| Literature DB >> 30775629 |
Marius A Øvrehus1,2, Per Bruheim3, Wenjun Ju4,5, Leila R Zelnick6,7, Knut A Langlo2, Kumar Sharma8, Ian H de Boer6,7, Stein I Hallan1,2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hypertensive nephrosclerosis is among the leading causes of end-stage renal disease, but its pathophysiology is poorly understood. We wanted to explore early metabolic changes using gene expression and targeted metabolomics analysis.Entities:
Keywords: amino acids; gene expression; hypertensive nephropathy; metabolomics; nephrosclerosis
Year: 2018 PMID: 30775629 PMCID: PMC6365407 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2018.10.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Kidney Int Rep ISSN: 2468-0249
Baseline characteristics of participants
| Gene expression studies (European Renal Biopsy Bank) | Metabolomics studies (HUNT study) | Metabolomics studies (SUGAR study) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy controls ( | Hypertensive nephrosclerosis ( | Healthy controls ( | Hypertensive nephrosclerosis ( | Healthy controls ( | Hypertensive non-DM CKD ( | |
| Age | 47.2 | 57.1 | 58.1 (11.3) | 59.7 (10.8) | 55.6 (11.8) | 61.5 (14.3) |
| Male gender (%) | 57 | 80 | 64 | 58 | 60 | 53 |
| Systolic BP (mm Hg) | <140 | 146 (22.9) | 126.8 (12.2) | 141.9 (13.8) | 122.4 (14.1) | 134.4 (15.9) |
| Diastolic BP (mm Hg) | <80 | 88 (13.5) | 73.1 (8.9) | 79.3 (10.9) | 77.2 (9.3) | 80.6 (9.7) |
| Cholesterol (mmol/l) | n.a. | 6.3 (1.0) | 5.9 (1.0) | 5.7 (1.0) | 5.2 (1.0) | 4.7 (1.1) |
| Current-smoker (%) | n.a. | n.a. | 25 | 11 | 7 | 20 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | n.a. | 29.1 (4.7) | 26.4 (3.5) | 28.6 (3.6) | 27.3 (5.9) | 30.3 (6.2) |
| Cardiovascular disease (%) | 0 | n.a. | 3 | 18 | 7 | 40 |
| DM (%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| eGFR (ml/min per 1.73 m2) | 105.4 (30.9) | 40.9 (23.8) | 94.8 (14.2) | 67.1 (10.8) | 90.4 (18.0) | 36.0 (12.8) |
| eGFR ≥90 (%) | 76 | 0 | 57 | 0 | 47 | 0 |
| eGFR 75–89 (%) | 10 | 20 | 43 | 44 | 27 | 0 |
| eGFR 60–74 (%) | 14 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 27 | 0 |
| eGFR 45–59 (%) | 0 | 13 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 31 |
| eGFR 30–44 (%) | 0 | 27 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 33 |
| eGFR 15–29 (%) | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 36 |
| u-ACR (mg/mmol) | <3.0 | 57 (56) | 1.3 (0.5) | 2.1 (1.6) | 0.8 (0.7) | 40.2 |
| ACR 0–2.9 (%) | 100 | 0 | 100 | 84 | 93 | 34 |
| ACR 3.0–29.9 (%) | 0 | 44 | 0 | 16 | 7 | 44 |
| ACR ≥30.0 (%) | 0 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 |
ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio; BP, blood pressure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; DM, diabetes mellitus; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HUNT, Nord-Trøndelag Health Study; SUGAR, Study of Glucose and Insulin in Renal Disease.
eGFR calculated using the CKD-Epidemiology collaboration equation.
