4.7 Article

Tubular and glomerular kidney effects in Swedish women with low environmental cadmium exposure

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES
卷 113, 期 11, 页码 1627-1631

出版社

US DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.8033

关键词

cadmium; diabetes; environmental exposure; glomerular effects; hypertension; kidney; lead; population-based; tubular effects; women

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cadmium is a well-known nephrotoxic agent in food and tobacco, but the exposure level that is critical for kidney effects in the general population is not defined. Within a population-based women's health survey in southern Sweden (Women's Health in the Lund Area, WHILA), we investigated cadmium exposure in relation to tubular and glomerular function, from 1999 through early 2000 in 820 women (71% participation rate) 53-64 years of age. Multiple linear regression showed cadmium in blood (median, 0.38 mu g/L) and urine (0.52 mu g/L; density adjusted = 0.67 mu g/g creatinine) to be significantly associated with effects on renal tubules (as indicated by increased levels of human complex-forming protein and N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase in urine), after adjusting for age, body mass index, blood lead, diabetes, hypertension, and regular use of nephrotoxic drugs. The associations remained significant even at the low exposure in women who had never smoked. We also found associations with markers of glomerular effects: glomerular filtration rate and creatinine clearance. Significant effects were seen already at a mean urinary cadmium level of 0.6 mu g/L (0.8 mu g/g creatinine). Cadmium potentiated diabetes-induced effects on kidney. In conclusion, tubular renal effects occurred at lower cadmium levels than previously demonstrated, and more important, glomerular effects were also observed. Although the effects were small, they may represent early signs of adverse effects, affecting large segments of the population. Subjects with diabetes seem to be at increased risk.

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