Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • Kidney Week Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Other
    • ASN Publications
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Society of Nephrology
  • Other
    • ASN Publications
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement
American Society of Nephrology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • Kidney Week Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Visit ASN on Facebook
  • Follow CJASN on Twitter
  • CJASN RSS
  • Community Forum
Original ArticlesGenetics
You have accessRestricted Access

Exome Chip Analyses and Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy among Han Chinese

Xu-jie Zhou, Lam C. Tsoi, Yong Hu, Matthew T. Patrick, Kevin He, Celine C. Berthier, Yanming Li, Yan-na Wang, Yuan-yuan Qi, Yue-miao Zhang, Ting Gan, Yang Li, Ping Hou, Li-jun Liu, Su-fang Shi, Ji-cheng Lv, Hu-ji Xu and Hong Zhang
CJASN February 2021, 16 (2) 213-224; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.06910520
Xu-jie Zhou
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Xu-jie Zhou
Lam C. Tsoi
5Department of Dermatology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
6Department of Biostatistics, Center for Statistical Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
7Department of Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yong Hu
8Beijing Institute of Biotechnology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew T. Patrick
5Department of Dermatology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin He
9Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
10Kidney Epidemiology and Cost Center, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Celine C. Berthier
11Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yanming Li
12Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yan-na Wang
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yuan-yuan Qi
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yue-miao Zhang
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ting Gan
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ting Gan
Yang Li
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ping Hou
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Li-jun Liu
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Su-fang Shi
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ji-cheng Lv
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hu-ji Xu
12Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas
14Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Shanghai Changzheng Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hong Zhang
1Renal Division, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
2Key Laboratory of Renal Disease, Ministry of Health of China, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
3Key Laboratory of Chronic Kidney Disease Prevention and Treatment (Peking University), Ministry of Education, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
4Research Units of Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune-Mediated Kidney Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF
Loading

Visual Abstract

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Abstract

Background and objectives IgA nephropathy is the most common form of primary GN worldwide. The evidence of geographic and ethnic differences, as well as familial aggregation of the disease, supports a strong genetic contribution to IgA nephropathy. Evidence for genetic factors in IgA nephropathy comes also from genome-wide association patient-control studies. However, few studies have systematically evaluated the contribution of coding variation in IgA nephropathy.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements We performed a two-stage exome chip–based association study in 13,242 samples, including 3363 patients with IgA nephropathy and 9879 healthy controls of Han Chinese ancestry. Common variant functional annotation, gene-based low-frequency variants analysis, differential mRNA expression, and gene network integration were also explored.

Results We identified three non-HLA gene regions (FBXL21, CCR6, and STAT3) and one HLA gene region (GABBR1) with suggestive significance (Pmeta<5×10−5) in single-variant associations. These novel non-HLA variants were annotated as expression-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms and were located in enhancer regions enriched in histone marks H3K4me1 in primary B cells. Gene-based low-frequency variants analysis suggests CFB as another potential susceptibility gene. Further combined expression and network integration suggested that the five novel susceptibility genes, TGFBI, CCR6, STAT3, GABBR1, and CFB, were involved in IgA nephropathy.

Conclusions Five novel gene regions with suggestive significance for IgA nephropathy were identified and shed new light for further mechanism investigation.

  • IgA nephropathy
  • exome
  • exome-wide association study
  • genetic variants
  • differential expression
  • gene network

Introduction

IgA nephropathy is the most common form of primary GN worldwide, and as a progressive disease, it is an important cause of kidney failure (1⇓–3). The evidence of geographic and ethnic differences and familial aggregation of the disease support a strong genetic contribution to IgA nephropathy. Of the many pathogenic mechanisms reported, defects in IgA1 glycosylation that lead to formation of immune complexes have been consistently indicated (1⇓–3). It has been demonstrated by several studies that the estimated heritability of aberrant IgA1 glycosylation is 54%–80% (4⇓–6). Evidence for genetic factors in IgA nephropathy also comes from genome-wide association patient-control studies (GWAS) (7⇓⇓⇓–11). Recent work has identified a number of genetic factors, mostly associated with mechanisms of defense against infection (12,13). While emphasizing the important new insights that have emerged from GWAS of IgA nephropathy, it should not be forgotten that even the latest and largest GWAS meta-analysis attributes only 7.6% of disease risk to genetic factors in Chinese populations and 6.2% in Europeans.

GWAS-implicated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) usually confer relatively small effects and lie within nonprotein-coding sequence, suggesting additional genetic variants yet to be discovered (14⇓–16). Few studies have systematically evaluated the contribution of coding variation in IgA nephropathy. However, a study for coding variants primarily relies on gene sequencing that is typically expensive, especially to systematically scale the whole genome in a number of samples. Recently, Illumina HumanExome BeadChips, also referred to as exome chips, were designed as a comprehensive and cost-effective alternative to explore the role of coding variants in human complex diseases, which made it applicable in large cohorts. Since then, the exome arrays have been applied to studies for complex diseases and have detected several significant coding variants; therefore, they provide great opportunities to further disentangle disease biology (14⇓–16).

To provide insights into the biologic mechanisms of IgA nephropathy, we performed a two-stage exome chip association study in 13,242 samples, including 3363 patients with IgA nephropathy and 9879 healthy controls of Han Chinese ancestry.

Materials and Methods

Participants

All patients with IgA nephropathy were recruited from Peking University First Hospital, and all controls were healthy blood donors. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Peking University First Hospital, China, and it was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki principles (institutional review board nos. 2013–548 and IRB00001052–17089, Chinese Human Genetic Resources 2008–014).

The cohort in total was composed of 3363 patients with IgA nephropathy and 9879 healthy controls (Table 1, Supplemental Figure 1, Supplemental Table 1). The diagnosis of IgA nephropathy was defined by kidney biopsy according to histopathologic detection of immunofluorescence showing at least 2+ (scale =0–3+) mesangial deposition of IgA, with IgA comprising the dominant Ig deposited in the glomeruli and excluding individuals with cirrhosis, IgA vasculitis, hepatitis B–associated GN, HIV infection, Alport syndrome, thin basement membrane disease, SLE, or other systemic diseases.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Sample information for different arrays involved in this study

Genotyping and Quality Controls in the Discovery Stage

There were 640 patients and 4295 controls genotyped by Illumina Human Exome V1.2 BeadChip in the discovery stage. This array contains about 240,000 variants (http://genome.sph.umich.edu/wiki/Exome_Chip_Design), 93.5% of which had minor allele frequency (MAF) ≤5%. The genotype calling and clustering were conducted using GenomeStudio V.2011.1. Illumina human exome genotyping array clustering and quality control were undertaken as reported (17,18).

Samples with call rates <95% were excluded for further analysis. Potential genetic relatedness in terms of pairwise identity by state was examined using Plink V.1.90 (http://pngu.mgh.harvard.edu/purcell/plink/). Close relatives were identified as having an estimated identity by descent (IBD) proportion of genome-wide shared alleles >0.1875, which was halfway between the expected IBD for third- and second-degree relatives. Sample outliers were checked on the basis of the principal components analysis method using Eigensoft 7.2.1 tools. There were 258 subjects excluded in the further analysis due to high heterozygosity rate (44 subjects; over ±3 SD from the mean), failure of IBD test (162 subjects), and principal component outliers (52 subjects; continental outliers were checked, and individual outliers were defined by over ±3 SD for the first two principal components) (Supplemental Figure 2).

SNPs were excluded if they showed call rate <95%, MAF<0.001, or significant departure from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium in controls (P<10−4). At the end of quality control, genotype data for 33,655 autosomal biallelic variants in 601 patients and 4076 controls qualified for association tests in the discovery stage. All of the analyses were accomplished in Plink v1.90.

Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Selection and Genotyping in the Replication Stage

The flow chart of the study design is shown in Supplemental Figure 1. A total of 144 non-HLA SNPs of MAF≥1% with association P<0.005 in the discovery study were genotyped for replication in an independent cohort of 8565 samples (2762 patients and 5803 controls; Xu-jie Zhou et al. unpublished data with the same criteria of quality control) using Illumina Human 610-Quad BeadChip (610), Illumina Infinium OmniZhongHua-8 v1.3 BeadChip (Zhonghua8), or Illumina Infinium Global Screening Array-24 v1.0 BeadChip (GSA).

Histocompatibility Leukocyte Antigen Imputation

To identify association at the MHC region, we extracted the SNPs within the extended MHC region (chr6: 25–34 Mb) and imputed classic alleles, untyped SNPs, and amino acid residues using SNP2HLA with the Asian HLA imputation reference panel (19,20). Imputation of genotypes for patients and controls was performed together. In order to reduce the uncertainty of imputation, we restricted our analysis to variants with high imputation quality (r2>0.8). Imputed dosage results were used in all subsequent analyses.

Functional Annotation of Novel Variants

The regulatory effects for new variants were annotated in Haploreg V4.1. B cells have been widely implicated in the risk of IgA nephropathy, and thus, the effects of newly identified SNPs were evaluated in primary B cells from the National Institutes of Health Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium (2015). The expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) effects for each novel SNP were obtained from public databases. The newly identified genes and other genes that are the closest or the ones reported previously in IgA nephropathy GWAS were used in STRING v11.0 to explore gene networks.

Quantification of Genes Expression

A total of 10 ml whole blood was collected in an EDTA vacutainer and centrifuged at 600×g for 30 minutes to remove plasma. Then, blood cells were diluted with PBS and layered on top of Ficoll-Paque (GE Healthcare). After centrifugation at 400×g for 30 minutes, the PBMC fraction was collected and washed in PBS to remove excess Ficoll-Paque. Platelets were removed following a second centrifugation at 300×g for 10 minutes. The extraction of RNA from PBMCs (obtained from 59 patients with IgA nephropathy and 28 healthy donors who were newly enrolled independent individuals, age: 40±13 versus 34±10 years and men: 56% versus 50%, respectively) was collected for total RNA extraction using TRIzol Reagent (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer’s protocol. The quantification of genes expression of PBMC was tested by RNA microarrays, which were performed by Compass Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (Beijing, China) using PrimeView Human Gene Expression Array.

Statistical Analyses

We adopted joint analysis for this two-stage GWAS (Supplemental Figure 1). For single-variant association, logistic regression was applied to test in both the discovery and replication stages, assuming an additive model. The first two principal components were included as covariates. Meta-analysis was conducted using METAL (https://genome.sph.umich.edu/wiki/METAL_Documentation) by default “SAMPLESIZE” analysis scheme with P value and direction of effect weighted according to sample size. The widely accepted thresholds P<5×10−8 and P<5×10−5 were used for genome-wide significance and suggestive significance, respectively. We adopted a nominal P<0.005 in the discovery stage and P<0.05 in the replication stage with the same direction of effect, as reported in the Chinese (14). The variance explained by the identified SNPs was estimated by GCTA software (https://cnsgenomics.com/software/gcta). For gene-based association, low-frequency variants (defined as MAF≤0.05) were analyzed for their potential differential clustering between patients and controls within certain genes (i.e., gene burden analysis) using a sequence kernel association test (SKAT-O) according to the EPACTS-3.3.0 tool (http://www.sph.umich.edu/csg/kang/epacts/) with the same significance threshold of 5×10−3. As normal distributions for the relative gene expressions of the candidates, we adopted unpaired t tests in checking the group difference.

Results

Summary of Exome Chip Association Study

In the discovery stage, after stringent quality control as introduced in Materials and Methods, we evaluated the association of 33,655 autosomal biallelic variants in 601 patients and 4076 controls. There was no substantial population structure in the qualified subjects for the exome chip association study (Supplemental Figure 2). The genomic inflation factor (λ) for single-variant associations in the discovery stage was 1.09. After removing SNPs within the MHC region, λ decreased to 1.05. The Manhattan plot and the quantile-quantile plot of the observed association P values are shown in Supplemental Figure 3.

Only one HLA variant surpassed the genome-wide significance of 5×10−8. For the extended HLA region (chr6: 25–34 Mb) in the exome-wide data, among 2018 variants included in the array 67 HLA SNPs associated with IgA nephropathy with P<0.005. The intronic variant rs29243 in GABBR1 showed the most significance (P=1.82 × 10−8). We observed 144 non-HLA SNPs with a possible association (P<0.005) in the array (Supplemental Table 2).

We checked the 28 reported associated variants associated with IgA nephropathy (Supplemental Table 3). In spite of limited data of exome array after quality control, ten variants could be retrieved. We successfully replicated associations of rs9275596 (HLA-DQA1-DQB1-DRB1, P=0.02) and rs2412971 (HORMAD2, P=0.001) with IgA nephropathy. By further checking the reported loci separately, rs17366568 (ST6GAL1, P=0.03), rs75858201 (ODF1-KLF10-UBR5, P=0.03), rs33952257 (ACCS, P=0.03), rs9901675 (TNFSF13, P=0.03), and rs2412973 (HORMAD2, P<0.001) showed P<0.05. Because these associated variants were the same or in LD with reported GWAS lead SNPs (Supplemental Figure 4, Supplemental Table 3), it suggested that this exome array could replicate associations for six reported loci.

Associations of Histocompatibility Leukocyte Antigen Variants

HLA (GABBR1) was the only region associated with IgA nephropathy in the discovery exome chip (Figure 1). With genotyped data, after stepwise conditional analysis, only missense variant rs12722039 in HLA-DQA1 showed additional independent association (P=1.85×10−5) with P threshold <5×10−5. Because the top association was somewhat different compared with previous report, we conducted HLA imputation and checked the contribution of specific HLA alleles and amino acid residues to the overall risk of IgA nephropathy. After quality controls, 5722 variants had high imputation quality (r2>0.8). Single-variant rs16895058 (3′ UTR of UBD), which was in high LD (r2=1.0) with rs29243 in GABBR1, showed the most significant association (P=6.22×10−9). However, no classic alleles or amino acid residue surpassed genome-wide significance in this exome-wide variant panel. HLA-DQB1*05:03 showed the most significance (P=3.27×10−4) in classic class 2 HLA alleles. DRB1–86 showed the most significance (P=8.88 × 10−5) in amino acid positions.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

HLA gene variants associated with IgA nephropathy. The regional plots for HLA in single-variant associations are shown. The data for HLA region (chr6: 25–34 Mb) before imputation are shown and are plotted by LocusZoom. rs29243 in GABBR1 showed the most significance (P<5×10−8), and a second signal was from HLA-DQA1. SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism.

Nonhistocompatibility Leukocyte Antigen Variants with Additional Replication Data and Meta-Analysis

Data for 133 non-HLA variants of the 144 could be retrieved in an independent cohort of 8565 samples. We found 35 SNPs exhibiting a significant association in the replication stage (P<0.05) (Supplemental Table 4).

Among these associated variants, two SNPs located in HORMAD2, which has been consistently associated with IgA nephropathy in previous GWAS (9⇓–11), showed the genome-wide significance (rs2412971, Pmeta=1.19×10−11; rs2412973, Pmeta=1.56×10−11). They were in high LD (r2=0.96) and were the lead SNPs in reported GWAS (9,11).