Gene ontology analysis showing the top 10 biological processes up- or downregulated by fold enrichment in hypertensive nephrosclerosis kidney biopsies versus biopsies from healthy kidney donors
| Biological process | Total | No. found | No. expected | Fold enrichment | Raw | FDR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cellular amino acid catabolic process | 56 | 10 | 0.70 | −12.81 | 1.05E-07 | 1.28E-05 |
| Fatty acid beta-oxidation | 20 | 3 | 0.25 | −11.96 | 2.77E-03 | 3.98E-02 |
| Response to interferon gamma | 58 | 9 | 0.87 | +10.40 | 5.80E-07 | 1.57E-05 |
| Gluconeogenesis | 23 | 3 | 0.29 | −10.40 | 3.96E-03 | 4.83–02 |
| Cellular defense response | 105 | 13 | 1.57 | +8.30 | 2.05E-08 | 2.50E-06 |
| Cellular amino acid metabolic process | 230 | 22 | 2.89 | −7.62 | 8.65E-13 | 2.11E-10 |
| Cellular amino acid biosynthetic process | 64 | 6 | 0.80 | −7.47 | 2.31E-04 | 7.04E-03 |
| Cellular calcium ion homeostasis | 115 | 12 | 1.72 | +6.99 | 3.94E-07 | 1.37E-05 |
| Cytokine-mediated signaling pathway | 60 | 6 | 0.9 | +6.70 | 4.17E-04 | 5.36E-03 |
| Monosaccharide metabolic process | 76 | 6 | 0.95 | −6.29 | 5.45E-04 | 1.21E-02 |
Note: Data from separate gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis of 306 upregulated and 267 downregulated genes. Analyses done with PANTHER application and genes with false discovery rate (FDR) <0.05 and |FC| >1.5 were included. Table shows PANTHER GO-Slim Biological Processes. GO is a framework for modeling biological function using defined concepts/classes to describe gene function and the relationships between these concepts. GO slims are cut-down versions of the full GO ontologies containing a subset of the most important and instructive terms, that is, an output particularly useful for giving a summary of the results when broad classification of gene product function is required.
Urinary amino acid excretion in healthy controls versus hypertensive patients with nephropathy
| HUNT cohort | SUGAR cohort | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central location difference (Nephroscl. – Ctrl., medians) | Distribution difference (Kolmogorov-Smirnov) | Discrimination (PLS-DA) | Central location difference (Nephroscl. – Ctrl., medians) | ||||||
| Δ % | Raw | FDR <0.10 | Raw | FDR <0.10 | VIP score | Δ % | Raw | FDR <0.10 | |
| Carnosine (Car) | −71.1 | 0.15 | N.s. | 0.03 | Sign. | 1.25 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Glycine (Gly) | −58.1 | 0.11 | N.s. | 0.06 | N.s. | 1.18 | −35.8 | <0.001 | Sign. |
| Serine (Ser) | −55.4 | 0.06 | N.s. | 0.001 | Sign. | 1.01 | −69.6 | <0.001 | Sign. |
| Tyrosine (Tyr) | −46.9 | 0.03 | N.s. | 0.005 | Sign. | 1.40 | −45.1 | 0.04 | Sign. |
| Threonine (Thr) | −46.7 | 0.19 | N.s. | 0.02 | Sign. | <1.0 | +12.8 | 0.21 | N.s. |
| Histidine (His) | −42.9 | 0.14 | N.s. | 0.24 | N.s. | 1.41 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| 2.4-diaminobutyric acid | +35.8 | 0.4 | N.s. | 0.7 | N.s. | 1.02 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Dopamine (DA) | −35.4 | 0.05 | N.s. | 0.05 | Sign. | 1.0 | −28.2 | 0.05 | Sign. |
| Ornithine (Orn) | −35.2 | 0.04 | N.s. | 0.02 | Sign. | 1.03 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Phenylalanine (Phe) | −33.4 | 0.07 | N.s. | 0.009 | Sign. | 1.08 | −51.2 | 0.004 | Sign. |
| Homocysteine (Hcys) | −32.7 | 0.02 | N.s. | 0.009 | Sign. | 1.82 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Leucine (Leu) | −32.6 | 0.09 | N.s. | 0.006 | Sign. | <1.0 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Kynurenine (Kyn) | −31.9 | 0.06 | N.s. | 0.1 | N.s. | 1.38 | −21.2 | 0.31 | N.s. |
| Lysine (Lys) | −31.8 | 0.11 | N.s. | 0.08 | N.s. | 1.08 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Alanine (Ala) | −31.8 | 0.13 | N.s. | 0.1 | N.s. | <1.0 | −63.1 | <0.001 | Sign. |
| α-aminoadipic acid (Aaa) | −31.5 | 0.1 | N.s. | 0.15 | N.s. | 1.07 | |||
| Valine (Val) | −30.3 | 0.18 | N.s. | 0.11 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| Cystathionine (Cth) | −29.2 | 0.11 | N.s. | 0.17 | N.s. | 1.15 | |||
| Proline (Pro) | −27.8 | 0.07 | N.s. | 0.03 | Sign. | <1.0 | |||
| Glutamic acid (Glu) | −26.6 | 0.04 | N.s. | 0.05 | Sign. | 1.43 | |||
