Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25589610›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN2015

Diagnosis and Prediction of CKD Progression by Assessment of Urinary Peptides.

Joost P Schanstra, Petra Zürbig, Alaa Alkhalaf, Angel Argiles, Stephan J L Bakker, Joachim Beige, Henk J G Bilo, Christos Chatzikyrkou, Mohammed Dakna, Jesse Dawson and 24 more

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

118 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Urine Fibrosis Markers and Risk of Allograft Failure in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Case-Cohort Ancillary Study of the FAVORIT Trial.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2017
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Biomarkers of Kidney Disease Progression in ADPKD.Kidney international reports · 2024
    Review
  20. Article

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

34 authors.

Joost P SchanstraInstitute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Disease, French Institute of Health and Medical Research U1048, Toulouse, France; Paul Sabatier University (Toulouse III), Toulouse, France;
Petra Zürbigmosaiques diagnostics GmbH, Hanover, Germany; zuerbig@mosaiques-diagnostics.com.
Alaa AlkhalafUniversity Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands;
Angel ArgilesRD Néphrologie, Montpellier, France;
Stephan J L BakkerUniversity Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands;
Joachim BeigeKfH Renal Unit, Department Nephrology, Leipzig and Martin-Luther-University, Halle/Wittenberg, Germany;
Henk J G BiloUniversity Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; Diabetes Centre, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands;
Christos ChatzikyrkouDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany;
Mohammed Daknamosaiques diagnostics GmbH, Hanover, Germany;
Jesse DawsonBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom;
Christian DellesBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom;
Hermann HallerDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, Medical School of Hanover, Hanover, Germany;
Marion HaubitzDepartment of Nephrology, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Fulda, Germany;
Holger HusiBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom;
Joachim JankowskiInstitute for Molecular Cardiovascular Research, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Aachen, Germany; Department of Internal Medicine IV, Charity Medical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany;
George JerumsAustin Health, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia;
Nanne KleefstraUniversity Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; Diabetes Centre, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands;
Tatiana KuznetsovaDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Faculty of Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;
David M MaahsBarbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, Colorado;
Jan MenneDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, Medical School of Hanover, Hanover, Germany;
William MullenBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom;
Alberto OrtizSchool of Medicine, Jimenez Diaz Foundation Institute for Health Research, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain;
Frederik PerssonSteno Diabetes Center, Gentofte, Denmark;
Peter RossingSteno Diabetes Center, Gentofte, Denmark; Faculty of Health, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark; Faculty of Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;
Piero RuggenentiMario Negri Institute of Pharmacology Research, Bergamo, Italy;
Ivan RychlikSecond Department of Internal Medicine, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic;
Andreas L SerraDivision of Nephrology, University Hospital, and Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Switzerland;
Justyna Siwymosaiques diagnostics GmbH, Hanover, Germany; Department of Internal Medicine IV, Charity Medical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany;
Janet Snell-BergeonBarbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, Colorado;
Goce SpasovskiUniversity Department of Nephrology, Medical Faculty, University of Skopje, Skopje, Macedonia;
Jan A StaessenFaculty of Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;
Antonia VlahouDivision of Biotechnology, Biomedical Research Foundation, Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece; School of Biomedical and Healthcare Sciences, Plymouth University, Plymouth, United Kingdom; and.
Harald MischakFaculty of Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;
Raymond VanholderNephrology Section, Department of Internal Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

Complications and Comorbidities of Type 1 DiabetesR01HL113029 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI SNELL-BERGEON, JANET KATHLEEN · 2013 to 2016
$2.9M
European Research Council 294713NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL113029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progressive CKD is generally detected at a late stage by a sustained decline in eGFR and/or the presence of significant albuminuria. With the aim of early and improved risk stratification of patients with CKD, we studied urinary peptides in a large cross-sectional multicenter cohort of 1990 individuals, including 522 with follow-up data, using proteome analysis. We validated that a previously established multipeptide urinary biomarker classifier performed significantly better in detecting and predicting progression of CKD than the current clinical standard, urinary albumin. The classifier was also more sensitive for identifying patients with rapidly progressing CKD. Compared with the combination of baseline eGFR and albuminuria (area under the curve [AUC]=0.758), the addition of the multipeptide biomarker classifier significantly improved CKD risk prediction (AUC=0.831) as assessed by the net reclassification index (0.303±-0.065; P<0.001) and integrated discrimination improvement (0.058±0.014; P<0.001). Correlation of individual urinary peptides with CKD stage and progression showed that the peptides that associated with CKD, irrespective of CKD stage or CKD progression, were either fragments of the major circulating proteins, suggesting failure of the glomerular filtration barrier sieving properties, or different collagen fragments, suggesting accumulation of intrarenal extracellular matrix. Furthermore, protein fragments associated with progression of CKD originated mostly from proteins related to inflammation and tissue repair. Results of this study suggest that urinary proteome analysis might significantly improve the current state of the art of CKD detection and outcome prediction and that identification of the urinary peptides allows insight into various ongoing pathophysiologic processes in CKD.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiomarkersCohort StudiesDisease ProgressionFemaleGlomerular Filtration RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeptidesRenal Insufficiency, ChronicBiomarkersPeptidesalbuminuriabiomarkerCKDextracellular matrixfibrosisrenal progression

Identifiers

PMID25589610
PMCPMC4520165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.