated with hypokalaemic metabolic alkalosis in a Turkish child: an unusual presentation of Dent's disease. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 20, 1476–1479 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Okamoto, T., Tajima, T., Hirayama, T. & Sasaki, S. A patient with Dent disease and features of Bartter syndrome caused by a novel mutation of CLCN5. Eur. J. Pediatr. 171, 401–404 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Fervenza, F. C. A patient with nephrotic-range proteinuria and focal global glomerulosclerosis. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 8, 1979–1987 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  142. Frishberg, Y. et al. Dent's disease manifesting as focal glomerulosclerosis: is it the tip of the iceberg? Pediatr. Nephrol. 24, 2369–2373 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Demoulin, N. et al. Gitelman syndrome and glomerular proteinuria: a link between loss of sodium-chloride cotransporter and podocyte dysfunction? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 29 (Suppl. 4), iv117–iv120 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Hanevold, C., Mian, A. & Dalton, R. C1q nephropathy in association with Gitelman syndrome: a case report. Pediatr. Nephrol. 21, 1904–1908 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Blanchard, A. et al. Gitelman syndrome: consensus and guidance from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. 91, 24–33 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Lata, S. et al. Whole exome sequencing in adults with chronic kidney disease: a pilot study. Ann. Intern. Med. https://doi.org/10.7326/M17-1319 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  147. Soden, S. E. et al. Effectiveness of exome and genome sequencing guided by acuity of illness for diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders. Sci. Transl Med. 6, 265ra168 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  148. Choi, M. et al. Genetic diagnosis by whole exome capture and massively parallel DNA sequencing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 19096–19101 (2009). This article is among the first papers published showing the utility of WES to achieve a specific diagnosis for patients presenting with nondiagnostic phenotypes.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. Wuttke, M. et al. A COL4A5 mutation with glomerular disease and signs of chronic thrombotic microangiopathy. Clin. Kidney J. 8, 690–694 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  150. Nakata, T. et al. Steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome as the initial presentation of nail-patella syndrome: a case of a de novo LMX1B mutation. BMC Nephrol. 18, 100 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Isnard, P. et al. Karyomegalic interstitial nephritis: a case report and review of the literature. Medicine 95, e3349 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  152. Vivante, A. et al. Exome sequencing discerns syndromes in patients from consanguineous families with congenital anomalies of the kidneys and urinary tract. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 28, 69–75 (2017). This article describes the successful use of WES to achieve a molecular diagnosis in genetically unresolved cases of CAKUT. Notably, 44% of diagnosed patients had mutations in genes not classically associated with CAKUT, highlighting the utility of genome-wide testing to pinpoint a specific — and often unexpected — disease aetiology among patients with nonspecific phenotypes.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Bockenhauer, D. & Bichet, D. G. Urinary concentration: different ways to open and close the tap. Pediatr. Nephrol. 29, 1297–1303 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Emma, F. et al. Nephropathic cystinosis: an international consensus document. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 29 (Suppl. 4), iv87–iv94 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Cochat, P. & Rumsby, G. Primary hyperoxaluria. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 649–658 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Aymé, S. et al. Common elements in rare kidney diseases: conclusions from a kidney disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. 92, 796–808 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  157. Savige, J. et al. Alport syndrome in women and girls. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 11, 1713–1720 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  158. Wang, R. Y., Lelis, A., Mirocha, J. & Wilcox, W. R. Heterozygous Fabry women are not just carriers, but have a significant burden of disease and impaired quality of life. Genet. Med. 9, 34–45 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  159. Terryn, W. et al. Fabry nephropathy: indications for screening and guidance for diagnosis and treatment by the European Renal Best Practice. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 28, 505–517 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Lentine, K. L. et al. KDIGO clinical practice guideline on the evaluation and care of living kidney donors. Transplantation 101, S1–S109 (2017).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Cornec-Le Gall, E. et al. Type of PKD1 mutation influences renal outcome in ADPKD. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 24, 1006–1013 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  162. Hwang, Y. H. et al. Refining genotype–phenotype correlation in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 27, 1861–1868 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Gunay-Aygun, M. et al. Hepatorenal findings in obligate heterozygotes for autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease. Mol. Genet. Metab. 104, 677–681 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  164. Zhang, J. et al. Incomplete distal renal tubular acidosis from a heterozygous mutation of the V-ATPase B1 subunit. Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol. 307, F1063–F1071 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  165. Edwards, N. et al. A novel LMX1B mutation in a family with end-stage renal disease of 'unknown cause'. Clin. Kidney J. 8, 113–119 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Munch, J., Grohmann, M., Lindner, T. H., Bergmann, C. & Halbritter, J. Diagnosing FSGS without kidney biopsy — a novel INF2-mutation in a family with ESRD of unknown origin. BMC Med. Genet. 17, 73 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  167. Ellingford, J. M. et al. Pinpointing clinical diagnosis through whole exome sequencing to direct patient care: a case of Senior-Loken syndrome. Lancet 385, 1916 (2015). This case report illustrates the potential of genetic testing for early diagnosis in a patient with undetected CKD, enabling preplanned initiation of dialysis, appropriate donor selection for renal transplantation, and surveillance of family members at risk.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Quaglia, M. et al. Unexpectedly high prevalence of rare genetic disorders in kidney transplant recipients with an unknown causal nephropathy. Clin. Transplant. 28, 995–1003 (2014). This retrospective study of 911 renal transplant recipients highlights the fact that many patients who progress to ESRD have no clear clinical diagnosis of their renal disease and that rare monogenic forms of nephropathy may be found in a notable fraction of these patients. These findings highlight the potential utility of genetic diagnostics for cases of CKD of unknown aetiology.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Berg, J. S. Genome-scale sequencing in clinical care: establishing molecular diagnoses and measuring value. JAMA 312, 1865–1867 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Lazaridis, K. N. et al. Outcome of whole exome sequencing for diagnostic odyssey cases of an individualized medicine clinic: the Mayo Clinic Experience. Mayo Clin. Proc. 91, 297–307 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  171. ACMG Board of Directors. Clinical utility of genetic and genomic services: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet. Med. 17, 505–507 (2015).

