Professor of Medicine and Renal Division Chief at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine

Kirk Campbell, MD

APOL1-Mediated Kidney Disease: From Genetic Discovery to the Edge of Precision Medicine


A decade and a half after APOL1 was linked to kidney disease, clinicians are still grappling with misdiagnosis, unpredictable progression, and uneven access to genetic insight, just as targeted therapies begin to emerge.

Kirk Campbell, MD, Professor of Medicine and Chief of the Renal Division at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine.

Pranav Garimella, MD, Chief Medical Officer of the American Kidney Fund,

Kristin Meliambro, MD, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

Katalin Susztak, MD, PhD, is a Professor of Medicine and Genetics at the University of Pennsylvania

John Cijan He, MD, PhD, Professor of Medicine and Pharmacological Sciences and Chief of the Division of Nephrology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

A Genetic Discovery That Reshaped Kidney Disease Risk

In the span of roughly 16 years, APOL1 has moved from evolutionary curiosity to one of the most important genetic risk factors in nephrology.

The G1 and G2 variants, enriched in populations with West and Central African ancestry, rose in frequency because they confer protection against 

 infection. Today, they are recognized as among the strongest common genetic risk factors for kidney disease.

Approximately one-third of African Americans carry at least one high-risk APOL1 variant, and about 14% carry the high-risk genotype—two risk alleles in combinations such as G1/G1, G2/G2, or G1/G2. Globally, more than 100 million people in sub-Saharan Africa are estimated to carry two risk variants, with frequencies reaching 37% in parts of Ghana and 50% in southeastern Nigeria.

“It is a long time,” said Campbell. “But the fact that it took 13 years from the discovery of APOL1 kidney disease genetic association to the first proof-of-concept APOL1 inhibitor efficacy report should be celebrated.”

At the same time, Campbell emphasized ongoing uncertainty:

“There are still no approved APOL1-specific therapies, no consensus on population screening, limited ability to predict who among carriers will progress, and unresolved questions about ‘second hits,’” he said.

Rethinking a Default Diagnosis: Hypertension as Explanation — or Misclassification

Before APOL1 can be treated, it must be recognized—and that remains a persistent challenge.

Hypertensive nephrosclerosis has long served as a default diagnosis for chronic kidney disease in patients with hypertension, particularly Black patients. But emerging evidence suggests this label often obscures more specific and potentially treatable disease.

One biopsy-based study found that clinical criteria for nephrosclerosis had a sensitivity of just 0.13. Even optimized algorithms only reached 0.19, and roughly 40% of clinically diagnosed cases were found to have alternative diagnoses such as glomerulonephritis or interstitial nephritis.

Clinicians increasingly caution against treating hypertension as the primary explanation by default. “Hypertensive nephrosclerosis is often a diagnosis of exclusion,” Garimella noted. “Some patients labeled that way actually have APOL1-associated kidney disease, FSGS, or another primary kidney disorder.”

The reframing has clinical and psychological implications. Elevated blood pressure may in some cases be a consequence rather than a cause of kidney disease.

“Sometimes patients feel that explanation doesn’t fully make sense, especially if their hypertension hasn’t seemed severe,” Meliambro observed. “Recognizing that there may have been more going on can be validating rather than implying they did something wrong.”

The data on blood pressure management remain nuanced. Some studies show intensive blood pressure control does not necessarily slow progression in high-risk APOL1 carriers, while other data suggest a survival benefit with more intensive control compared with standard targets.

The introduction of a dedicated ICD code for APOL1-mediated kidney disease represents an important structural shift, enabling more precise diagnosis, counseling, and trial referral.

The Core Problem: Risk Without Prediction

While identifying APOL1 risk variants is now straightforward, predicting outcomes remains the central clinical challenge.

Carriers of two high-risk alleles face an estimated 15%–20% lifetime risk of kidney disease—meaning roughly 80% will never develop kidney failure.

“This represents a major knowledge gap,” Susztak explained. “If you receive a genotype result, you start asking: should I be doing something specific to prevent disease?”

Traditional risk models have not resolved this. Polygenic risk scores have failed to improve prediction in APOL1 high-risk individuals. Clinical risk scores based on eGFR, proteinuria, age, and sex perform well in established disease but are not clinically meaningful in preserved kidney function, she said.

“Some work has suggested that the G1/G1 genotype might be associated with a higher risk of decline in GFR and also a younger age of developing kidney disease,” Meliambro noted, adding that this requires further validation. High-risk genotype is still defined as any two risk alleles.

