| Literature DB >> 30239170 |
Jing-Min Zheng1,2, Zuan-Hong Jiang1, De-Jun Chen1, Sa-Sa Wang1, Wen-Jin Zhao2, Li-Juan Li2.
Abstract
AIMS/Entities:
Keywords: Diabetic nephropathy; Tubular injury; Urinary complement activation products
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30239170 PMCID: PMC6497774 DOI: 10.1111/jdi.12934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Investig ISSN: 2040-1116 Impact factor: 4.232
Figure 1Urinary levels of C3a, C5a and C5b‐9 in patients at different clinical stages of diabetic nephropathy. As the data about the levels of urinary complement activation products (including C3a, C5a and C5b‐9) were determined to be non‐normal, multigroup comparison was carried out using the Kruskal–Wallis test. The difference between the two groups was compared with a non‐parametric Wilcoxon rank sum test. (a) Urinary levels of C3a in different groups. (b) Urinary levels of C5a in different groups. (c) Urinary levels of C5b‐9 in different groups. Thick black line shows the median. **P < 0.01. DMG, diabetes mellitus group (without nephropathy); MG, microalbuminuria stage group; NG, normal control group; PG, proteinuria stage group; RIG, renal insufficiency stage group.
Correlation of urinary complement activation products level with clinical and renal pathological indices
| Indices | Urinary C3a level | Urinary C5a level | Urinary C5b‐9 level | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| eGFR | −0.706 | <0.001 | −0.630 | <0.001 | −0.562 | <0.001 |
| Serum creatinine | 0.727 | <0.001 | 0.633 | <0.001 | 0.614 | <0.001 |
| 24‐h urine protein | 0.848 | <0.001 | 0.838 | <0.001 | 0.885 | <0.001 |
| Tubular and interstitial lesion score | 0.632 | <0.001 | 0.634 | <0.001 | 0.636 | <0.001 |
| Relative tubular interstitial volume | 0.742 | <0.001 | 0.700 | <0.001 | 0.658 | <0.001 |
| Density of tubulointerstitial inflammatory cells | 0.617 | <0.001 | 0.569 | <0.001 | 0.487 | <0.001 |
The relationship of variables was determined by using Spearman correlation coefficients. eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate.
Figure 2More severe renal tubular damage, such as a higher proportion of atrophic tubules, larger tubular interstitial area, more severe degree of brush border loss and more tubular epithelial cells detached from the tubular basement membrane (shown by black arrow), was observed in the renal biopsies of patients with higher levels of urinary complement activation products. According to the level of urinary C3a, all the patients were divided into three groups: group 1, patients with the urinary C3a level within the first third (<9.2 ng/mg·Cr); group 2, patients with the urinary C3a level within the second third (≥9.2 and <893 ng/mg·Cr); group 3, patients with a urinary C3a level within the last third (≥893 ng/mg·Cr). As the data about tubular interstitial injury score and relative interstitial volume were determined to be non‐normal, multigroup comparison was carried out using the Kruskal–Wallis test. The difference between the two groups was compared with a non‐parametric Wilcoxon rank sum test. (a) A representative picture of periodic acid–Schiff staining from a patient in group 1. (b) A representative picture of periodic acid–Schiff staining from a patient in group 2. (c) A representative picture of periodic acid–Schiff staining from a patient in group 3. (d) The relative tubular interstitial volume in different groups. (e) The tubular interstitial injury score in different groups. (a1,b1,c1) Partial enlargement of (a–c), respectively. Scale bars (a–c, a1–c1), 50 μM. Thick black line in (d) and (e) shows the median.*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Association of urinary complement activation products level with the markers of tubular injury before and after adjustment for confounders
| Tubular injury markers | Urinary CAPs | Model A | Model B | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| ||
| TIS | C3a | 14.3 (4.2–48.7) | <0.001 | 6.5 (1.6–26.6) | 0.009 |
| C5a | 21.7 (5.9–80.1) | <0.001 | 11.1 (2.6–48.2) | 0.001 | |
| C5b‐9 | 14.3 (4.2–48.7) | <0.001 | 8.2 (2.0–34.3) | 0.004 | |
| RIV | C3a | 17.4 (4.9–61.2) | <0.001 | 8.3 (1.7–41.3) | 0.009 |
| C5a | 27.0 (7.0–104.7) | <0.001 | 17.3 (3.0–101.0) | 0.002 | |
| C5b‐9 | 17.4 (4.9–61.2) | <0.001 | 13.2 (2.3–75.3) | 0.004 | |
Model A: no adjustments; model B: adjusted for estimated glomerular filtration rate and 24‐h urine protein. Here, the odds ratio (OR) value means the fold of possibility that patients with higher (above median) level of complement activation products (CAPs) have more severe renal tubular interstitial injury (as represented by higher relative interstitial volume [RIV] or tubular and interstitial injury score [TIS]) than patients with lower (below median) level of CAPs.