  172. Parker, S. The pooling of manpower and resources through the establishment of European reference networks and rare disease patient registries is a necessary area of collaboration for rare renal disorders. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 29 (Suppl. 4), iv9–iv14 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. European Reference Networks. ERKNet: The European Rare Kidney Disease Reference Network. ERKNet https://www.erknet.org/index.php?id=home (2017).

  174. Krischer, J. P., Gopal-Srivastava, R., Groft, S. C., Eckstein, D. J. & Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network. The Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network's organization and approach to observational research and health outcomes research. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 29 (Suppl. 3), S739–S744 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. UK Kidney Research Consortium. Establishing an infrastructure to support the development and delivery of clinical research in patients with kidney disease. Clin. Med. (Lond.) 15, 415–419 (2015).

  176. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02855268 (2016).

  177. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02795325 (2016).

  178. Alport Syndrome Foundation. AlportSyndrome.org http://alportsyndrome.org/ (2017).

  179. PKD Foundation. PKDCure.org https://pkdcure.org/ (2017).

  180. UKD Foundation. UKDCure.org http://www.ukdcure.org/ (2017).

  181. Hodson, E. M., Wong, S. C., Willis, N. S. & Craig, J. C. Interventions for idiopathic steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome in children. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 10, CD003594 (2016).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Richards, S. et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet. Med. 17, 405–424 (2015). In this article, the American College of Medical Genetics puts forth guidelines for diagnostic sequence interpretation. The lines of evidence and variant classification scheme discussed offer a helpful framework to assess variant pathogenicity; the authors also discuss the importance of integrating a patient's genetic and clinical data to achieve a genetic diagnosis.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  183. MacArthur, D. G. et al. Guidelines for investigating causality of sequence variants in human disease. Nature 508, 469–476 (2014). This article provides general standards for sequence interpretation at both the gene level and variant level and emphasizes the importance of using quantitative methods to enable more accurate and reproducible genetic assessment.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  184. Strande, N. T. & Berg, J. S. Defining the clinical value of a genomic diagnosis in the era of next-generation sequencing. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 17, 303–332 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  185. Parsa, A. et al. Common variants in Mendelian kidney disease genes and their association with renal function. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 24, 2105–2117 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  186. Clemente, M. et al. Hyperinsulinaemic hypoglycaemia, renal Fanconi syndrome and liver disease due to a mutation in the HNF4A gene. Endocrinol. Diabetes Metab. Case Rep. 2017, 16–0133 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Hamilton, A. J. et al. The HNF4A R76W mutation causes atypical dominant Fanconi syndrome in addition to a beta cell phenotype. J. Med. Genet. 51, 165–169 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  188. Bekheirnia, M. R. et al. Whole-exome sequencing in the molecular diagnosis of individuals with congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract and identification of a new causative gene. Genet. Med. 19, 412–420 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  189. Jiang, S. et al. Lack of major involvement of human uroplakin genes in vesicoureteral reflux: implications for disease heterogeneity. Kidney Int. 66, 10–19 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  190. Kelly, H. et al. Uroplakin III is not a major candidate gene for primary vesicoureteral reflux. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 13, 500–502 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  191. Hennekam, R. C. & Biesecker, L. G. Next-generation sequencing demands next-generation phenotyping. Hum. Mutat. 33, 884–886 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  192. Shashi, V. et al. Practical considerations in the clinical application of whole-exome sequencing. Clin. Genet. 89, 173–181 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  193. Lek, M. et al. Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans. Nature 536, 285–291 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  194. Cassa, C. A., Tong, M. Y. & Jordan, D. M. Large numbers of genetic variants considered to be pathogenic are common in asymptomatic individuals. Hum. Mutat. 34, 1216–1220 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  195. Piton, A., Redin, C. & Mandel, J. L. XLID-causing mutations and associated genes challenged in light of data from large-scale human exome sequencing. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 93, 368–383 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  196. Shearer, A. E. et al. Utilizing ethnic-specific differences in minor allele frequency to recategorize reported pathogenic deafness variants. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 95, 445–453 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  197. Abdelhak, S. et al. Clustering of mutations responsible for branchio-oto-renal (BOR) syndrome in the eyes absent homologous region (eyaHR) of EYA1. Hum. Mol. Genet. 6, 2247–2255 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  198. Chang, E. H. et al. Branchio-oto-renal syndrome: the mutation spectrum in EYA1 and its phenotypic consequences. Hum. Mutat. 23, 582–589 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  199. NM_000503.5(EYA1):c.1460C>T (p.Ser487Leu). ClinVar https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/variation/228678/#clinical-assertions (2017).