To address this gap, researchers turned to proteomics.

In a study of approximately 1,400 African American individuals from the Penn Medicine Biobank—many with preserved kidney function and no proteinuria at baseline—researchers analyzed roughly 7,700 circulating proteins.

Using machine learning, they identified nine proteins that, combined with clinical variables, formed the APOL1 Proteomic Risk Score (APRS), achieving a time-dependent AUC of 86.5%.

Individuals in the highest-risk quintile had approximately a 60% probability of progressing to dialysis or transplant over 10 years, while those in the lowest-risk quintile had less than a 1% risk. The score outperformed both the Kidney Failure Risk Equation and polygenic risk scores.

“Some of these proteins are related to tissue damage in the kidney that is not reflected in creatinine levels or urinary protein,” Susztak said. “For example, markers like MMP7 and matrix proteins may reflect fibrosis or injury that isn’t detected with standard tests.”

Others reflect inflammatory and endothelial pathways.

The score has been validated in external cohorts, including UK Biobank and NIH-supported data, but remains a research tool.

“We need to incorporate this biomarker into clinical trials and demonstrate that it is actionable,” she said. “Currently, we can treat the disease but not cure it.”

What APOL1 Biology Is Revealing About Early Kidney Injury

Beyond prediction, APOL1 research is reshaping understanding of early disease biology.

“In African American patients, we know the APOL1 gene is a high-risk gene for what we call APOL1-mediated glomerular disease, which is essentially like FSGS,” said He. “When this gene is highly expressed, it can cause podocyte injury through specific cellular pathways.”

“Some of these proteins are related to tissue damage in the kidney that is not reflected in creatinine levels or urinary proteins,” Susztak said.

“Other proteins are linked to inflammation. APOL1 is strongly regulated by inflammation, so individuals with higher inflammatory states may be at greater risk.”

“And there are a few proteins related to endothelial injury that we are still working to understand.”

Together, these findings suggest injury may precede traditional clinical markers such as proteinuria or eGFR decline.

From Biology to Therapy: Precision Medicine Takes Shape

Mechanistic insight has enabled targeted drug development.

“Based on that mechanism, therapies have been developed to block the pathways activated by APOL1,” He said. “These inhibitors have shown promising results in reducing proteinuria in phase 2 studies, with ongoing phase 3 trials.”

Inaxaplin directly targets APOL1 pore formation in podocytes.

“This is a very specific, targeted therapy that inhibits the pore-forming function of the APOL1 protein,” Meliambro said. “It represents a true example of precision medicine in nephrology.”

Other approaches include antisense oligonucleotides and anti-inflammatory strategies.

Despite therapeutic advances, management remains standard CKD care.

“A two-risk-variant APOL1 genotype raises concern for progressive disease,” Garimella explained. “But the treatment backbone remains standard CKD care.”

That includes RAAS blockade, SGLT2 inhibitors when appropriate, blood pressure control, statins, and avoidance of nephrotoxins.

“APOL1 testing is worth considering when the result can change follow-up, trial eligibility, transplant donor counseling, or future targeted-treatment decisions,” Campbell said. “But it should come with counseling, and it should never replace a full kidney-disease workup.”

“Awareness only matters if it changes decisions such as diagnosis, counseling, testing, referral, or follow-up,” Garimella said.

The ICD code for APOL1-mediated kidney disease may help translate awareness into action.

Barriers to Integration and Uneven Adoption

Despite availability of testing, adoption remains inconsistent.

“It’s not necessarily ordering the test—it’s interpreting and explaining the results,” Meliambro said.

Barriers include lack of guidelines, limited genetic counseling infrastructure, and patient concerns about privacy and discrimination.

Equity Will Define the Impact of Precision Medicine

“Equitable access would require more than drug approval,” Campbell said. “It would require payer coverage for testing, counseling, nephrology referral, and medication.”

“Otherwise, we risk repeating the same inequities,” he said. “Patients with better access get tested and treated, while underserved populations remain underdiagnosed.”

The decision to hold a major consensus meeting in Accra reflects the field’s shifting center of gravity.

“This is a rapidly evolving field,” Meliambro said. “There has been substantial research progress. But there are still many unresolved questions—especially around predicting disease progression and translating this knowledge into improved patient outcomes.”

