#382 Unexpected diagnoses of ADTKD-MUC1 with the help of VNtyper
Authors: Kachmar Jessica , Saei Hassan , Morinière Vincent , Heidet Laurence , Gribouval Olivier , Mautret-Godefroy Manon , Knebelmann Bertrand , Burtey Stéphane , Vuiblet Vincent , Nitschké Patrick , Antignac Corinne , Dorval Guillaume 
Published: May 2024

Background and Aims

Autosomal dominant tubulointerstitial kidney disease (ADTKD) due to pathogenic variants in the MUC1 gene is difficult to diagnose since these variants lie in a large variable number tandem repeats (VNTR) and require specialized genetic testing, such as SNaPshot minisequencing. We recently developed a computational pipeline, VNtyper, for easier reliable detection of MUC1 VNTR pathogenic variants and have applied this tool to a large cohort of patients with various phenotypes of kidney disease. The aim of this study is to clinically describe patients in whom MUC1 pathogenic variants were unexpectedly detected with the help of VNtyper.

Method

We applied a computational pipeline, VNtyper, to a large cohort of patients with suspected hereditary kidney disease referred for genetic testing, regardless of their phenotype. This cohort included patients evaluated from 2017 to 2023 in the Molecular Genetics Department of Necker-Enfants Malades Hospital (Paris, France). Clinical characteristics were collected from patients in whom we detected new MUC1 VNTR pathogenic variants.

Results

44 out of 3735 patients tested (1.2%) were newly diagnosed with a MUC1 pathogenic variant. Of these patients, ADTKD was clinically suspected in only 31 out of 44 patients (70%).

In 2 patients, there was a pathogenic variant in another gene that could explain the phenotype, in addition to the MUC1 pathogenic variant. In fact, one 52-year-old patient had polycystic kidneys, nephrolithiasis, hematuria and normal kidney function. Her mother also had kidney cysts with absence of chronic kidney disease (CKD). This patient had a pathogenic variant in IFT140 gene (c.2399+1G&gt;T) which could explain her autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) phenotype. Whether the MUC1 variant contributes to her disease remains unclear, especially seeing as her kidney function is normal at the age of 52 years. On the other hand, one patient had kidney cysts discovered at 3 days of age. A heterozygous HNF1B deletion was detected which could explain the phenotype. The following detection of a pathogenic MUC1 variant was thus an incidental finding and seemed de novo, although parents declined to get tested. These incidental findings can be challenging, especially when it comes to counselling and follow-up.

There was no family history of kidney disease in 7 out of 44 patients (16%), and in one patient, we were able to confirm de novo disease since her parents were tested and were negative. It was unfortunately not possible to get DNA from the parents of the other patients. This is the first case of proven de novo ADTKD-MUC1 described to our knowledge. De novo variants in ADTKD-MUC1 are not surprising since the 7C stretch found in VNTR is a hotspot for mutagenesis. Interestingly, these patients seemed to have a more severe clinical presentation with an early onset of disease (median age at diagnosis 28 years [18, 32]). However, this could be due to a selection bias. In fact, young age of onset of CKD may have prompted clinicians to refer these patients for genetic testing despite negative family history, whereas older patients with possible ADTKD-MUC1 and no family history of kidney disease might be presumed to have another etiology of CKD. One way to confirm this would be to test a large cohort of patients with CKD from unknown etiology with no family history of CKD. Considering the nonspecific clinical manifestations of ADTKD-MUC1 and the phenotypic variability, it has previously been suggested that the most important clue to diagnosis is the presence of CKD in first-degree family. The possibility of de novo cases makes the clinical diagnosis of ADKTD-MUC1 even more challenging.

Conclusion

With VNtyper, we were able to diagnose new cases of ADTKD-MUC1 in a large cohort of patients with various phenotypes, with a significant prevalence of 1.2%. ADTKD-MUC1 was not suspected in 30% of these patients who would have maybe never been diagnosed otherwise. This is also the first study in which we describe a proven de novo case of ADTKD-MUC1. Pathogenic variants in the MUC1 gene should thus be in the differential diagnosis of all unspecified CKD, even if there is no family history since de novo variants are also possible.