  200. Smith, R. J. H. Branchiootorenal spectrum disorders. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1380 (2015).

  201. Amendola, L. M. et al. Performance of ACMG-AMP variant-interpretation guidelines among nine laboratories in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 1067–1076 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  202. Yang, S. et al. Sources of discordance among germ-line variant classifications in ClinVar. Genet. Med. 19, 1118–1126 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  203. Safarova, M. S. et al. Variability in assigning pathogenicity to incidental findings: insights from LDLR sequence linked to the electronic health record in 1013 individuals. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 25, 410–415 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  204. Harrison, S. M. et al. Clinical laboratories collaborate to resolve differences in variant interpretations submitted to ClinVar. Genet. Med. 19, 1096–1104 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  205. Strande, N. T. et al. Evaluating the clinical validity of gene–disease associations: an evidence-based framework developed by the Clinical Genome Resource. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 895–906 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  206. Patel, R. Y. et al. ClinGen Pathogenicity Calculator: a configurable system for assessing pathogenicity of genetic variants. Genome Med. 9, 3 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  207. Li, Q. & Wang, K. InterVar: clinical interpretation of genetic variants by the 2015 ACMG-AMP guidelines. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 267–280 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  208. Knoppers, B. M., Zawati, M. H. & Senecal, K. Return of genetic testing results in the era of whole-genome sequencing. Nat. Rev. Genet. 16, 553–559 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  209. Demmer, L. A. & Waggoner, D. J. Professional medical education and genomics. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 15, 507–516 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  210. Meagher, K. M., McGowan, M. L., Settersten, R. A., Fishman, J. R. & Juengst, E. T. Precisely where are we going? Charting the new terrain of precision prevention. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 18, 369–387 (2017). This review examines central ELSIs of expanding genetic testing to a population-wide scale and highlights the need for study of both genetic and environmental determinants of health.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  211. Berg, J. S., Khoury, M. J. & Evans, J. P. Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genet. Med. 13, 499–504 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  212. Burke, W. Genetic tests: clinical validity and clinical utility. Curr. Protoc. Hum. Genet. 81, 9.15.1–9.15.8 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  213. Green, R. C. et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet. Med. 15, 565–574 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  214. Kalia, S. S. et al. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet. Med. 19, 249–255 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  215. van El, C. G. et al. Whole-genome sequencing in health care: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 21, 580–584 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  216. Amendola, L. M. et al. Actionable exomic incidental findings in 6503 participants: challenges of variant classification. Genome Res. 25, 305–315 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  217. Olfson, E. et al. Identification of medically actionable secondary findings in the 1000 Genomes. PLoS ONE 10, e0135193 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  218. Birdwell, K. A. et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for CYP3A5 genotype and tacrolimus dosing. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 98, 19–24 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  219. Relling, M. V. et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines for thiopurine methyltransferase genotype and thiopurine dosing. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89, 387–391 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  220. Hunter, J. E. et al. A standardized, evidence-based protocol to assess clinical actionability of genetic disorders associated with genomic variation. Genet. Med. 18, 1258–1268 (2016). This article gives a systematic workflow to assess the medical actionability of a given genetic disease, which can be used to help determine which results may merit return as medically actionable secondary findings.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  221. O'Daniel, J. M. et al. A survey of current practices for genomic sequencing test interpretation and reporting processes in US laboratories. Genet. Med. 19, 575–582 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  222. Otten, E. et al. Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature. Genet. Med. 17, 668–678 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  223. Pyeritz, R. E. The coming explosion in genetic testing — is there a duty to recontact? N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 1367–1369 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  224. ACMG Board of Directors. Points to consider in the clinical application of genomic sequencing. Genet. Med. 14, 759–761 (2012).