We found five loci with suggestive associations defined with P<0.001, namely, C5orf55 (chr5, rs139173233, Pmeta=4.72×10−5), FBXL21 (chr5, rs40986, Pmeta=1.13×10−5), CCR6 (chr6, rs3093024, Pmeta=1.39×10−6; rs3093023, Pmeta=1.05×10−6), NAALAD2 (chr11, rs11018879, Pmeta=3.02×10−5), and STAT3 (chr17, rs1026916, Pmeta= 1.75×10−5; rs744166, Pmeta=2.41×10−5)-HSD17B1 (chr17, rs605059, Pmeta =5.74×10−6)-COASY (chr17, rs615942, Pmeta=1.11×10−5)-PSMC3IP (chr17, rs2292751, Pmeta=1.33×10−5) (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Five novel non-HLA loci associated with IgA nephropathy with suggestive significance. The regional plots for novel non-HLA loci in single-variant associations are shown. The visualization of association results was plotted by LocusZoom (http://locuszoom.sph.umich.edu/). It shows the P values obtained in the exome-wide discovery samples. The –log10 P values (y axes) of SNPs are presented against their chromosomal positions (x axes). SNPs highlighted are the validated SNPs with P value from combined analysis of discovery and validation samples, and their linkage disequilibrium (LD) (r2) values with nearby SNPs are indicated by different colors. The recombination rate (centimorgans per megabase; estimated using the 1000 Genomes November 2014 American Society of Nephrology samples) is shown with blue lines, and the genes within the region are shown as black arrows. All coordinates are on the basis of National Center for Biotechnology Information build 37.

For the CCR6 and STAT3-HSD17B1-COASY-PSMC3IP gene regions, as multiple variants have been identified to be associated with IgA nephropathy, we further checked the LD among them. In both regions, the associated variants were in high LD (r2=0.99–1.00). In GWAS reported as associated with other autoimmune diseases (the NHGRI-EBI catalog of published GWAS, https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/), rs3093023 and rs744166 have been shown as the lead SNPs, with CCR6 and STAT3 as the candidates. We thus further focused on these two variants.

In the FBXL21, CCR6, and STAT3 gene regions (up- and downstream 400 kb of the gene), apart from the above associated SNPs, there were additional variants in partial LD showing significant associations (P<0.005), further supporting their genetic associations.

Common Variant Functional Annotation

SNPs including rs40986, rs3093023, and rs744166 were further checked for functional annotation. rs40986 is a missense variant (p.Pro209Leu) of FBXL21, and rs3093023 and rs744166 are intronic variants of CCR6 and STAT3, respectively.

In the eQTLGen Consortium data (an eQTL meta-analysis performed in blood samples from 31,684 individuals) (21,22), the associated SNPs had significant cis-eQTL effects: for example, rs40986 on TGFBI (P=1.09×10−19), rs3093023 on CCR6 (P=3.24×10−145), and rs744166 on STAT3 (P=6.91×10−59). By HaploReg v4.1 (Supplemental Table 5), rs3093023 and rs744166 were observed to be located in enhancer regions enriched in histone marks H3K4me1 in primary B cells. As enhancers are distal cis-regulatory elements that modulate gene expression, it may partially account for the underlying mechanism of the eQTL association.

Gene-Based Group of Low-Frequency Variants

It has been suggested that a gene-based test provides better power by aggregating low-frequency variants compared with single-variant analyses (23,24). To test for accumulation of low-frequency variants within a gene, we performed a gene burden analysis with SKAT-O (25). Differences between patients and controls did not survive correction for multiple testing for 8255 genes analyzed (P< 6.06×10−6). Detailed information of the SKAT-O gene burden analysis is provided in Supplemental Table 6. However, of interest, as a key factor that triggers alternative pathways of complement, CFB showed the lowest P value (3.98× 10−4).

Differential Gene Expression of Novel Genes in Immunoglobulin A Nephropathy Kidney Tissue and Blood

For the genes identified above, we interrogated the open-access Nephroseq Classic (v4) database (www.nephroseq.org), which integrates a total of 36 datasets from 2015 samples, including two studies from human IgA nephropathy kidneys microdissected into glomerular and tubulointerstitial compartments. As shown in Supplemental Figure 5 and in both datasets, TGFBI and CFB showed consistent significantly higher expression in the glomeruli and tubulointerstitium of patients with IgA nephropathy. Compared with healthy living donors, TFGBI mRNA expression was at least 2.7- and 1.4-fold higher in glomeruli and tubulointerstitium, respectively (P<0.05). CFB transcripts were at least 1.5- and 2.3-fold higher in glomeruli and tubulointerstitium, respectively (P<0.05). Glomerular STAT3 and tubulointerstitial CCR6 mRNAs showed higher expressions in patients with IgA nephropathy in one of the two studies. One study suggested that GABBR1 was marginally expressed higher in IgA nephropathy glomeruli.

As these associated genes exert important functions in immunity regulation, to further check the gene expressions in blood, we enrolled a larger sample size (59 patients and 28 controls) compared with previous reports. As can be seen in Figure 3, TGFBI, STAT3, and GABBR1 were significantly upregulated in PBMCs from patients with IgA nephropathy (P<0.05). Differential mRNA levels were confirmed by detecting two or more probes.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

TGFBI, STAT3, and GABBR1 showed differential expressions from PBMC of patients with IgA nephropathy (IgAN) compared with controls. Among the five novel genes observed, only showed the positive findings of differential gene expressions confirmed by two or more probes in microarray. The scatterplots are presented with mean ± SD and P values. (A) TGFBI was detected by three probes, 11734549_s_at (IgAN versus controls, 8.85±0.42 versus 8.63±0.51, P=0.03), 11755281_a_at (9.01±0.46 versus 8.73±0.88, P=0.05), and 11734550_x_at (9.37±0.40 versus 9.15±0.59, P=0.05). (B) STAT3 was detected by three probes, 11720755_at (IgAN versus controls, 8.09±0.22 versus 7.89±0.17, P<0.001), 11720756_at (8.39±0.27 versus 8.09 ±0.47, P<0.001), and 11750674_a_at (8.19±0.27 versus 7.93±0.42, P<0.001). (C) GABBR1 was detected by two probes, 11730725_a_at (IgAN versus controls, 6.19±0.32 versus 6.02±0.45, P=0.04) and 11721553_a_at (7.31±0.28 versus 7.19±0.31, P=0.07).

Gene Network Analysis

The above blood eQTL analysis and differential gene expression data suggested that TGFBI rather than FBXL21 might be the effector gene. We thus further investigated TGFBI as a candidate. Using the Protein-Protein Interaction Network tool STRING v11.0 (https://string-db.org/), the novel suggestive genes identified involved in IgA nephropathy, including CCR6, STAT3, TGFBI, GABBR1, and CFB, were found connected with known IgA nephropathy genes (CFH, VAV3, ST6GAL1, HLA-DQA1, DEFA1, KLF10, CARD9, ACCS, ITGAM, TNFSF13, and HORMAD2) with a protein-protein interaction enrichment P=1.13×10−5 (Figure 3); they jointly suggested several pathways relevant to immune response (Supplemental Table 7). The most significant biologic process was regulation of immune system process (GO:0002682; PFDR=3.76×10−15), and the most significant KEGG pathway was Staphylococcus aureus infection (hsa05150, PFDR=1.95×10−12).

Lastly, we evaluated the contribution of the associated SNPs to overall IgA nephropathy risk. Cumulatively, by GCTA software, these novel association signals explained about 1.67%±1.21% (P =1.67×10−16) of disease variance (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Meta-analysis results of the three novel non-HLA IgA nephropathy susceptibility loci

Discussion

In this study, we identified five suggestive susceptible genes for IgA nephropathy, namely, CCR6, STAT3, TGFBI, GABBR1, and CFB, by a multitiered exome-wide study in 13,242 Han Chinese samples. We suggest that the novel implicated genes might modulate the immune response and share a similar pathway with infections in IgA nephropathy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first large-scale exome array study for IgA nephropathy, which provides insights into the biologic mechanism of IgA nephropathy.

