3.8 Article

Clinical and Biological Determinants of Sclerostin Plasma Concentration in Hemodialysis Patients

期刊

NEPHRON CLINICAL PRACTICE
卷 128, 期 1-2, 页码 127-134

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000366449

关键词

Sclerostin; Bone turnover; Vascular calcification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Sclerostin is a potent inhibitor of bone formation, but the meaning of its serum levels remains undetermined. We evaluated the association between sclerostin levels and clinical or biological data in hemodialyzed patients (HD), notably parathormone (PTH), biomarkers of bone turnover, vascular calcifications and mortality after 2 years. Methods: 164 HD patients were included in this observational study. The calcification score was assessed with the Kauppila method. Patients were followed for 2 years. Results: Median sclerostin levels were significantly (p < 0.0001) higher in HD versus healthy subjects (n = 94) (1,375 vs. 565 pg/ml, respectively). In univariate analysis a significant association (p < 0.05) was found between sclerostin and age, height, dialysis vintage, albumin, troponin, homocysteine, PTH, C-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase and osteoprotegerin, but not with the calcification score. In a multivariate model, the association remained with age, height, dialysis vintage, troponin, homocysteine, phosphate, PTH, but also with vascular calcifications. Association was positive for all variables, except PTH and vascular calcifications. The baseline sclerostin concentration was not different in survivors and non-survivors. Conclusions: We confirm a higher concentration of sclerostin in HD patients, a positive association with age and a negative association with PTH. A positive association with phosphate, homocysteine and troponin calls for additional research. The clinical interest of sclerostin to assess vascular calcifications in HD is limited and no association was found between sclerostin and mortality. (C) 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据