MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465760346 · doi:10.1186/s12014-016-9117-x

Quantification of angiotensin II-regulated proteins in urine of patients with polycystic and other chronic kidney diseases by selected reaction monitoring

2016· article· en· W2465760346 on OpenAlexafffund
Ana Konvalinka, Ihor Batruch, Tomáš Tokár, Apostolos Dimitromanolakis, Shelby Reid, Xuewen Song, York Pei, Andrei P. Drabovich, Eleftherios P. Diamandis, Igor Jurišica, James W. Scholey

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Proteomics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto General Hospital
FundersCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for InnovationAstellas Pharma Canada
KeywordsUrineKidneyAutosomal dominant polycystic kidney diseaseKidney diseaseInternal medicineEndocrinologyRenal functionMedicineAngiotensin IICreatinineChemistryUrinalysisReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-II (Ang II) mediates progression of autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) and other chronic kidney diseases (CKD). However, markers of kidney Ang II activity are lacking. We previously defined 83 Ang II-regulated proteins in vitro, which reflected kidney Ang II activity in vivo. METHODS: In this study, we developed selected reaction monitoring (SRM) assays for quantification of Ang II-regulated proteins in urine of ADPKD and CKD patients. We demonstrated that 47 of 83 Ang II-regulated transcripts were differentially expressed in cystic compared to normal kidney tissue. We then developed SRM assays for 18 Ang II-regulated proteins overexpressed in cysts and/or secreted in urine. Methods that yielded CV ≤ 6 % for control proteins, and recovery ~100 % were selected. Heavy-labeled peptides corresponding to 13 identified Ang II-regulated peptides were spiked into urine samples of 17 ADPKD patients, 9 patients with CKD predicted to have high kidney Ang II activity and 11 healthy subjects. Samples were then digested and analyzed on triple-quadrupole mass spectrometer in duplicates. RESLUTS: Calibration curves demonstrated linearity (R(2) > 0.99) and within-run CVs < 9 % in the concentration range of 7/13 peptides. Peptide concentrations were normalized by urine creatinine. Deamidated peptide forms were monitored, and accounted for <15 % of the final concentrations. Urine excretion rates of proteins BST1, LAMB2, LYPA1, RHOB and TSP1 were significantly different (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA) between patients with CKD, those with ADPKD and healthy controls. Urine protein excretion rates were highest in CKD patients and lowest in ADPKD patients. Univariate analysis demonstrated significant association between urine protein excretion rates of most proteins and disease group (p < 0.05, ANOVA) as well as sex (p < 0.05, unpaired t test). Multivariate analysis across protein concentration, age and sex demonstrated good separation between ADPKD and CKD patients. CONCLUSIONS: We have optimized methods for quantification of Ang II-regulated proteins, and we demonstrated that they reflected differences in underlying kidney disease in this pilot study. High urine excretion of Ang II-regulated proteins in CKD patients likely reflects high kidney Ang II activity. Low excretion in ADPKD appears related to lack of communication between cysts and tubules. Future studies will determine whether urine excretion rate of Ang II-regulated proteins correlates with kidney Ang II activity in larger cohorts of chronic kidney disease patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ProteomicsSame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207