Evaluating ApoL1 Genetic Testing Policy Options for Transplant Centers

Author:

McIntosh Tristan1,Walsh Heidi1ORCID,Baldwin Kari1,Iltis Ana2ORCID,Mohan Sumit3ORCID,Sawinski Deirdre4ORCID,Goodman Melody5ORCID,DuBois James M.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Bioethics Resaerch Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

2. Center for Bioethics, Health and Society, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

3. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York

4. Weil Cornell Medical College, New York, New York

5. School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, New York

Abstract

Background Apolipoprotein L1 (ApoL1) variants G1 and G2 are associated with a higher risk of kidney disease. ApoL1 risk variants are predominantly seen in individuals with sub-Saharan African ancestry. In most transplant centers, potential organ donors are being selectively genetically tested for ApoL1 risk variants. Transplant programs have highly variable ApoL1 testing practices and need guidance on essential ApoL1 clinical policy questions. Methods We conducted a Delphi consensus panel focused on ApoL1 clinical policy questions, including who gets tested, who decides whether testing occurs, how test results are shared, who receives test results, and how test results are used. A total of 27 panelists across seven stakeholder groups participated: living kidney donors (n=4), deceased donor family members (n=3), recipients of a deceased donor kidney (n=4), recipients of a living donor kidney (n=4), nephrologists (n=4), transplant surgeons (n=4), and genetic counselors (n=4). Nineteen panelists (70%) identified as Black. The Delphi panel process involved two rounds of educational webinars and three rounds of surveys administered to panelists, who were asked to indicate whether they support, could live with, or oppose each policy option. Results The panel reached consensus on one or more acceptable policy options for each clinical policy question; panelists supported 18 policy options and opposed 15. Key elements of consensus include the following: ask potential donors about African ancestry rather than race; make testing decisions only after discussion with donors; encourage disclosure of test results to blood relatives and organ recipients but do not require it; use test results to inform decision making, but never for unilateral decisions by transplant programs. Conclusions The panel generally supported policy options involving discussion and shared decision making among patients, donors, and family stakeholders. There was general opposition to unilateral decision making and prohibiting donation altogether.

Funder

National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. The Road to APOL1 Genetic Testing in Transplantation;Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology;2024-04

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3