  225. Shahmirzadi, L. et al. Patient decisions for disclosure of secondary findings among the first 200 individuals undergoing clinical diagnostic exome sequencing. Genet. Med. 16, 395–399 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  226. Delikurt, T., Williamson, G. R., Anastasiadou, V. & Skirton, H. A systematic review of factors that act as barriers to patient referral to genetic services. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 23, 739–745 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  227. Cichon, M. & Feldman, G. L. Opportunities to improve recruitment into medical genetics residency programs: survey results of program directors and medical genetics residents. Genet. Med. 16, 413–418 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  228. Plunkett-Rondeau, J., Hyland, K. & Dasgupta, S. Training future physicians in the era of genomic medicine: trends in undergraduate medical genetics education. Genet. Med. 17, 927–934 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  229. Berns, J. S. A survey-based evaluation of self-perceived competency after nephrology fellowship training. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 5, 490–496 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  230. Murray, M. F. Educating physicians in the era of genomic medicine. Genome Med. 6, 45 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  231. Kentwell, M. et al. Mainstreaming cancer genetics: a model integrating germline BRCA testing into routine ovarian cancer clinics. Gynecol. Oncol. 145, 130–136 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  232. Rhodes, A. et al. Minding the genes: a multidisciplinary approach towards genetic assessment of cardiovascular disease. J. Genet. Couns. 26, 224–231 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  233. Green, R. C. et al. Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: accelerating evidence-based practice of genomic medicine. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 1051–1066 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  234. Skirton, H. et al. Genetic education and the challenge of genomic medicine: development of core competences to support preparation of health professionals in Europe. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 18, 972–977 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  235. Gross, O. et al. Safety and efficacy of the ACE-inhibitor ramipril in alport syndrome: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III EARLY PRO-TECT Alport trial in pediatric patients. ISRN Pediatr. 2012, 436046 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  236. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01485978 (2017).

  237. Dumitrescu, L. et al. Genome-wide study of resistant hypertension identified from electronic health records. PLoS ONE 12, e0171745 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  238. Facio, F. M. et al. Motivators for participation in a whole-genome sequencing study: implications for translational genomics research. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 19, 1213–1217 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  239. Hallowell, N. et al. An investigation of patients' motivations for their participation in genetics-related research. J. Med. Ethics 36, 37–45 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  240. US Department of Health and Human Services. How does genetic testing in a research setting differ from clinical genetic testing? Genetics Home Reference https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/testing/researchtesting (2017).