Although our understanding of the genetic susceptibility of IgA nephropathy has been advanced dramatically recently, the total explained heritability is still limited. Importantly, elucidating the genetic mechanism of IgA nephropathy underlying each susceptibility signal is still a great challenge, which can partially be attributed to the property of GWAS SNPs within nonprotein-coding or intergenic regions (26,27). Exome-wide association studies have been validated to be a powerful approach to identify disease-causing genes (28). In this study, we first confirmed the strong genetic associations between variants in HLA and HORMAD2 in IgA nephropathy, both of which passed genome-wide significance, highlighting their etiologic significance (10,11). More importantly, we identified five genes with suggestive evidence for an association with IgA nephropathy. These associated variants were annotated as functional of expression-related SNPs, and SNP-containing genomic regions may be possible exonic or intronic transcriptional regulatory elements affecting gene expression in B cells. This possibility aids prioritization of their effector genes. The above identified loci have not been discovered in previous GWAS in IgA nephropathy, and the overall evidence did not reach genome-wide significance for the newly identified gene loci. However, in our multistage genetic study, combinations of clues from integrative statistical, bioinformatics, expression, and pathway analyses support the causality of the genes and their biologic relevance in the development of IgA nephropathy. Furthermore, these important findings are concordant with some more recent statistical and functional evidence supporting the involvement of these genes in IgA nephropathy (29⇓–31) (Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Novel IgA nephropathy loci and gene functional prioritization

CFB, GABBR1, TGFBI, and CCR6 are all involved in complement regulation pathways, which have been considered a dominant driver of kidney injury in IgA nephropathy (32), whereas CCR6 signaling may induce the JAK-STAT3 pathway in T cells, which has been suggested to play an important role in Th17 signaling and IgA1 production (29) (Figure 4). Using network analysis, CCR6, STAT3, TGFBI, and CFB are involved in two pathways, namely, response to stimulus (GO:0050896, P<0.001) and regulation of biologic process (GO:0050789, P=0.002) (Supplemental Table 7). Integrated with known IgA nephropathy loci, the top pathways were all involved in immune regulation and defense response, supporting the idea that initiating pathogenic insult in IgA nephropathy must arise from aberrant immunity (9). Five of the top ten KEGG pathways are consistent with infections (S. aureus infection, tuberculosis, leishmaniasis, herpes simplex infection, and toxoplasmosis). Of particular interest, all these infections have been reported to be associated with IgA nephropathy. The top suggested Staphylococcus is also by far the most frequent etiologic agent as IgA-dominant infection-associated GN (33). The remaining top KEGG pathways include known IgA nephropathy pathways: intestinal immune network for IgA production and inflammatory bowel disease. Furthermore, our novel data in combination with previous reports support the likely biologic significance for the Jak-STAT signaling pathway and the Th17 cell differentiation in IgA nephropathy. These pathways are interconnected by these associated genes, and the novel ones warrant more attention.

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Interactive network analysis of the proteins encoded by novel and known IgA nephropathy genome-wide association patient-control study (GWAS)–implicated genes. The functional interaction network in this figure was constructed for the genes/loci identified in previous GWAS and this study using STRING v11.0. Inputted the newly identified genes in this study and the 11 closest or reported genes implicated in previous IgA nephropathy GWAS and found that all of the new genes interacted with known IgA nephropathy genes. The five novel genes were highlighted with circles.

Limitations of the study should also be noted. Because this is an exome-wide study, the number of qualified variants is relatively small (33,655 autosomal biallelic variants) and not optimal in imputation, thus limiting the discovery ability. Further studies in large independent samples will be needed to replicate these findings. The discovered variants may act as susceptibility biomarkers rather than causal variants. Future studies involving fine mapping of targeted regions and deep functional studies are required to delineate the molecular mechanisms underlying the risk variants identified.

In summary, we performed the first large-scale exome-wide study for IgA nephropathy in a Han Chinese population and identified five novel suggestive genes for IgA nephropathy. The findings provide novel clues into the biologic mechanisms of IgA nephropathy.

Disclosures

All authors have nothing to disclose.

Funding

Support was provided by Beijing Natural Science Foundation grant Z190023; Beijing Nova Program Interdisciplinary Cooperation Project grant Z191100001119004; Beijing Youth Top-notch Talent Support Program grant 2017000021223ZK31; Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences grant 2019-I2M-5-046; Clinical Medicine Plus X-Young Scholars Project of Peking University grant PKU2020LCXQ003; Fok Ying Tung Education Foundation grant 171030; National Natural Science Foundation of China grants 82022010, 81970613, and 82070733; Natural Science Foundation for Innovation Research Group of China grant 81621092; the Training Program of the Major Research Plan of the National Natural Science Foundation of China grant 91642120; and the University of Michigan Health System–Peking University Health Science Center Joint Institute for Translational and Clinical Research grant BMU2017JI007.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank their collaborators, Dr. Ali G. Gharavi, Dr. Krzysztof Kiryluk, and Dr. Elena Sanchez-Rodrıguez (Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University, New York), for providing previous GWAS data, assisting statistical analysis, and giving advice for the manuscript. The authors thank Dr. Kirsten Herold for elaborative language editing on our manuscript and the Human Genetic Resources Core Facility and Center for Life Sciences of Peking University for enrolling controls. They also thank the patients, their families, and healthy donors for their cooperation and for giving consent to participate in this study. The authors apologize to the scientists whose important works are not cited here due to space limitation.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, or preparation of the manuscript.

H. Zhang and X.-j. Zhou designed the study; Y. Hu, L. C. Tsoi, and X.-j. Zhou carried out experiments and data analysis; T. Gan, P. Hou, Yang Li, Yanming Li, L.-j. Liu, J.-c. Lv, Y.-y. Qi, S.-f. Shi, Y.-n. Wang, H.-j. Xu, and Y.-m. Zhang contributed to sample collection and data analysis; C. C. Berthier, K. He, Yanming Li, M. T. Patrick, H. Zhang, and X.-j. Zhou drafted and revised the paper; and all authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Supplemental Material

This article contains the following supplemental material online at http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.2215/CJN.06910520/-/DCSupplemental.

Supplemental Figure 1. Flow chart of the study design of this study.

Supplemental Figure 2. Principal components analysis plot in the exome array data.

Supplemental Figure 3. Manhattan plot and quantile-quantile plot in the discovery stage.

Supplemental Figure 4. The regional plots for GWAS-reported loci for IgA nephropathy in single-variant associations.

Supplemental Figure 5. Differential gene expression for novel loci using Nephroseq.

Supplemental Table 1. Some clinical parameters for patients with IgA nephropathy in the exome array.

Supplemental Table 2. Summary statistics of the associated genetic variants with P<0.005 in the discovery samples.

Supplemental Table 3. Replication data for reported variants/loci in the exome array.

Supplemental Table 4. Summary statistics of the associated genetic variants with P<0.05 in the validation samples.

Supplemental Table 5. Functional annotation for four SNPs within suggestive genes.

Supplemental Table 6. Detailed information of the SKAT-O gene burden analysis (data shown for significant findings).

Supplemental Table 7. Gene ontology and KEGG pathways implicated by newly implicated genes and known IgA nephropathy risk genes using STRING (http://string-db.org/).

Footnotes

  • Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org.

  • See related editorial, “Assessing Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy: State of the Art,” on pages 182–184.