“There is significant investment and enthusiasm,” she added. “Hopefully that will lead to meaningful breakthroughs in the near future.”

Campbell reports relevant disclosures with NIH, National Kidney Foundation. Garimella reports relevant disclosures with NIH. Meliambro reports no relevant disclosures identified. Susztak reports relevant disclosures with NIH. He reports no relevant disclosures identified.

Genovese G, Friedman DJ, Ross MD, et al. Association of trypanolytic ApoL1 variants with kidney disease in African Americans. Science. 2010;329(5993):841-845. doi:10.1126/science.1193032

Tzur S, Rosset S, Shemer R, 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. 2010;128(3):345-350. doi:10.1007/s00439-010-0861-0

Friedman DJ, Pollak MR. APOL1 nephropathy: from genetics to clinical applications. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2021;16(2):294-303. doi:10.2215/CJN.15161119

Gbadegesin RA, Ulasi I, Ajayi S, et al. APOL1 bi- and monoallelic variants and chronic kidney disease in West Africans. N Engl J Med. 2025;392:228-238. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2403840

Hallan S, Øien CM, Garborg K, et al. Hypertensive nephrosclerosis: wider kidney biopsy indications may be needed to improve diagnostics. J Intern Med. 2021;289(4):527-540. doi:10.1111/joim.13146

Ojo A, Ulasi I, Freedman BI, et al. APOL1 kidney disease: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. Published online June 23, 2025. doi:10.1016/j.kint.2025.04.029

Li C, et al. Proteomic risk score for early prediction of kidney disease progression in individuals with APOL1 high-risk genotypes. Nat Med. Published online April 15, 2026. doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04337-2

Egbuna O, Zimmerman B, Manos G, et al. Inaxaplin for proteinuric kidney disease in persons with two APOL1 variants. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(11):969-979. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2202396

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. Vertex advances inaxaplin (VX-147) into phase 3 portion of adaptive phase 2/3 clinical trial for the treatment of APOL1-mediated kidney disease. Press release. April 1, 2024. Accessed May 1, 2026. https://news.vrtx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/vertex-advances-inaxaplin-vx-147-phase-3-portion-adaptive-phase

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. Vertex announces key advancements across kidney portfolio. Press release. September 25, 2025. Accessed May 1, 2026. https://news.vrtx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/vertex-announces-key-advancements-across-kidney-portfolio

Maze Therapeutics. Maze Therapeutics doses first patient in phase 2 HORIZON clinical trial evaluating MZE829 as a potential treatment for APOL1 kidney disease. Press release. February 7, 2025. Accessed May 1, 2026. https://ir.mazetx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/maze-therapeutics-doses-first-patient-phase-2-horizon-clinical

Maze Therapeutics. Maze Therapeutics announces positive topline data from phase 2 HORIZON trial of MZE829. Press release. March 25, 2026. Accessed May 1, 2026. https://ir.mazetx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/maze-therapeutics-announces-positive-topline-data-phase-2

Articles

APOL1 G1/G2 variants, selected for trypanosome resistance, are prevalent in people with West/Central African ancestry and drive substantial CKD and FSGS risk, yet progression remains poorly predictable. Hypertensive nephrosclerosis frequently misclassifies underlying glomerular or interstitial disease, prompting calls for more precise workups and use of the new APOL1-mediated kidney disease ICD code. A nine-protein APOL1 Proteomic Risk Score stratifies 10-year kidney failure risk far better than existing models. Targeted APOL1 inhibitors (eg, inaxaplin) and other modalities are advancing, while equitable access to testing, counseling, and therapy lags.

APOL1 research is driving precision nephrology, but prediction gaps and equity challenges still limit clinical impact.

APOL1-Mediated Kidney Disease: From Genetic Discovery to the Edge of Precision Medicine

April 28th, 2026, was the American Kidney Fund’s third annual APOL1-Mediated Kidney Disease (AMKD) Awareness Day, which urges clinicians to identify high-risk patients of African ancestry with unexplained kidney failure.

More than a decade after the discovery of APOL1 risk variants, translation into clinical care has been slower than many anticipated, with the field reaching an important milestone with the first proof-of-concept data for APOL1-targeted therapies.

As these treatments advance and longstanding questions around risk prediction, screening, and access remain unresolved, the focus is shifting toward how to translate this progress into equitable, real-world care.