  241. Ferreira-Gonzalez, A. et al. US system of oversight for genetic testing: a report from the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society. Per. Med. 5, 521–528 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  242. Jarvik, G. P. et al. Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 94, 818–826 (2014). This article discusses the practical and ethical questions surrounding the return of medically actionable results to participants in genomic research studies and gives consensus guidelines to help navigate this complex process.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  243. Aronson, S. J. & Rehm, H. L. Building the foundation for genomics in precision medicine. Nature 526, 336–342 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  244. Lyon, G. J. Personalized medicine: bring clinical standards to human-genetics research. Nature 482, 300–301 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  245. Crews, D. C., Liu, Y. & Boulware, L. E. Disparities in the burden, outcomes, and care of chronic kidney disease. Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens. 23, 298–305 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  246. Patzer, R. E. & McClellan, W. M. Influence of race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status on kidney disease. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 8, 533–541 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  247. Webb, B. D. et al. A founder mutation in COL4A3 causes autosomal recessive Alport syndrome in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Clin. Genet. 86, 155–160 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  248. Verlander, P. C. et al. Carrier frequency of the IVS4 + 4 A-->T mutation of the Fanconi anemia gene FAC in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Blood 86, 4034–4038 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  249. Fedick, A., Jalas, C. & Treff, N. R. A deleterious mutation in the PEX2 gene causes Zellweger syndrome in individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish descent. Clin. Genet. 85, 343–346 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  250. Friedman, D. J. & Pollak, M. R. Apolipoprotein L1 and kidney disease in African Americans. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 27, 204–215 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  251. Genovese, G. et al. Association of trypanolytic ApoL1 variants with kidney disease in African Americans. Science 329, 841–845 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  252. Kruzel-Davila, E., Wasser, W. G., Aviram, S. & Skorecki, K. APOL1 nephropathy: from gene to mechanisms of kidney injury. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 31, 349–358 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  253. Kramer, H. J. et al. African ancestry-specific alleles and kidney disease risk in Hispanics/Latinos. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 28, 915–922 (2017). This article demonstrates that the APOL1 risk alleles and/or sickle cell trait are associated with increased CKD risk amongst self-reported Hispanic individuals, but their prevalence varies widely between the Caribbean and non-Caribbean subpopulations owing to differences in genetic ancestry. These findings highlight the importance of detailed consideration of genetic ancestry when assessing the impact of sequence variants on disease risk within a population.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  254. Naik, R. P. et al. Association of sickle cell trait with chronic kidney disease and albuminuria in African Americans. JAMA 312, 2115–2125 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  255. Petrovski, S. & Goldstein, D. B. Unequal representation of genetic variation across ancestry groups creates healthcare inequality in the application of precision medicine. Genome Biol. 17, 157 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  256. Manrai, A. K. et al. Genetic misdiagnoses and the potential for health disparities. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 655–665 (2016). This article describes genetic misdiagnoses amongst African-American patients with suspected familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, highlighting the importance of interpreting sequence data in the context of patients' genetic ancestry.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  257. Need, A. C. & Goldstein, D. B. Next generation disparities in human genomics: concerns and remedies. Trends Genet. 25, 489–494 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  258. Popejoy, A. B. & Fullerton, S. M. Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature 538, 161–164 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  259. Shea, L., Newschaffer, C. J., Xie, M., Myers, S. M. & Mandell, D. S. Genetic testing and genetic counseling among Medicaid-enrolled children with autism spectrum disorder in 2001 and 2007. Hum. Genet. 133, 111–116 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  260. Hann, K. E. J. et al. Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic testing for cancer risk among ethnic minority groups: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 17, 503 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  261. Halbert, C. H., McDonald, J. A., Magwood, G. & Jefferson, M. Beliefs about genetically targeted care in African Americans. J. Natl Med. Assoc. 109, 98–106 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  262. National Institutes of Health. NIH funds precision medicine research with a focus on health disparities. NIH https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-funds-precision-medicine-research-focus-health-disparities (2016).

  263. Kingsmore, S. F. et al. Next-generation community genetics for low- and middle-income countries. Genome Med. 4, 25 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  264. Tekola-Ayele, F. & Rotimi, C. N. Translational genomics in low- and middle-income countries: opportunities and challenges. Public Health Genomics 18, 242–247 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  265. World Health Organization. Community genetics services: report of a WHO consultation on community genetics in low- and middle-income countries (WHO, 2010).

  266. Obrador, G. T. et al. Genetic and environmental risk factors for chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. Suppl. 7, 88–106 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  267. Maltese, P. E. et al.Genetic tests for low- and middle-income countries: a literature review. Genet. Mol. Res. 16, gmr16019466 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  268. Bogershausen, N. et al. An unusual presentation of Kabuki syndrome with orbital cysts, microphthalmia, and cholestasis with bile duct paucity. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 170A, 3282–3288 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  269. Moosa, S. et al. Novel IFT122 mutations in three Argentinian patients with cranioectodermal dysplasia: expanding the mutational spectrum. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 170A, 1295–1301 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  270. Osafo, C. et al. Human Heredity and Health (H3) in Africa Kidney Disease Research Network: a focus on methods in sub-Saharan Africa. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 10, 2279–2287 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  271. Illumina. H3Africa Consortium Array Available Soon. Illumina https://www.illumina.com/company/news-center/feature-articles/h3africa-consortium-array-available-soon-.html (2016).