  • Received May 7, 2020.
  • Accepted December 11, 2020.
  • Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology

References

  1. ↵
    1. Rodrigues JC,
    2. Haas M,
    3. Reich HN
    : IgA nephropathy. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 677–686, 2017pmid:28159829
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Wyatt RJ,
    2. Julian BA
    : IgA nephropathy. N Engl J Med 368: 2402–2414, 2013pmid:23782179
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Lai KN,
    2. Tang SC,
    3. Schena FP,
    4. Novak J,
    5. Tomino Y,
    6. Fogo AB,
    7. Glassock RJ
    : IgA nephropathy. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2: 16001, 2016pmid:27189177
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Lomax-Browne HJ,
    2. Visconti A,
    3. Pusey CD,
    4. Cook HT,
    5. Spector TD,
    6. Pickering MC,
    7. Falchi M
    : IgA1 glycosylation is heritable in healthy twins. J Am Soc Nephrol 28: 64–68, 2017pmid:27313232
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Gharavi AG,
    2. Moldoveanu Z,
    3. Wyatt RJ,
    4. Barker CV,
    5. Woodford SY,
    6. Lifton RP,
    7. Mestecky J,
    8. Novak J,
    9. Julian BA
    : Aberrant IgA1 glycosylation is inherited in familial and sporadic IgA nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 19: 1008–1014, 2008pmid:18272841
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Gale DP,
    2. Molyneux K,
    3. Wimbury D,
    4. Higgins P,
    5. Levine AP,
    6. Caplin B,
    7. Ferlin A,
    8. Yin P,
    9. Nelson CP,
    10. Stanescu H,
    11. Samani NJ,
    12. Kleta R,
    13. Yu X,
    14. Barratt J
    : Galactosylation of IgA1 is associated with common variation in C1GALT1. J Am Soc Nephrol 28: 2158–2166, 2017pmid:28209808
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Feehally J,
    2. Farrall M,
    3. Boland A,
    4. Gale DP,
    5. Gut I,
    6. Heath S,
    7. Kumar A,
    8. Peden JF,
    9. Maxwell PH,
    10. Morris DL,
    11. Padmanabhan S,
    12. Vyse TJ,
    13. Zawadzka A,
    14. Rees AJ,
    15. Lathrop M,
    16. Ratcliffe PJ
    : HLA has strongest association with IgA nephropathy in genome-wide analysis. J Am Soc Nephrol 21: 1791–1797, 2010pmid:20595679
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Li M,
    2. Foo JN,
    3. Wang JQ,
    4. Low HQ,
    5. Tang XQ,
    6. Toh KY,
    7. Yin PR,
    8. Khor CC,
    9. Goh YF,
    10. Irwan ID,
    11. Xu RC,
    12. Andiappan AK,
    13. Bei JX,
    14. Rotzschke O,
    15. Chen MH,
    16. Cheng CY,
    17. Sun LD,
    18. Jiang GR,
    19. Wong TY,
    20. Lin HL,
    21. Aung T,
    22. Liao YH,
    23. Saw SM,
    24. Ye K,
    25. Ebstein RP,
    26. Chen QK,
    27. Shi W,
    28. Chew SH,
    29. Chen J,
    30. Zhang FR,
    31. Li SP,
    32. Xu G,
    33. Shyong Tai E,
    34. Wang L,
    35. Chen N,
    36. Zhang XJ,
    37. Zeng YX,
    38. Zhang H,
    39. Liu ZH,
    40. Yu XQ,
    41. Liu JJ
    : Identification of new susceptibility loci for IgA nephropathy in Han Chinese. Nat Commun 6: 7270, 2015pmid:26028593
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Kiryluk K,
    2. Li Y,
    3. Scolari F,
    4. Sanna-Cherchi S,
    5. Choi M,
    6. Verbitsky M,
    7. Fasel D,
    8. Lata S,
    9. Prakash S,
    10. Shapiro S,
    11. Fischman C,
    12. Snyder HJ,
    13. Appel G,
    14. Izzi C,
    15. Viola BF,
    16. Dallera N,
    17. Del Vecchio L,
    18. Barlassina C,
    19. Salvi E,
    20. Bertinetto FE,
    21. Amoroso A,
    22. Savoldi S,
    23. Rocchietti M,
    24. Amore A,
    25. Peruzzi L,
    26. Coppo R,
    27. Salvadori M,
    28. Ravani P,
    29. Magistroni R,
    30. Ghiggeri GM,
    31. Caridi G,
    32. Bodria M,
    33. Lugani F,
    34. Allegri L,
    35. Delsante M,
    36. Maiorana M,
    37. Magnano A,
    38. Frasca G,
    39. Boer E,
    40. Boscutti G,
    41. Ponticelli C,
    42. Mignani R,
    43. Marcantoni C,
    44. Di Landro D,
    45. Santoro D,
    46. Pani A,
    47. Polci R,
    48. Feriozzi S,
    49. Chicca S,
    50. Galliani M,
    51. Gigante M,
    52. Gesualdo L,
    53. Zamboli P,
    54. Battaglia GG,
    55. Garozzo M,
    56. Maixnerová D,
    57. Tesar V,
    58. Eitner F,
    59. Rauen T,
    60. Floege J,
    61. Kovacs T,
    62. Nagy J,
    63. Mucha K,
    64. Pączek L,
    65. Zaniew M,
    66. Mizerska-Wasiak M,
    67. Roszkowska-Blaim M,
    68. Pawlaczyk K,
    69. Gale D,
    70. Barratt J,
    71. Thibaudin L,
    72. Berthoux F,
    73. Canaud G,
    74. Boland A,
    75. Metzger M,
    76. Panzer U,
    77. Suzuki H,
    78. Goto S,
    79. Narita I,
    80. Caliskan Y,
    81. Xie J,
    82. Hou P,
    83. Chen N,
    84. Zhang H,
    85. Wyatt RJ,
    86. Novak J,
    87. Julian BA,
    88. Feehally J,
    89. Stengel B,
    90. Cusi D,
    91. Lifton RP,
    92. Gharavi AG
    : Discovery of new risk loci for IgA nephropathy implicates genes involved in immunity against intestinal pathogens. Nat Genet 46: 1187–1196, 2014pmid:25305756
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Yu XQ,
    2. Li M,
    3. Zhang H,
    4. Low HQ,
    5. Wei X,
    6. Wang JQ,
    7. Sun LD,
    8. Sim KS,
    9. Li Y,
    10. Foo JN,
    11. Wang W,
    12. Li ZJ,
    13. Yin XY,
    14. Tang XQ,
    15. Fan L,
    16. Chen J,
    17. Li RS,
    18. Wan JX,
    19. Liu ZS,
    20. Lou TQ,
    21. Zhu L,
    22. Huang XJ,
    23. Zhang XJ,
    24. Liu ZH,
    25. Liu JJ
    : A genome-wide association study in Han Chinese identifies multiple susceptibility loci for IgA nephropathy. Nat Genet 44: 178–182, 2011pmid:22197929
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Gharavi AG,
    2. Kiryluk K,
    3. Choi M,
    4. Li Y,
    5. Hou P,
    6. Xie J,
    7. Sanna-Cherchi S,
    8. Men CJ,
    9. Julian BA,
    10. Wyatt RJ,
    11. Novak J,
    12. He JC,
    13. Wang H,
    14. Lv J,
    15. Zhu L,
    16. Wang W,
    17. Wang Z,
    18. Yasuno K,
    19. Gunel M,
    20. Mane S,
    21. Umlauf S,
    22. Tikhonova I,
    23. Beerman I,
    24. Savoldi S,
    25. Magistroni R,
    26. Ghiggeri GM,
    27. Bodria M,
    28. Lugani F,
    29. Ravani P,
    30. Ponticelli C,
    31. Allegri L,
    32. Boscutti G,
    33. Frasca G,
    34. Amore A,
    35. Peruzzi L,
    36. Coppo R,
    37. Izzi C,
    38. Viola BF,
    39. Prati E,
    40. Salvadori M,
    41. Mignani R,
    42. Gesualdo L,
    43. Bertinetto F,
    44. Mesiano P,
    45. Amoroso A,
    46. Scolari F,
    47. Chen N,
    48. Zhang H,
    49. Lifton RP
    : Genome-wide association study identifies susceptibility loci for IgA nephropathy. Nat Genet 43: 321–327, 2011pmid:21399633
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Neugut YD,
    2. Kiryluk K
    : Genetic determinants of IgA nephropathy: Western perspective. Semin Nephrol 38: 443–454, 2018pmid:30177016
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Li M,
    2. Yu XQ
    : Genetic determinants of IgA nephropathy: Eastern perspective. Semin Nephrol 38: 455–460, 2018pmid:30177017
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Wen L,
    2. Zhu C,
    3. Zhu Z,
    4. Yang C,
    5. Zheng X,
    6. Liu L,
    7. Zuo X,
    8. Sheng Y,
    9. Tang H,
    10. Liang B,
    11. Zhou Y,
    12. Li P,
    13. Zhu J,
    14. Ding Y,
    15. Chen G,
    16. Gao J,
    17. Tang L,
    18. Cheng Y,
    19. Sun J,
    20. Elango T,
    21. Kafle A,
    22. Yu R,
    23. Xue K,
    24. Zhang Y,
    25. Li F,
    26. Li Z,
    27. Guo J,
    28. Zhang X,
    29. Zhou C,
    30. Tang Y,
    31. Shen N,
    32. Wang M,
    33. Yu X,
    34. Liu S,
    35. Fan X,
    36. Gao M,
    37. Xiao F,
    38. Wang P,
    39. Wang Z,
    40. Zhang A,
    41. Zhou F,
    42. Sun L,
    43. Yang S,
    44. Xu J,
    45. Yin X,
    46. Cui Y,
    47. Zhang X
    : Exome-wide association study identifies four novel loci for systemic lupus erythematosus in Han Chinese population. Ann Rheum Dis 77: 417, 2018pmid:29233832
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Massey J,
    2. Eyre S
    : Rare variants and autoimmune disease. Brief Funct Genomics 13: 392–397, 2014pmid:24817515
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Fritsche LG,
    2. Igl W,
    3. Bailey JN,
    4. Grassmann F,
    5. Sengupta S,
    6. Bragg-Gresham JL,
    7. Burdon KP,
    8. Hebbring SJ,
    9. Wen C,
    10. Gorski M,
    11. Kim IK,
    12. Cho D,
    13. Zack D,
    14. Souied E,
    15. Scholl HP,
    16. Bala E,
    17. Lee KE,
    18. Hunter DJ,
    19. Sardell RJ,
    20. Mitchell P,
    21. Merriam JE,