| Glutamyl-Lysine (Glu-Lys) | −26.1 | 0.17 | N.s. | 0.27 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| 5-aminovalerate (5Aval) | −25.5 | 0.48 | N.s. | 0.51 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| Methionine (Met) | −24.9 | 0.09 | N.s. | 0.09 | N.s. | 1.20 | |||
| Isoleucine (Ile) | −24.6 | 0.13 | N.s. | 0.15 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| 2,6-Aminopimelat (Dapa) | +22.8 | 0.21 | N.s. | 0.2 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| Proline-OH-proline (PHP) | −22.1 | 0.68 | N.s. | 0.29 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| 1-Met-Histidine (1Mhis) | −22.1 | 0.64 | N.s. | 0.57 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| Cystine | −20.9 | 0.05 | N.s. | 0.04 | Sign. | 1.24 | |||
| Hydroxyproline (Hyp) | −15.6 | 0.49 | N.s. | 0.65 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| Aspartic acid (Asp) | −9.3 | 0.51 | N.s. | 0.69 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
| 3-Met-Histidine (3Mhis) | −3.4 | 0.85 | N.s. | 0.45 | N.s. | <1.0 | |||
Note: We intended to replicate the top 15 HUNT metabolites in the SUGAR cohort, but not all metabolites were available and some are therefore marked with “n.a.” Central location is the difference between median values, that is, controls (Ctrl.) subtracted from patients with nephrosclerosis (Nephroscl.).
FDR, false discovery rate; HUNT, Nord-Trøndelag Health Study; N.s, not significant; PLS-DA, partial least squares discriminant analysis; Sign., significant; SUGAR, Study of Glucose and Insulin in Renal Disease; VIP, variable importance in projection.
Figure 1Relative frequency plots of central amino acids. Hypertensive nephrosclerosis (red) versus healthy controls (blue). (a) Plot of relative frequency versus relative concentrations of serine. (b) Plot of relative frequency versus relative concentrations of tyrosine. Red line: Nephrosclerosis. (c) Plot of relative frequency versus relative concentrations of homocystein.
Figure 2Overall ability of urine amino acids to discriminate between patients with early nephrosclerosis (chronic kidney disease stage 2–3) and healthy controls. Partial least squares discriminant analysis shows the overall variance between the groups divided into 3 vectors (principal components 1–3). Eighteen amino acids had variable importance in projection scores ≥1.0 (in decreasing order: Hcys, Glu, His, Tyr, Kyn, Car, Cys, Met, Gly, Cth, Lys, Phe, Aaa, Orn, Dap, Ser, DA, Ala), which is considered a significant contribution to discrimination.
Diagnostic accuracy of important amino acids for nephrosclerosis and its clinical criteria
| PC 1 | Homocysteine | Glutamate | Histidine | Kynurenine | Leucine | Phenylalanine | Serine | Tyrosine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nephrosclerosis | 0.59 (0.47–0.72) | 0.61 (0.48–0.73) | 0.62 (0.49–0.74) | 0.61 (0.48–0.75) | |||||
| Hypertension | 0.58 (0.45–0.72) | 0.61 (0.48–0.74) | 0.60 (0.48–0.73) | 0.60 (0.47–0.74) | |||||
| eGFR | 0.50 (0.37–0.62) | 0.51 (0.39–0.63) | 0.52 (0.40–0.64) | 0.58 (0.46–0.69) | 0.50 (0.38–0.62) | 0.54 (0.42–0.67) | 0.53 (0.42–0.65) | 0.56 (0.44–0.68) | 0.55 (0.42–0.66) |
| Proteinuria | 0.55 (0.36–0.74) | 0.55 (0.42–0.76) | 0.52 (0.35–0.69) | 0.60 (0.30–0.90) | 0.54 (0.29–0.79) | 0.50 (0.27–0.72) | 0.59 (0.44–0.75) | 0.51 (0.28–0.75) | 0.61 (0.47–0.76) |
| Hematuria | 0.60 (0.41–0.77) | 0.56 (0.37–0.76) | 0.62 (0.40–0.84) | 0.52 (0.32–0.72) | 0.58 (0.39–0.79) | 0.51 (0.30–0.72) | 0.62 (0.45–0.79) | 0.68 (0.49–0.86) | 0.62 (0.45–0.80) |
Note: Principal Component (PC) 1 includes information from all amino acids reduced into 1 variable describing the variation in the dataset irrespective of diagnostic group. The specific amino acids displayed are the top 5 from Table 2 (highest significance for distribution differences) and the top 5 from Figure 1 (highest variable importance in projection score in partial least squares discriminant analysis). Data are area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (95% confidence interval). Negative associations giving values below 0.5, which is the line of indifference, are transformed (1 − x) for ease of comparison. Significant data are highlighted in bold.
