4.2 Review

Metabolomics and renal disease

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN NEPHROLOGY AND HYPERTENSION
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 371-379

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MNH.0000000000000136

Keywords

metabolite profiling; metabolomics; renal metabolism

Funding

  1. NIH [K08-DK-090142]
  2. Extramural Grant Program of Satellite Healthcare

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review This review summarizes recent metabolomics studies of renal disease, outlining some of the limitations of the literature to date. Recent findings The application of metabolomics in nephrology research has expanded from the initial analyses of uremia to include both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of earlier stages of kidney disease. Although these studies have nominated several potential markers of incident chronic kidney disease (CKD) and CKD progression, a lack of overlap in metabolite coverage has limited the ability to synthesize results across groups. Furthermore, direct examination of renal metabolite handling has underscored the substantial impact kidney function has on these potential markers (and many other circulating metabolites). In experimental studies, metabolomics has been used to identify a signature of decreased mitochondrial function in diabetic nephropathy and a preference for aerobic glucose metabolism in polycystic kidney disease. In each case, these studies have outlined novel therapeutic opportunities. Finally, as a complement to the longstanding interest in renal metabolite clearance, the microbiome has been increasingly recognized as the source of many plasma metabolites, including some with potential functional relevance to CKD and its complications. Summary The high-throughput, high-resolution phenotyping enabled by metabolomics technologies has begun to provide insight on renal disease in clinical, physiologic, and experimental contexts.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available