  272. Bredenoord, A. L., de Vries, M. C. & van Delden, H. The right to an open future concerning genetic information. Am. J. Bioeth. 14, 21–23 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  273. Wilfond, B. S., Fernandez, C. V. & Green, R. C. Disclosing secondary findings from pediatric sequencing to families: considering the “benefit to families”. J. Law Med. Eth. 43, 552–558 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  274. Committee on Bioethics et al. Ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Pediatrics 131, 620–622 (2013).

  275. Ross, L. F. et al. Technical report: ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Genet. Med. 15, 234–245 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  276. Hufnagel, S. B., Martin, L. J., Cassedy, A., Hopkin, R. J. & Antommaria, A. H. Adolescents' preferences regarding disclosure of incidental findings in genomic sequencing that are not medically actionable in childhood. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 170A, 2083–2088 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  277. Otlowski, M., Taylor, S. & Bombard, Y. Genetic discrimination: international perspectives. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 13, 433–454 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  278. Joly, Y., Feze, I. N., Song, L. & Knoppers, B. M. Comparative approaches to genetic discrimination: chasing shadows? Trends Genet. 33, 299–302 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  279. Yoshizawa, G. et al. ELSI practices in genomic research in East Asia: implications for research collaboration and public participation. Genome Med. 6, 39 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  280. Joly, Y., Ngueng Feze, I. & Simard, J. Genetic discrimination and life insurance: a systematic review of the evidence. BMC Med. 11, 25 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  281. Council of Europe. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to the member States on the processing of personal health-related data for insurance purposes, including data resulting from genetic tests. Quotidiano Sanita http://www.quotidianosanita.it/allegati/allegato2027308.pdf (2016).

  282. Zlotogora, J. Genetics and genomic medicine in Israel. Mol. Genet. Genomics Med. 2, 85–94 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  283. Association of British Insurers. Concordat and moratorium on genetics and insurance. ABI https://www.abi.org.uk/globalassets/sitecore/files/documents/publications/public/2014/genetics/concordat-and-moratorium-on-genetics-and-insurance.pdf (2014).

  284. Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association. Industry code on genetics testing information for insurance underwriting. CLHIA http://www.clhia.ca/domino/html/clhia/clhia_lp4w_lnd_webstation.nsf/page/E79687482615DFA485257D5D00682400!OpenDocument (2017).

  285. Hudson, K. L. & Pollitz, K. Undermining genetic privacy? Employee wellness programs and the law. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 1–3 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  286. Manolio, T. A. et al. Bedside back to bench: building bridges between basic and clinical genomic research. Cell 169, 6–12 (2017). This article highlights key priorities for integrating genomic research with clinical care and proposes collaborative efforts between researchers, clinicians, and patients to help address them.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  287. Tzur, S. et al. Missense mutations in the APOL1 gene are highly associated with end stage kidney disease risk previously attributed to the MYH9 gene. Hum. Genet. 128, 345–350 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  288. McLean, N. O., Robinson, T. W. & Freedman, B. I. APOL1 gene kidney risk variants and cardiovascular disease: getting to the heart of the matter. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 70, 281–289 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  289. Freedman, B. I. et al. Association of APOL1 variants with mild kidney disease in the first-degree relatives of African American patients with non-diabetic end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int. 82, 805–811 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  290. Divers, J. et al. Gene–gene interactions in APOL1-associated nephropathy. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 29, 587–594 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  291. Kopp, J. B. et al. APOL1 genetic variants in focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and HIV-associated nephropathy. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 22, 2129–2137 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  292. Kasembeli, A. N. et al. APOL1 risk variants are strongly associated with HIV-associated nephropathy in black South Africans. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 26, 2882–2890 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  293. Newell, K. A. et al. Integrating APOL1 gene variants into renal transplantation: considerations arising from the American Society of Transplantation Expert Conference. Am. J. Transplant. 17, 901–911 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  294. Harewood, L. et al. Bilateral renal agenesis/hypoplasia/dysplasia (BRAHD): postmortem analysis of 45 cases with breakpoint mapping of two de novo translocations. PLoS ONE 5, e12375 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  295. Mansouri, M. R. et al. Molecular genetic analysis of a de novo balanced translocation t(6;17)(p21.31;q11.2) associated with hypospadias and anorectal malformation. Hum. Genet. 119, 162–168 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  296. Holmberg, C. & Jalanko, H. Congenital nephrotic syndrome and recurrence of proteinuria after renal transplantation. Pediatr. Nephrol. 29, 2309–2317 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  297. Patrakka, J. et al. Recurrence of nephrotic syndrome in kidney grafts of patients with congenital nephrotic syndrome of the Finnish type: role of nephrin. Transplantation 73, 394–403 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  298. Ashraf, S. et al. ADCK4 mutations promote steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome through CoQ10 biosynthesis disruption. J. Clin. Invest. 123, 5179–5189 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  299. Heeringa, S. F. et al. COQ6 mutations in human patients produce nephrotic syndrome with sensorineural deafness. J. Clin. Invest. 121, 2013–2024 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  300. Kashtan, C. Alport syndrome and thin basement membrane nephropathy. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1207/ (2015).

