4.5 Review

Cell-free DNA: the role in pathophysiology and as a biomarker in kidney diseases

Journal

EXPERT REVIEWS IN MOLECULAR MEDICINE
Volume 20, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/erm.2017.12

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation [DFG: SFB/TRR57, SFB/TRR219, BO3755/3-1, BO 3755/6-1]
  2. German Ministry of Education and Research [BMBF: STOP-FSGS-01GM1518A]
  3. Slovak Research & Development Agency [APVV-16-0273]
  4. Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic [VEGA 1/0156/17, VEGA 1/0092/17]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is present in various body fluids and originates mostly from blood cells. In specific conditions, circulating cfDNA might be derived from tumours, donor organs after transplantation or from the foetus during pregnancy. The analysis of cfDNA is mainly used for genetic analyses of the source tissue tumour, foetus or for the early detection of graft rejection. It might serve also as a nonspecific biomarker of tissue damage in critical care medicine. In kidney diseases, cfDNA increases during haemodialysis and indicates cell damage. In patients with renal cell carcinoma, cfDNA in plasma and its integrity is studied for monitoring of tumour growth, the effects of chemotherapy and for prognosis. Urinary cfDNA is highly fragmented, but the technical hurdles can now be overcome and urinary cfDNA is being evaluated as a potential biomarker of renal injury and urinary tract tumours. Beyond its diagnostic application, cfDNA might also be involved in the pathogenesis of diseases affecting the kidneys as shown for systemic lupus, sepsis and some pregnancy-related pathologies. Recent data suggest that increased cfDNA is associated with acute kidney injury. In this review, we discuss the biological characteristics, sources of cfDNA, its potential use as a biomarker as well as its role in the pathogenesis of renal and urinary diseases.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available