In this Q&A, Kirk Campbell, MD, a nephrologist at Penn Medicine, discusses the evolving clinical landscape of APOL1-mediated kidney disease, the challenges that have slowed progress, and what must change to ensure emerging advances reach the patients most at risk.

HCPLive: We’ve known about APOL1’s role in kidney disease for over a decade. Why has translation into clinical practice been so slow and what has that delay meant for patients?

Campbell: It is a long time, but the fact that it took 13 years from the discovery of APOL1 kidney disease genetic association to the first proof-of-concept APOL1 inhibitor efficacy report should be celebrated. At the same time, the many uncertainties around disease pathogenesis have slowed translation in several ways. There are still no approved APOL1-specific therapies, no consensus on population screening, limited ability to predict who among carriers will progress and unresolved questions about “second hits,”

For patients carrying APOL1 high-risk variants, what does “risk” translate to in terms of real-world monitoring and follow-up today?

Approximately 14% of African Americans have the APOl1 high risk genotype. These two APOL1 risk variants confer roughly a 15%–20% lifetime chance of kidney disease, while also emphasizing that about 80% of people with two risk variants do not develop kidney disease

: With AMPLITUDE now in Phase 3 and Maze Therapeutics advancing a Phase 2 program, if one of these therapies succeeds, what needs to happen to ensure equitable access, particularly for patients with the highest genetic risk?

Campbell: Equitable access would require more than drug approval. It would require payer coverage for APOL1 testing, genetic counseling, urine albumin testing, nephrology referral, and the medication itself. It would also require that eligibility be based on genotype and clinical phenotype, not crude racial categories. Otherwise, we risk repeating the same inequities: patients with better insurance and academic-center access get tested and treated, while safety-net, rural, and historically underserved remain underdiagnosed. The highest-burden regions cannot be an afterthought. KDIGO notes that APOL1 kidney disease disproportionately affects communities with limited health-care and research infrastructure, and the report calls for community engagement, education, and clinical-trial participation strategies involving trusted community partners

: There’s ongoing debate about how to frame APOL1 risk, as a biological story, a population genetics story, or one rooted in structural inequities. Where do you land on that, and has your thinking evolved?

I would not choose only one frame. APOL1 is a biological mechanism, a population-genetics story, and a health-equity story at the same time. The biology matters because APOL1 variants can injure kidney cells and are now targetable. The population-genetics story matters because G1 and G2 variants are enriched in people with West and Central African ancestry and likely rose in frequency because of protection against certain trypanosomal infections. But the structural inequity story is just as important. Genetics may help explain susceptibility; it does not explain who gets screened, who has a primary care relationship, who sees a nephrologist early, who gets a transplant evaluation, who is offered genetic counseling, or who can afford a precision medicine.

: The KDIGO conference on APOL1 was held in Accra, Ghana. What does it mean for the field to be having these conversations on the African continent, and does that reflect a meaningful shift toward meeting patients where they are?

Campbell: It matters a lot. West Africa is central to our understanding of APOL1 kidney disease. KDIGO reports very high frequencies of APOL1 high-risk genotypes in West African populations, including up to 37% in Central Ghana and 50% in Southeastern Nigeria, and estimates that more than 100 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa may have two APOL1 high-risk alleles.

Holding the conference in Accra signals that the field is beginning to locate the conversation closer to the populations most affected, rather than treating African populations only as a source of retrospective genetic insight.

: If you had to leave clinicians with one practical implication about APOL1 today, what should it be?

Campbell: APOL1 testing is worth considering when the result can change follow-up, trial eligibility, transplant donor counseling, or future targeted-treatment decisions. But the test should come with counseling, and it should never replace a full kidney-disease workup. KDIGO explicitly says APOL1 testing can guide risk stratification and follow-up, but should not preclude diagnostic evaluation, including biopsy when clinically indicated.

APOL1-Mediated Kidney Disease (AMKD) awareness efforts underscore the lag between discovery of APOL1 risk variants and meaningful clinical translation, despite emerging proof-of-concept inhibitor data and late-stage trials. About 14% of African Americans carry a high-risk genotype, translating to an estimated 15%–20% lifetime kidney-disease risk, while most carriers never progress, highlighting persistent gaps in prediction and “second hit” biology. Equitable implementation will require coverage for testing, counseling, monitoring, referrals, and therapy, plus genotype-driven—not race-based—eligibility and stronger community-engaged infrastructure.

Campbell answers questions about the current research and clinical landscape of APOL1-mediated kidney disease. 