Dear Editor,

We thank Dr. Mubarak for his interest in and comment on our article “IgM nephropathy in children: clinicopathologic analysis”1. We agree with Dr. Mubarak that IgM nephropathy (IgMN) is a very controversial entity, with variable definitions in the different case series published. As in all series of glomerulopathy cases, the percentage frequency variability depends largely on the subjectivity of diagnosis in many cases, the characteristics of each study population and the denominator used to determine the percentage. We decided use all renal biopsies because it gives us an idea of the total frequency of cases and permit to compare with other glomerulopathies frequencies. In our series, 138 children were biopsied due to nephrotic syndrome, so IgMN percentage frequency in children with nephrotic syndrome was 9.4%. With respect minimum threshold of IgM positivity used for us in order to define IgM Nephropaty was “++”.

The evolution time in ours patients was 1 year until 21 years (diagnostic moment until last observation); but, we used the time between the first evaluation in this hospital and one year more like follow up.

Dr. Mubarak his appreciations about Table 1 is correct, we mistake this information because at moment of diagnosis, seven patients present hematuria and three hypertension. About laboratory information, ours creatine values are mg/dL and for proteinuria mg/m2/hours, and for last, those patients were classified like cortico-resistant or cortico-dependent in the last evaluations that we found.

Thank you for his correction.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest associated with this manuscript.