  301. Bekheirnia, M. R. et al. Genotype-phenotype correlation in X-linked Alport syndrome. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 21, 876–883 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  302. Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes Glomerulonephritis Work Group. KDIGO clinical practice guideline for glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. Suppl. 2, 139–274 (2012).

  303. Mitchel, M. W. et al. 17q12 recurrent deletion syndrome. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK401562 (2016).

  304. Bollee, G. et al. Adenine phosphoribosyltransferase deficiency. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 7, 1521–1527 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  305. Runolfsdottir, H. L., Palsson, R., Agustsdottir, I. M., Indridason, O. S. & Edvardsson, V. O. Kidney disease in adenine phosphoribosyltransferase deficiency. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 67, 431–438 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  306. Kirmani, S. & Young, W. F. Hereditary paraganglioma-pheochromocytoma syndromes. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/books/NBK1548 (2014).

  307. Rednam, S. P. et al. Von Hippel-Lindau and hereditary pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma syndromes: clinical features, genetics, and surveillance recommendations in childhood. Clin. Cancer Res. 23, e68–e75 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  308. Bali, D. S., Chen, Y. T., Austin, S. & Goldstein, J. L. Glycogen storage disease type I. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/books/NBK1312 (2016).

  309. Froissart, R. et al. Glucose-6-phosphatase deficiency. Orphanet J. Rare Dis. 6, 27 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work of the authors was supported by grants from the US National Institutes of Health (1F30DK116473 (E.E.G.), 2R01DK080099, and 5U01HG008680 (A.G.G.)), and the American Society of Nephrology Foundation for Kidney Research Donald E. Wesson Research Fellowship (H.M.R.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Nephrology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, 1150 Saint Nicholas Avenue, Russ Berrie Pavilion #412C, New York, 10032, New York, USA

    Emily E. Groopman, Hila Milo Rasouly & Ali G. Gharavi

Authors
  1. Emily E. Groopman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hila Milo Rasouly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali G. Gharavi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed substantially to the research and writing process, including discussing the content of the article and reviewing and editing the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali G. Gharavi.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

PowerPoint slides

Glossary

Heritability

The proportion of interindividual variation in a given trait that is due to genetic factors.

Chromosomal microarray

(CMA). A technique to detect copy number variants by hybridizing a patient's DNA to probes corresponding to various regions of the genome; the hybridization pattern for a given probe reflects the number of copies that the patient has of that genomic region.

Next-generation sequencing

(NGS). Simultaneous sequencing of multiple DNA segments; also known as massively parallel sequencing.

Genome

The entirety of an individual's DNA. The genome is divided into smaller protein-coding segments called genes.

Genetic testing

The assessment of DNA sequence variation. Genetic testing can be performed at the level of a single variant, a gene, multiple genes, or the entire genome.

Genomic medicine

An emerging branch of medicine that uses information about an individual's genome to inform their clinical care, including diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.

Genetic diagnosis

The hereditary aetiology of a patient's presentation, as identified by genetic testing.

Single-nucleotide variants

(SNVs). Changes of single bases (nucleotides) in a DNA sequence. SNVs can lead to an altered amino acid sequence in the encoded protein (nonsynonymous variants) or leave the sequence unchanged (synonymous variants).

Insertions or deletions

The gain or loss of bases in a DNA sequence, resulting in an altered amino acid sequence in the encoded protein.

Structural variants

Large (≥1 kb) DNA variants that include balanced (for example, inversions or reciprocal translocations) and imbalanced alterations (for example, copy number variants).

