| Literature DB >> 26923419 |
Rupesh Raina1,2, Linda Lou1,2, Bruce Berger3,2, Beth Vogt1,2, Angelique Sao-Mai Do3,2, Robert Cunningham1,2, Pauravi Vasavada4,2, Karin Herrmann4,2, Katherine Dell5,2, Michael Simonson6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathogenesis of progressive renal insufficiency in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is unclear. Evidence from experimental models of ADPKD suggests that elevated endothelin-1 (ET-1) drives cyst growth, renal fibrosis and loss of renal function, but whether ET-1 is elevated in humans with ADPKD is uncertain.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26923419 PMCID: PMC4770683 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-016-0232-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nephrol ISSN: 1471-2369 Impact factor: 2.388
Clinical characteristics of the cross-sectional sample of patients with ADPKD, n = 21
| Characteristic | Median (IQRa) |
|---|---|
| Age | 39.2 (25–50) |
| Female (%) | 29 |
| eGFR, ml/min/1.73 m2 | 63.2 (43.5–80.2) |
| Urine Albumin/Creatinine Ratio, μg/mg | 115.0 (7.5–58.5) |
| Total Kidney Volume, ml | 1270 (839–1545) |
| Systolic Blood Pressure, mm Hg | 123 (110–138) |
| Diastolic Blood Pressure, mm Hg | 88 (79–98) |
| Polycystic Liver Disease (%) | 22 |
| Renin Angiotensin System Inhibitors (%) | 82 |
| Tolvaptan (%) | 82 |
a IQR interquartile range
Fig. 1Urine ET-1 inversely correlated with eGFR in a cross-sectional analysis of 21 patients with ADPKD. ET-1 was measured by ELISA in spot urine specimens and values were adjusted for urine creatinine. Because the distribution of urine ET-1 was non-normal, log-transformed values were utilized
Summary of multiple linear regression model of ET-1, age and sex to predict eGFR and ACR in patients with ADPKD
| eGFR | ACR | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable |
| SE |
|
| SE |
|
| Urine ET-1 | −5.366 | 2.910 | 0.084 | 104.9 | 36.1 | 0.023 |
| Age | −1.017 | 0.388 | 0.019 | −14.7 | 6.1 | 0.041 |
| Sex | 8.978 | 12.541 | 0.484 | −118.2 | 152.7 | 0.461 |
Note: * P < 0.05; B unstandardized regression coefficient, SE standard error of B. Overall P for both models is P < 0.01
Fig. 2Positive correlation of urine ET-1 with total kidney volume. The log transform of urine ET-1 measured in spot urine specimens was plotted versus total kidney volume, r = 0.426, that did not attain statistical significance, P = 0.100. Identical results were obtained when TKV was referenced to participant height
Fig. 3Total kidney volume trended higher across quartiles of urine ET-1. Each box represents the 25th to 75th percentile, and the line represents the median total kidney volume within a given quartile of log urine ET-1. There was a trend towards higher total kidney volume as urine ET-1 increased, z = 1.83, P = 0.068