Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31188898›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Podocin and uPAR are good biomarkers in cases of Focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis in pediatric renal biopsies.

Lívia Helena de Morais Pereira, Crislaine Aparecida da Silva, Maria Luíza Gonçalves Dos Reis Monteiro, Liliane Silvano Araújo, Laura Penna Rocha, Marcelo Bernardes da Rocha Reis, Fernando Silva Ramalho, Rosana Rosa Miranda Corrêa, Marcos Vinicius Silva, Marlene Antonia Reis and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Perspective of Vitamin D on suPAR-Related AKI in COVID-19.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lívia Helena de Morais PereiraInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Crislaine Aparecida da SilvaInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Maria Luíza Gonçalves Dos Reis MonteiroInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Liliane Silvano AraújoInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Laura Penna RochaInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Marcelo Bernardes da Rocha ReisInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9254-1995
Fernando Silva RamalhoDepartment of Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Ribeirão Preto Faculty of Medicine of São Paulo University, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rosana Rosa Miranda CorrêaInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Marcos Vinicius SilvaInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of Parasitology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Marlene Antonia ReisInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Juliana Reis MachadoInstitute of Biological and Natural Sciences, Discipline of General Pathology, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-8673-7788
Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are controversies whether Minimal Change Disease (MCD) and Focal and Segmental Glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) are distinct glomerular lesions or different manifestations within the same spectrum of diseases. The uPAR (urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor) and some slit diaphragm proteins may be altered in FSGS glomeruli and may function as biomarkers of the disease in renal biopsies. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the diagnostic potential of uPAR and glomerular proteins for differentiation between MCD and FSGS in renal pediatric biopsy. Renal biopsies from 50 children between 2 and 18 years old were selected, with diagnosis of MCD (n = 29) and FSGS (n = 21). Control group consisted of pediatric autopsies (n = 15) from patients younger than 18 years old, with no evidences of renal dysfunction. In situ expressions of WT1, nephrin, podocin and uPAR were evaluated by immunoperoxidase technique. Renal biopsy of patients with MCD and FSGS expressed fewer WT1 (p≤0.0001, F = 19.35) and nephrin (p<0.0001; H = 21.54) than patients in the control group. FSGS patients expressed fewer podocin than control (p<0.0359, H = 6.655). FSGS cases expressed more uPAR than each of control and MCD (p = 0.0019; H = 12.57) and there was a positive and significant correlation between nephrin and podocin (p = 0.0026, rS = 0.6502) in these cases. Podocin had sensitivity of 73.3% and specificity of 86.7% (p = 0.0068) and uPAR had sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 73.3% (p = 0.0040) for diagnosis of FSGS patients. The main limitation of the study is the limited number of cases due to the difficulty in performing biopsy in pediatric patients. Podocin and uPAR are good markers for FSGS and differentiate these cases from MCD, reinforcing the theory of distinct glomerular diseases. These findings suggest that podocin and uPAR can be used as biomarkers in the routine analysis of renal biopsies in cases of podocytopathies when the lesion (sclerosis) is not sampled.

Indexed as

AdolescentAutopsyBiomarkersBiopsyCase-Control StudiesChildChild, PreschoolDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleGene ExpressionGlomerulosclerosis, Focal SegmentalHumansIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsKidney GlomerulusMaleMembrane ProteinsBiomarkersIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMembrane ProteinsnephrinNPHS2 proteinReceptors, Urokinase Plasminogen ActivatorWT1 protein, humanWT1 Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31188898
PMCPMC6561567
OpenAlexW2950097347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.