4.5 Article

Longitudinal assessment of the CXCL10 blood and urine concentration in kidney transplant recipients with BK polyomavirus replication-a retrospective study

期刊

TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL
卷 33, 期 5, 页码 555-566

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tri.13584

关键词

BK virus; CXCL10; kidney transplantation; nephropathy; polyomavirus

资金

  1. Sigrid Juselius Foundation
  2. Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation
  3. Medical Society of Finland (FLS)
  4. Helsinki University Hospital Research and Education Fund
  5. Austrian Science fund (Erwin Schrodinger fellowship) [J3962-B30]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) replication may progress to polyomavirus-associated nephropathy (PVAN). In this retrospective study, we assessed the chemokine CXCL10 in urine and blood samples consecutively acquired from 85 KTRs who displayed different stages of BKPyV replication and eventually developed PVAN. In parallel to progression toward PVAN, CXCL10 gradually increased in blood and urine, from baseline (prior to virus replication) to BKPyV DNAuria (median increase in blood: 42.15 pg/ml, P = 0.0156), from mere DNAuria to low- and high-level BKPyV DNAemia (median increase: 52.60 and 87.26 pg/ml, P = 0.0010 and P = 0.0002, respectively) and peaked with histologically confirmed PVAN (median increase: 145.00 pg/ml, P < 0.0001). CXCL10 blood and urine levels significantly differed among KTRs with respect to simultaneous presence of human cytomegalovirus (P < 0.001) as well as in relation to the clinical severity of respective BKPyV DNAemia episodes (P = 0.0195). CXCL-10 concentrations were particularly lower in KTRs in whom BKPyV DNAemia remained without clinical evidence for PVAN, as compared to individuals who displayed high decoy cell levels, decreased renal function and/or biopsy-proven PVAN (median blood concentration: 266.97 vs. 426.42 pg/ml, P = 0.0282). In conclusion, in KTRs CXCL10 rises in parallel to BKPyV replication and correlates with the gradual development of PVAN.

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