    22. Cipriani V,
    23. Hoffman JD,
    24. Schick T,
    25. Lechanteur YT,
    26. Guymer RH,
    27. Johnson MP,
    28. Jiang Y,
    29. Stanton CM,
    30. Buitendijk GH,
    31. Zhan X,
    32. Kwong AM,
    33. Boleda A,
    34. Brooks M,
    35. Gieser L,
    36. Ratnapriya R,
    37. Branham KE,
    38. Foerster JR,
    39. Heckenlively JR,
    40. Othman MI,
    41. Vote BJ,
    42. Liang HH,
    43. Souzeau E,
    44. McAllister IL,
    45. Isaacs T,
    46. Hall J,
    47. Lake S,
    48. Mackey DA,
    49. Constable IJ,
    50. Craig JE,
    51. Kitchner TE,
    52. Yang Z,
    53. Su Z,
    54. Luo H,
    55. Chen D,
    56. Ouyang H,
    57. Flagg K,
    58. Lin D,
    59. Mao G,
    60. Ferreyra H,
    61. Stark K,
    62. von Strachwitz CN,
    63. Wolf A,
    64. Brandl C,
    65. Rudolph G,
    66. Olden M,
    67. Morrison MA,
    68. Morgan DJ,
    69. Schu M,
    70. Ahn J,
    71. Silvestri G,
    72. Tsironi EE,
    73. Park KH,
    74. Farrer LA,
    75. Orlin A,
    76. Brucker A,
    77. Li M,
    78. Curcio CA,
    79. Mohand-Saïd S,
    80. Sahel JA,
    81. Audo I,
    82. Benchaboune M,
    83. Cree AJ,
    84. Rennie CA,
    85. Goverdhan SV,
    86. Grunin M,
    87. Hagbi-Levi S,
    88. Campochiaro P,
    89. Katsanis N,
    90. Holz FG,
    91. Blond F,
    92. Blanché H,
    93. Deleuze JF,
    94. Igo RP Jr.,
    95. Truitt B,
    96. Peachey NS,
    97. Meuer SM,
    98. Myers CE,
    99. Moore EL,
    100. Klein R,
    101. Hauser MA,
    102. Postel EA,
    103. Courtenay MD,
    104. Schwartz SG,
    105. Kovach JL,
    106. Scott WK,
    107. Liew G,
    108. Tan AG,
    109. Gopinath B,
    110. Merriam JC,
    111. Smith RT,
    112. Khan JC,
    113. Shahid H,
    114. Moore AT,
    115. McGrath JA,
    116. Laux R,
    117. Brantley MA Jr.,
    118. Agarwal A,
    119. Ersoy L,
    120. Caramoy A,
    121. Langmann T,
    122. Saksens NT,
    123. de Jong EK,
    124. Hoyng CB,
    125. Cain MS,
    126. Richardson AJ,
    127. Martin TM,
    128. Blangero J,
    129. Weeks DE,
    130. Dhillon B,
    131. van Duijn CM,
    132. Doheny KF,
    133. Romm J,
    134. Klaver CC,
    135. Hayward C,
    136. Gorin MB,
    137. Klein ML,
    138. Baird PN,
    139. den Hollander AI,
    140. Fauser S,
    141. Yates JR,
    142. Allikmets R,
    143. Wang JJ,
    144. Schaumberg DA,
    145. Klein BE,
    146. Hagstrom SA,
    147. Chowers I,
    148. Lotery AJ,
    149. Léveillard T,
    150. Zhang K,
    151. Brilliant MH,
    152. Hewitt AW,
    153. Swaroop A,
    154. Chew EY,
    155. Pericak-Vance MA,
    156. DeAngelis M,
    157. Stambolian D,
    158. Haines JL,
    159. Iyengar SK,
    160. Weber BH,
    161. Abecasis GR,
    162. Heid IM
    : A large genome-wide association study of age-related macular degeneration highlights contributions of rare and common variants. Nat Genet 48: 134–143, 2016pmid:26691988
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Guo Y,
    2. He J,
    3. Zhao S,
    4. Wu H,
    5. Zhong X,
    6. Sheng Q,
    7. Samuels DC,
    8. Shyr Y,
    9. Long J
    : Illumina human exome genotyping array clustering and quality control. Nat Protoc 9: 2643–2662, 2014pmid:25321409
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Anderson CA,
    2. Pettersson FH,
    3. Clarke GM,
    4. Cardon LR,
    5. Morris AP,
    6. Zondervan KT
    : Data quality control in genetic case-control association studies. Nat Protoc 5: 1564–1573, 2010pmid:21085122
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Jia X,
    2. Han B,
    3. Onengut-Gumuscu S,
    4. Chen WM,
    5. Concannon PJ,
    6. Rich SS,
    7. Raychaudhuri S,
    8. de Bakker PI
    : Imputing amino acid polymorphisms in human leukocyte antigens. PLoS One 8: e64683, 2013pmid:23762245
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Molineros JE,
    2. Looger LL,
    3. Kim K,
    4. Okada Y,
    5. Terao C,
    6. Sun C,
    7. Zhou XJ,
    8. Raj P,
    9. Kochi Y,
    10. Suzuki A,
    11. Akizuki S,
    12. Nakabo S,
    13. Bang SY,
    14. Lee HS,
    15. Kang YM,
    16. Suh CH,
    17. Chung WT,
    18. Park YB,
    19. Choe JY,
    20. Shim SC,
    21. Lee SS,
    22. Zuo X,
    23. Yamamoto K,
    24. Li QZ,
    25. Shen N,
    26. Porter LL,
    27. Harley JB,
    28. Chua KH,
    29. Zhang H,
    30. Wakeland EK,
    31. Tsao BP,
    32. Bae SC,
    33. Nath SK
    : Amino acid signatures of HLA Class-I and II molecules are strongly associated with SLE susceptibility and autoantibody production in Eastern Asians. PLoS Genet 15: e1008092, 2019pmid:31022184
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Zeng B,
    2. Lloyd-Jones LR,
    3. Montgomery GW,
    4. Metspalu A,
    5. Esko T,
    6. Franke L,
    7. Vosa U,
    8. Claringbould A,
    9. Brigham KL,
    10. Quyyumi AA,
    11. Idaghdour Y,
    12. Yang J,
    13. Visscher PM,
    14. Powell JE,
    15. Gibson G
    : Comprehensive multiple eQTL detection and its application to GWAS interpretation. Genetics 212: 905–918, 2019pmid:31123039
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Wainberg M,
    2. Sinnott-Armstrong N,
    3. Mancuso N,
    4. Barbeira AN,
    5. Knowles DA,
    6. Golan D,
    7. Ermel R,
    8. Ruusalepp A,
    9. Quertermous T,
    10. Hao K,
    11. Björkegren JLM,
    12. Im HK,
    13. Pasaniuc B,
    14. Rivas MA,
    15. Kundaje A
    : Opportunities and challenges for transcriptome-wide association studies. Nat Genet 51: 592–599, 2019pmid:30926968
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Cirulli ET,
    2. White S,
    3. Read RW,
    4. Elhanan G,
    5. Metcalf WJ,
    6. Tanudjaja F,
    7. Fath DM,
    8. Sandoval E,
    9. Isaksson M,
    10. Schlauch KA,
    11. Grzymski JJ,
    12. Lu JT,
    13. Washington NL
    : Genome-wide rare variant analysis for thousands of phenotypes in over 70,000 exomes from two cohorts. Nat Commun 11: 542, 2020pmid:31992710
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Sham PC,
    2. Purcell SM
    : Statistical power and significance testing in large-scale genetic studies. Nat Rev Genet 15: 335–346, 2014pmid:24739678
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Moutsianas L,
    2. Agarwala V,
    3. Fuchsberger C,
    4. Flannick J,
    5. Rivas MA,
    6. Gaulton KJ,
    7. Albers PK,
    8. McVean G,
    9. Boehnke M,
    10. Altshuler D,
    11. McCarthy MI
    ; GoT2D Consortium: The power of gene-based rare variant methods to detect disease-associated variation and test hypotheses about complex disease. PLoS Genet 11: e1005165, 2015pmid:25906071
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Tam V,
    2. Patel N,
    3. Turcotte M,
    4. Bossé Y,
    5. Paré G,
    6. Meyre D
    : Benefits and limitations of genome-wide association studies. Nat Rev Genet 20: 467–484, 2019pmid:31068683
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Schaid DJ,
    2. Chen W,
    3. Larson NB
    : From genome-wide associations to candidate causal variants by statistical fine-mapping. Nat Rev Genet 19: 491–504, 2018pmid:29844615
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Povysil G,
    2. Petrovski S,
    3. Hostyk J,
    4. Aggarwal V,
    5. Allen AS,
    6. Goldstein DB
    : Rare-variant collapsing analyses for complex traits: Guidelines and applications. Nat Rev Genet 20: 747–759, 2019pmid:31605095
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Yamada K,
    2. Huang ZQ,
    3. Raska M,
    4. Reily C,
    5. Anderson JC,
    6. Suzuki H,
    7. Ueda H,
    8. Moldoveanu Z,
    9. Kiryluk K,
    10. Suzuki Y,
    11. Wyatt RJ,
    12. Tomino Y,
    13. Gharavi AG,
    14. Weinmann A,
    15. Julian BA,
    16. Willey CD,
    17. Novak J
    : Inhibition of STAT3 signaling reduces IgA1 autoantigen production in IgA nephropathy. Kidney Int Rep 2: 1194–1207, 2017pmid:29270528
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Welsh-Bacic D,
    2. Lindenmeyer M,
    3. Cohen CD,
    4. Draganovici D,
    5. Mandelbaum J,
    6. Edenhofer I,
    7. Ziegler U,
    8. Regele H,
    9. Wüthrich RP,
    10. Segerer S
    : Expression of the chemokine receptor CCR6 in human renal inflammation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 26: 1211–1220, 2011pmid:20844183
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Lu G,
    2. Zhang X,
    3. Shen L,
    4. Qiao Q,
    5. Li Y,
    6. Sun J,
    7. Zhang J
    : CCL20 secreted from IgA1-stimulated human mesangial cells recruits inflammatory Th17 cells in IgA nephropathy. PLoS One 12: e0178352, 2017pmid:28552941