Sanger sequencing

A DNA sequencing method that uses labelled chain-terminating dideoxynucleotides to identify the nucleotides in the DNA strand being sequenced. This method generates a sequence chromatogram that can be analysed to detect genetic variants.

Targeted next-generation sequencing panels

Next-generation-sequencing-based analysis of a set of genes commonly associated with the patient's clinically suspected phenotype.

Whole-exome sequencing

(WES). Next-generation-sequencing-based analysis of the exome — the protein-coding regions of the genome that contain the majority of known causal variants for Mendelian disorders.

Whole-genome sequencing

(WGS). Next-generation-sequencing-based analysis of the whole genome, including protein-coding and non-coding regions.

Karyotyping

A technique used to detect large genomic imbalances through visual inspection of stained chromosomes using a microscope at high magnification (×1,000).

Copy number variants

(CNVs). Structural variants that results in gain or loss of DNA at the relevant locus.

Array comparative genomic hybridization

A type of chromosomal microarray in which patient and control DNA are labelled with different coloured fluorescent dyes and cohybridized to a single DNA probe in order to directly compare copy number at that genomic region.

Single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays

A type of chromosomal microarray in which a patient's DNA is hybridized to DNA probes corresponding to single-nucleotide polymorphisms and the hybridization pattern is compared with previously analysed controls. This type of chromosomal microarray can detect a patient's genotype in addition to copy number at a given genomic region.

Balanced chromosomal rearrangements

Chromosomal rearrangements that do not cause a net loss or gain of genetic material.

Sequencing coverage and depth

In this Review, sequencing coverage denotes the percentage of bases in the DNA region targeted by sequencing that is sequenced a given number of times. Sequencing depth refers to the average number of times that a given nucleotide is read in a set of DNA sequence reads. Higher coverage and depth means that more of the targeted genomic region has been sampled a greater number of times, increasing the accuracy of the resulting data.

Secondary findings

Genetic findings that are not related to the primary indication for testing; also called incidental findings.

Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification

A technique in which patient DNA is hybridized to two oligonucleotide probes, corresponding to the 5′ and 3′ ends of the DNA, which are then ligated and PCR-amplified using a fluorescently labelled primer. The resulting PCR products are size-separated using capillary electrophoresis, and the fluorescent signal intensity is compared between the probe and the patient's DNA to determine copy number at that region. In addition to identifying copy number variants, this technique can detect mosaicism for a copy number variant and DNA methylation status.

Variants of uncertain significance

(VUSs). Genetic variants that have an unclear association with a given disorder owing to insufficient or conflicting evidence.

Phenotypic expansions

Phenotypic expansions occur when mutations in a gene that is classically associated with one phenotype are demonstrated to cause another clinically distinct phenotype.

Allele

Within each chromosome, the DNA sequence at a given region can vary; these variants are alleles.

Missense variant

Single-nucleotide variant that leads to the replacement of the amino acid normally encoded with another amino acid.

Haploinsufficiency

The state that arises when one copy of a gene is deleted or otherwise inactivated and the single remaining copy is insufficient to produce the amount of gene product needed to maintain normal function, leading to an abnormal (disease) phenotype.

Loss-of-function variation

DNA sequence alteration that leads to a protein with severely reduced or no function. Genetic variants that result in a prematurely truncated protein, such as nonsense variants, generally cause loss of function; however, missense variants can also have this effect.

Nonsense variant

Single-nucleotide variant that leads to the replacement of the amino acid normally encoded with a stop codon, leading to a prematurely truncated protein.

Variant phasing

Determining whether two variants in an individual's genome are both on the same copy of the gene (in cis) or on different copies of the genes (in trans) by use of parental testing. If two variants in a gene associated with a recessive disorder are in trans, they are more likely to be causal for the disorder, as they will impact both copies of the gene.

Allele frequency

The incidence of an allele in a population. Allele frequency is calculated by dividing the number of times that the allele is found by the total number of chromosomes. The allele frequency can be used to assess the rarity of a certain allele to help ascertain its pathogenicity during clinical sequence interpretation.

Penetrance

The proportion of individuals with a certain genetic variant who display the phenotype that is associated with this variant.

Genetic discrimination

(GD). Differential treatment of individuals on the basis of their genetic information.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Groopman, E., Rasouly, H. & Gharavi, A. Genomic medicine for kidney disease. Nat Rev Nephrol 14, 83–104 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2017.167

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2017.167

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research