4.7 Article

Relationships among injury, fibrosis, and time in human kidney transplants

期刊

JCI INSIGHT
卷 1, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/jci.insight.85323

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND. Kidney transplant biopsies offer an opportunity to understand the pathogenesis of organ fibrosis. We studied the relationships between the time of biopsy after transplant (TxBx), histologic fibrosis, diseases, and transcript expression. METHODS. Expression microarrays from 681 kidney transplant indication biopsies taken either early (n = 282, <1 year) or late (n = 399, >1 year) after transplant were used to analyze the molecular landscape of fibrosis in relationship to histologic fibrosis and diseases. RESULTS. Fibrosis was absent at transplantation but was present in some early biopsies by 4 months after transplant, apparently as a self-limited response to donation implantation injury not associated with progression to failure. The molecular phenotype of early biopsies represented the time sequence of the response to wounding: immediate expression of acute kidney injury transcripts, followed by fibrillar collagen transcripts after several weeks, then by the appearance of immunoglobulin and mast cell transcripts after several months as fibrosis appeared. Fibrosis in late biopsies correlated with injury, fibrillar collagen, immunoglobulin, and mast cell transcripts, but these were independent of time. Pathway analysis revealed epithelial response-to-wounding pathways such as Wnt/beta-catenin. CONCLUSION. Fibrosis in late biopsies had different associations because many kidneys had potentially progressive diseases and subsequently failed. Molecular correlations with fibrosis in late biopsies were independent of time, probably because ongoing injury obscured the response-to-wounding time sequence. The results indicate that fibrosis in kidney transplants is driven by nephron injury and that progression to failure reflects continuing injury, not autonomous fibrogenesis.

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

4.7
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