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Tortajada A,
    2. Gutierrez E,
    3. Pickering MC,
    4. Praga Terente M,
    5. Medjeral-Thomas N
    : The role of complement in IgA nephropathy. Mol Immunol 114: 123–132, 2019pmid:31351413
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Rollino C,
    2. Vischini G,
    3. Coppo R
    : IgA nephropathy and infections. J Nephrol 29: 463–468, 2016pmid:26800970
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Moledina DG,
    2. Wilson FP,
    3. Pober JS,
    4. Perazella MA,
    5. Singh N,
    6. Luciano RL,
    7. Obeid W,
    8. Lin H,
    9. Kuperman M,
    10. Moeckel GW,
    11. Kashgarian M,
    12. Cantley LG,
    13. Parikh CR
    : Urine TNF-α and IL-9 for clinical diagnosis of acute interstitial nephritis. JCI Insight 4: e127456, 2019pmid:31092735
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Li DY,
    2. Liu D,
    3. Wang SX,
    4. Yu XJ,
    5. Cui Z,
    6. Zhou FD,
    7. Zhao MH
    : Renal leukocyte chemotactic factor 2 (ALECT2)-associated amyloidosis in Chinese patients. Amyloid 27: 134–141, 2020pmid:32024381
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Geng XD,
    2. Wang WW,
    3. Feng Z,
    4. Liu R,
    5. Cheng XL,
    6. Shen WJ,
    7. Dong ZY,
    8. Cai GY,
    9. Chen XM,
    10. Hong Q,
    11. Wu D
    : Identification of key genes and pathways in diabetic nephropathy by bioinformatics analysis. J Diabetes Investig 10: 972–984, 2019pmid:30536626
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Lebdai S,
    2. Verhoest G,
    3. Parikh H,
    4. Jacquet SF,
    5. Bensalah K,
    6. Chautard D,
    7. Rioux Leclercq N,
    8. Azzouzi AR,
    9. Bigot P
    : Identification and validation of TGFBI as a promising prognosis marker of clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol 33: 69.e11–69.e18, 2015pmid:25035170
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Koumakis E,
    2. Bouaziz M,
    3. Dieudé P,
    4. Ruiz B,
    5. Riemekasten G,
    6. Airo P,
    7. Müller-Nurasyid M,
    8. Cusi D,
    9. Matucci-Cerinic M,
    10. Melchers I,
    11. Salvi E,
    12. Strauch K,
    13. Peters A,
    14. Cuomo G,
    15. Hachulla E,
    16. Diot E,
    17. Hunzelmann N,
    18. Caramaschi P,
    19. Riccieri V,
    20. Distler JH,
    21. Tarner I,
    22. Avouac J,
    23. Letenneur L,
    24. Amouyel P,
    25. Lambert JC,
    26. Chiocchia G,
    27. Boileau C,
    28. Allanore Y
    : A regulatory variant in CCR6 is associated with susceptibility to antitopoisomerase-positive systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 65: 3202–3208, 2013pmid:23983073
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Zhou XJ,
    2. Mu R,
    3. Li C,
    4. Nath SK,
    5. Zhang YM,
    6. Qi YY,
    7. Li ZG,
    8. Zhao MH,
    9. Zhang H
    : Association of variants in CCR6 with susceptibility to lupus nephritis in Chinese. Arthritis Rheumatol 67: 3091–3093, 2015pmid:26138531
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Hu X,
    2. Feng J,
    3. Deng S,
    4. Tang J,
    5. Liao Z,
    6. Luo L,
    7. Luo L,
    8. Meng T,
    9. Gong G,
    10. Li X
    : Anaphylatoxins enhance Th9 cell recruitment via the CCL20-CCR6 axis in IgA nephropathy. J Nephrol 33: 1027–1036, 2020pmid:32036611
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Jakkula E,
    2. Leppä V,
    3. Sulonen AM,
    4. Varilo T,
    5. Kallio S,
    6. Kemppinen A,
    7. Purcell S,
    8. Koivisto K,
    9. Tienari P,
    10. Sumelahti ML,
    11. Elovaara I,
    12. Pirttilä T,
    13. Reunanen M,
    14. Aromaa A,
    15. Oturai AB,
    16. Søndergaard HB,
    17. Harbo HF,
    18. Mero IL,
    19. Gabriel SB,
    20. Mirel DB,
    21. Hauser SL,
    22. Kappos L,
    23. Polman C,
    24. De Jager PL,
    25. Hafler DA,
    26. Daly MJ,
    27. Palotie A,
    28. Saarela J,
    29. Peltonen L
    : Genome-wide association study in a high-risk isolate for multiple sclerosis reveals associated variants in STAT3 gene. Am J Hum Genet 86: 285–291, 2010pmid:20159113
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Arakawa T,
    2. Masaki T,
    3. Hirai T,
    4. Doi S,
    5. Kuratsune M,
    6. Arihiro K,
    7. Kohno N,
    8. Yorioka N
    : Activation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 correlates with cell proliferation and renal injury in human glomerulonephritis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 3418–3426, 2008pmid:18556750
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Tang Y,
    2. He H,
    3. Sun W,
    4. Hu P,
    5. Chen X,
    6. Xu X
    : Corticosteroid therapy in IgA nephropathy with minimal proteinuria and high renal pathological score: A single-center cohort study. Mol Med Rep 18: 4103–4112, 2018pmid:30132546
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Pace J,
    2. Paladugu P,
    3. Das B,
    4. He JC,
    5. Mallipattu SK
    : Targeting STAT3 signaling in kidney disease. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 316: F1151–F1161, 2019pmid:30943069
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Zhang JY,
    2. Wang M,
    3. Tian L,
    4. Genovese G,
    5. Yan P,
    6. Wilson JG,
    7. Thadhani R,
    8. Mottl AK,
    9. Appel GB,
    10. Bick AG,
    11. Sampson MG,
    12. Alper SL,
    13. Friedman DJ,
    14. Pollak MR
    : UBD modifies APOL1-induced kidney disease risk. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 115: 3446–3451, 2018pmid:29531077
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Zhou XJ,
    2. Cheng FJ,
    3. Zhu L,
    4. Lv JC,
    5. Qi YY,
    6. Hou P,
    7. Zhang H
    : Association of systemic lupus erythematosus susceptibility genes with IgA nephropathy in a Chinese cohort. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 9: 788–797, 2014pmid:24458077
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Jullien P,
    2. Laurent B,
    3. Claisse G,
    4. Masson I,
    5. Dinic M,
    6. Thibaudin D,
    7. Berthoux F,
    8. Alamartine E,
    9. Mariat C,
    10. Maillard N
    : Deletion variants of CFHR1 and CFHR3 associate with mesangial immune deposits but not with progression of IgA nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 29: 661–669, 2018pmid:29114042
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Xie J,
    2. Kiryluk K,
    3. Li Y,
    4. Mladkova N,
    5. Zhu L,
    6. Hou P,
    7. Ren H,
    8. Wang W,
    9. Zhang H,
    10. Chen N,
    11. Gharavi AG
    : Fine mapping implicates a deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 in protection from IgA nephropathy in Han Chinese. J Am Soc Nephrol 27: 3187–3194, 2016pmid:26940089
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Zhu L,
    2. Zhai YL,
    3. Wang FM,
    4. Hou P,
    5. Lv JC,
    6. Xu DM,
    7. Shi SF,
    8. Liu LJ,
    9. Yu F,
    10. Zhao MH,
    11. Novak J,
    12. Gharavi AG,
    13. Zhang H
    : Variants in complement factor H and complement factor H-related protein genes, CFHR3 and CFHR1, affect complement activation in IgA nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 26: 1195–1204, 2015pmid:25205734
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Shi D,
    2. Zhong Z,
    3. Wang M,
    4. Cai L,
    5. Fu D,
    6. Peng Y,
    7. Guo L,
    8. Mao H,
    9. Yu X,
    10. Li M
    : Identification of susceptibility locus shared by IgA nephropathy and inflammatory bowel disease in a Chinese Han population. J Hum Genet 65: 241–249, 2020pmid:31857673
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: 16 (2)
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Vol. 16, Issue 2
February 08, 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Sign up for Alerts
Email Article
Thank you for your help in sharing the high-quality science in CJASN.
Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Exome Chip Analyses and Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy among Han Chinese
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Society of Nephrology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Society of Nephrology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Exome Chip Analyses and Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy among Han Chinese
Xu-jie Zhou, Lam C. Tsoi, Yong Hu, Matthew T. Patrick, Kevin He, Celine C. Berthier, Yanming Li, Yan-na Wang, Yuan-yuan Qi, Yue-miao Zhang, Ting Gan, Yang Li, Ping Hou, Li-jun Liu, Su-fang Shi, Ji-cheng Lv, Hu-ji Xu, Hong Zhang
CJASN Feb 2021, 16 (2) 213-224; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.06910520

