Wei Chen1, Viktoriya Anokhina2, Gregory Dieudonne3, Matthew K Abramowitz4, Randeep Kashyap5, Chen Yan1, Tong Tong Wu6, Karen L de Mesy Bentley7, Benjamin L Miller2,8,9, David A Bushinsky1. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 2. Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 6. Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 7. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 8. Department of Dermatology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA. 9. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The size of secondary calciprotein particles (CPP2) and the speed of transformation (T50) from primary calciprotein particles (CPP1) to CPP2 in serum may be associated with vascular calcification (VC) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We developed a high throughput, microplate-based assay using dynamic light scattering (DLS) to measure the transformation of CPP1 to CPP2, hydrodynamic radius (Rh) of CPP1 and CPP2, T50 and aggregation of CPP2. We used this DLS assay to test the hypothesis that a large Rh of CPP2 and/or a fast T50 are associated with VC in 45 participants with CKD Stages 4-5 (22 without VC and 23 with VC) and 17 healthy volunteers (HV). VC was defined as a Kauppila score >6 or an Adragao score ≥3. RESULTS: CKD participants with VC had larger cumulants Rh of CPP2 {370 nm [interquartile range (IQR) 272-566]} compared with CKD participants without VC [212 nm (IQR 169-315)] and compared with HV [168 nm (IQR 145-352), P < 0.01 for each]. More CPP2 were in aggregates in CKD participants with VC than those without VC (70% versus 36%). The odds of having VC increased by 9% with every 10 nm increase in the Rh of CPP2, after adjusting for age, diabetes, serum calcium and phosphate [odds ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03, 1.16, P = 0.005]. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for VC of CPP2 size was 0.75 (95% CI 0.60, 0.90). T50 was similar in CKD participants with and without VC, although both groups had a lower T50 than HV. CONCLUSIONS: Rh of CPP2, but not T50, is independently associated with VC in patients with CKD Stages 4-5.
BACKGROUND: The size of secondary calciprotein particles (CPP2) and the speed of transformation (T50) from primary calciprotein particles (CPP1) to CPP2 in serum may be associated with vascular calcification (VC) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We developed a high throughput, microplate-based assay using dynamic light scattering (DLS) to measure the transformation of CPP1 to CPP2, hydrodynamic radius (Rh) of CPP1 and CPP2, T50 and aggregation of CPP2. We used this DLS assay to test the hypothesis that a large Rh of CPP2 and/or a fast T50 are associated with VC in 45 participants with CKD Stages 4-5 (22 without VC and 23 with VC) and 17 healthy volunteers (HV). VC was defined as a Kauppila score >6 or an Adragao score ≥3. RESULTS: CKD participants with VC had larger cumulants Rh of CPP2 {370 nm [interquartile range (IQR) 272-566]} compared with CKD participants without VC [212 nm (IQR 169-315)] and compared with HV [168 nm (IQR 145-352), P < 0.01 for each]. More CPP2 were in aggregates in CKD participants with VC than those without VC (70% versus 36%). The odds of having VC increased by 9% with every 10 nm increase in the Rh of CPP2, after adjusting for age, diabetes, serum calcium and phosphate [odds ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03, 1.16, P = 0.005]. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for VC of CPP2 size was 0.75 (95% CI 0.60, 0.90). T50 was similar in CKD participants with and without VC, although both groups had a lower T50 than HV. CONCLUSIONS: Rh of CPP2, but not T50, is independently associated with VC in patients with CKD Stages 4-5.
Authors: Edward R Smith; Martin L Ford; Laurie A Tomlinson; Chakravarthi Rajkumar; Lawrence P McMahon; Stephen G Holt Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2011-11-20 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: José L Górriz; Pablo Molina; M Jesús Cerverón; Rocío Vila; Jordi Bover; Javier Nieto; Guillermina Barril; Alberto Martínez-Castelao; Elvira Fernández; Verónica Escudero; Celestino Piñera; Teresa Adragao; Juan F Navarro-Gonzalez; Luis M Molinero; Cristina Castro-Alonso; Luis M Pallardó; Sophie A Jamal Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Andreas Pasch; Geoffrey A Block; Matthias Bachtler; Edward R Smith; Wilhelm Jahnen-Dechent; Spyridon Arampatzis; Glenn M Chertow; Patrick Parfrey; Xiaoye Ma; Juergen Floege Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Alexander Heiss; Thomas Eckert; Anke Aretz; Walter Richtering; Wim van Dorp; Cora Schäfer; Willi Jahnen-Dechent Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2008-03-25 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Joshua D Bundy; Xuan Cai; Julia J Scialla; Mirela A Dobre; Jing Chen; Chi-Yuan Hsu; Mary B Leonard; Alan S Go; Panduranga S Rao; James P Lash; Raymond R Townsend; Harold I Feldman; Ian H de Boer; Geoffrey A Block; Myles Wolf; Edward R Smith; Andreas Pasch; Tamara Isakova Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Mark K Tiong; Michael M X Cai; Nigel D Toussaint; Sven-Jean Tan; Andreas Pasch; Edward R Smith Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Sina Köppert; Andrea Büscher; Anne Babler; Ahmed Ghallab; Eva M Buhl; Eicke Latz; Jan G Hengstler; Edward R Smith; Willi Jahnen-Dechent Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Daria Shishkova; Elena Velikanova; Maxim Sinitsky; Anna Tsepokina; Olga Gruzdeva; Leo Bogdanov; Anton Kutikhin Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Julia Bavendiek; Philip Maurer; Steffen Gräber; Andreas Pasch; Werner Karl Schomburg; Willi Jahnen-Dechent Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Antonia E Schantl; Anja Verhulst; Ellen Neven; Geert J Behets; Patrick C D'Haese; Marc Maillard; David Mordasini; Olivier Phan; Michel Burnier; Dany Spaggiari; Laurent A Decosterd; Mark G MacAskill; Carlos J Alcaide-Corral; Adriana A S Tavares; David E Newby; Victoria C Beindl; Roberto Maj; Anne Labarre; Chrismita Hegde; Bastien Castagner; Mattias E Ivarsson; Jean-Christophe Leroux Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Wei Chen; Jessica Fitzpatrick; Jose M Monroy-Trujillo; Stephen M Sozio; Bernard G Jaar; Michelle M Estrella; Jishyra Serrano; Viktoriya Anokhina; Benjamin L Miller; Michal L Melamed; David A Bushinsky; Rulan S Parekh Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Mario Cozzolino; Giuseppe Cianciolo; Manuel Alfredo Podestà; Paola Ciceri; Andrea Galassi; Lorenzo Gasperoni; Gaetano La Manna Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-05-30 Impact factor: 5.717