4.2 Article

Urine exosomal ceruloplasmin: a potential early biomarker of underlying kidney disease

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL NEPHROLOGY
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 1013-1021

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10157-019-01734-5

关键词

Ceruloplasmin; Exosomes; Chronic kidney disease; Immunohistochemistry; Proteinuria; Heymann nephritis

资金

  1. Hektoen Institute for Medicine, Chicago IL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Previously we found that kidney tissue and urinary exosomes from patients of diabetic kidney disease showed high levels of ceruloplasmin (CP). Because CP is an acute-phase protein of kidney origin, it could be an early marker of many other kidney diseases. To investigate this hypothesis, we first measured urine exosomal and kidney expression of CP in non-diabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (membranous nephropathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, lupus nephritis and IgA nephropathy) followed by a longitudinal study in rat passive Heymann nephritis (PHN), a model of human membranous nephropathy. Methods Urinary exosomes were isolated from urine of patients (and rats) by differential centrifugation. The exosomal extracts were used for measuring CP using ELISA. Kidney expression of CP was evaluated by immune-staining biopsy tissues. Similar techniques were applied in rat PHN model (produced by injection of anti-gp600 antiserum) to analyze urine exosomal and kidney CP. Results Urine exosomal CP levels were 10-20 times higher in CKD patients than in controls; consistent with this we found high immune-reactive CP localized in tubules and collecting ducts of biopsies of CKD patients. In the PHN model urinary exosomal CP level was significantly higher prior to the onset of proteinuria. Early rise of urine exosomal CP, which preceded proteinuria, correlated with high immunoreactive CP found in rat kidneys at this time. Conclusion We propose that urine exosomal CP, observed to increase prior to proteinuria, makes it a potential urinary biomarker to diagnose early kidney disease.

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

4.2
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