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Exome Chip Analyses and Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy among Han Chinese
Xu-jie Zhou, Lam C. Tsoi, Yong Hu, Matthew T. Patrick, Kevin He, Celine C. Berthier, Yanming Li, Yan-na Wang, Yuan-yuan Qi, Yue-miao Zhang, Ting Gan, Yang Li, Ping Hou, Li-jun Liu, Su-fang Shi, Ji-cheng Lv, Hu-ji Xu, Hong Zhang
CJASN Feb 2021, 16 (2) 213-224; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.06910520
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Visual Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosures
    • Funding
    • Acknowledgements
    • Supplemental Material
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF

More in this TOC Section

Original Articles

  • Association of Polypharmacy with Kidney Disease Progression in Adults with CKD
  • The Effect of Atrasentan on Kidney and Heart Failure Outcomes by Baseline Albuminuria and Kidney Function
  • Collectin11 and Complement Activation in IgA Nephropathy
Show more Original Articles

Genetics

  • GWAS of Hematuria
  • APOL1 Kidney Risk Variants and Proteomics
Show more Genetics

Cited By...

  • Assessing Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy: State of the Art
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Related Articles

  • Assessing Genetic Risk for IgA Nephropathy
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Keywords

  • IgA nephropathy
  • exome
  • exome-wide association study
  • genetic variants
  • differential expression
  • gene network

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Access
  • Subject Collections
  • Article Archive
  • ASN Meeting Abstracts

Information for Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Trainee of the Year
  • Author Resources
  • ASN Journal Policies
  • Reuse/Reprint Policy

About

  • CJASN
  • ASN
  • ASN Journals
  • ASN Kidney News

Journal Information

  • About CJASN
  • CJASN Email Alerts
  • CJASN Key Impact Information
  • CJASN Podcasts
  • CJASN RSS Feeds
  • Editorial Board

More Information

  • Advertise
  • ASN Podcasts
  • ASN Publications
  • Become an ASN Member
  • Feedback
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Password/Email Address Changes
  • Subscribe to ASN Journals

© 2022 American Society of Nephrology

Print ISSN - 1555-9041 Online ISSN - 1555-905X

Powered by HighWire