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate.
Integrated pathway analysis combining significant genes and metabolites in clinical nephrosclerosis versus healthy controls
| Pathway/metabolism | Enrichment analysis | Topology analysis | Rank | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | No. expected | No. found | Fold-change | ||||
| Glycine, serine, threonine | 68 | 11.36 | 23 | 0.0004 | 2.02 | 3.70 | 7.50 |
| Phenylalanine, tyrosine, tryptophan | 9 | 1.50 | 5 | 0.0089 | 3.32 | 2.06 | 6.85 |
| Methionine and homocystein | 63 | 10.53 | 19 | 0.0053 | 1.80 | 3.31 | 5.98 |
| Glycerolipid | 72 | 12.03 | 20 | 0.0116 | 1.66 | 2.60 | 4.31 |
| One-carbon pool by folate | 28 | 4.68 | 10 | 0.0116 | 2.14 | 1.71 | 3.65 |
| Arginine and proline | 102 | 17.05 | 30 | 0.0008 | 1.76 | 2.00 | 3.52 |
| Glycolysis/gluconeogenesis | 91 | 15.21 | 23 | 0.0224 | 1.51 | 2.27 | 3.44 |
| N-Glycan biosynthesis | 50 | 8.36 | 15 | 0.0134 | 1.80 | 1.40 | 2.51 |
| Phenylalanine | 29 | 4.85 | 13 | 0.0003 | 2.68 | 0.88 | 2.35 |
| Butanoate | 47 | 7.85 | 17 | 0.0009 | 2.16 | 0.88 | 1.89 |
| Beta-alanine | 50 | 8.36 | 19 | 0.0002 | 2.27 | 0.76 | 1.73 |
| Linoleic acid | 34 | 5.68 | 15 | 0.0001 | 2.64 | 0.57 | 1.51 |
Note: Pathways are ranked according to their combined enrichment and topology using multiplication. The analysis is using hypergeometric test for enrichment and betweenness centrality for topology. Enrichment analysis tests if compounds involved in a particular pathway are represented more often than expected by chance, and data are presented as fold enrichment. Topology analysis takes the pathway structure into consideration when determining which pathways are more likely to be involved in the conditions under study with changes in key positions of a network triggering more severe impact on the pathway than changes on marginal or relatively isolated positions. Analyses were done using MetaboAnalyst 3.0.
Figure 3Major disturbances connecting the major perturbed pathways in nephrosclerosis: tyrosine, serine, and methionine metabolism. Filled figures are data from the current study, circles are metabolites, and rectangles are enzymes. Colored but open figures are based on literature findings in nephrosclerosis. Red is increased/upregulated, green is normal/unchanged, and blue is reduced/downregulated. ADMA, assymetric dimethylarginine; AHCY, adenosylhomocysteinase; BHMT, betaine-homocysteine methyl-transferase; CBS, cystathionine beta-synthase; COMT, catechol-O-methyltransferase; CTH, cystathionase; DHFR, dihydrofolate reductase; DHPR, dihydropteridine reductase; DNMT, DNA methyltransferase; DOC; deoxycorticosterone; eNOS, endogenous nitric oxide synthase; L-DOPA, L-dihydroxyphenylalanine; MAO-A/B, monoamine oxidase A/B; MAT, methionine adenosyl-transferase; MS, methionine synthase; MTHFR, 5,10-methylene-tetrahydrofolate reductase; NO, nitric oxide; n.s., not significant; PAH, phenylalanine-hydroxylase; PEPCK, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase; RNLS, renalase; TCA, citric acid; TH, tyrosine hydroxylase.