4.5 Article

Associations between proteins and heavy metals in urine at low environmental exposures: Evidence of reverse causality

期刊

TOXICOLOGY LETTERS
卷 210, 期 3, 页码 345-352

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2012.02.005

关键词

Cadmium; Lead; Heavy metals; Proteinuria; Albuminuria; Retinol-binding protein; beta(2)-microglobulin; Reverse causality

资金

  1. Swedish Council for the Working Life and Social Research
  2. Medical faculty of Lund University
  3. County Councils of southern Sweden
  4. European Union (EU) [FOOD-CT-2006-016253]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heavy metals can cause renal effects on vulnerable populations but it is uncertain whether these metals still pose health risks at the low exposure levels now prevailing in most industrialized countries. In a cross-sectional study performed on 736 adolescents, we assessed the associations between the concentrations of cadmium and lead in blood and urine and the urinary concentrations of albumin and of low-molecular-weight (LMW) proteins, retinol-binding protein (RBP) and beta(2)-microglobulin. Multiple regression analyses were tested using urinary markers normalized to urinary creatinine or specific gravity. Median metal concentrations were in blood (mu g/L): lead. 15.1, cadmium, 0.18 and in urine (mu g/g creatinine): cadmium, 0.09 and lead, 0.82. Multivariate analyses revealed significant associations in urine between RBP and cadmium as well as between beta(2)-microglobulin and lead whereas no associations were seen with metals in blood. These associations were completely abolished in subjects with increased urinary albumin, which may be explained by the competitive inhibition of LMW protein reabsorption by albumin. Given the evidence that cadmium and lead circulate mainly bound to LMW proteins, these associations observed at low exposure might simply reflect the interindividual variations in the renal uptake of proteins sharing the same affinity for tubular binding sites. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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