4.7 Review

Toll-Like Receptor as a Potential Biomarker in Renal Diseases

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms21186712

Keywords

acute kidney injury; biomarker; diabetic nephropathy; focal segmental glomerulosclerosis; innate immunity; membranous nephropathy; minimal change diseases; TLR

Funding

  1. Polish National Science Centre (NCN) [UMO-2016/23/B/NZ6/02844]
  2. Medical University of Lublin [DS460]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the major challenges faced by modern nephrology is the identification of biomarkers associated with histopathological patterns or defined pathogenic mechanisms that may assist in the non-invasive diagnosis of kidney disease, particularly glomerulopathy. The identification of such molecules may allow prognostic subgroups to be established based on the type of disease, thereby predicting response to treatment or disease relapse. Advances in understanding the pathogenesis of diseases, such as membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, IgA (immunoglobulin A) nephropathy, and diabetic nephropathy, along with the progressive development and standardization of plasma and urine proteomics techniques, have facilitated the identification of an increasing number of molecules that may be useful for these purposes. The growing number of studies on the role of TLR (toll-like receptor) receptors in the pathogenesis of kidney disease forces contemporary researchers to reflect on these molecules, which may soon join the group of renal biomarkers and become a helpful tool in the diagnosis of glomerulopathy. In this article, we conducted a thorough review of the literature on the role of TLRs in the pathogenesis of glomerulopathy. The role of TLR receptors as potential marker molecules for the development of neoplastic diseases is emphasized more and more often, as prognostic factors in diseases on several epidemiological backgrounds.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available