Urinary calprotectin, NGAL, and KIM-1 in the differentiation of primarily inflammatory vs. non-inflammatory stable chronic kidney diseases.

INTRODUCTION: It has been demonstrated that urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and calprotectin are helpful biomarkers in the differentiation of intrinsic and prerenal acute kidney injury. OBJECTIVE: The present cross-sectional study investigates, whether urinary biomarkers are able to differentiate primarily inflammatory from non-inflammatory entities in chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: Urinary calprotectin, NGAL, and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) concentrations were assessed in a study population of 143 patients with stable CKD and 29 healthy controls. Stable renal function was defined as an eGFR fluctuation ≤5 ml/min/1.73 m2 in the past 12 months. Pyuria, metastatic carcinoma, and renal transplantation were regarded as exclusion criteria. Diabetic nephropathy, hypertensive nephropathy, and polycystic kidney disease were categorized as 'primarily non-inflammatory renal diseases' (NIRD), whereas glomerulonephritis and vasculitis were regarded as 'primarily inflammatory renal diseases' (IRD). RESULTS: Urinary calprotectin and NGAL concentrations significantly differed between CKD and healthy controls (p < 0.05 each), whereas KIM-1 concentrations did not (p = 0.84). The three biomarkers did neither show significant differences in-between the individual entities, nor the two categories of IRD vs. NIRD (calprotectin 155.7 vs. 96.99 ng/ml; NGAL 14 896 vs. 11 977 pg/ml; KIM-1 1388 vs. 1009 pg/ml; p > 0.05 each). Albumin exceeds the diagnostic power of the investigated biomarkers by far. CONCLUSIONS: The urinary biomarkers calprotectin, NGAL, and KIM-1 have no diagnostic value in the differentiation of primarily inflammatory vs. non-inflammatory etiologies of CKD.

Prognostic Value of Urinary Calprotectin, NGAL and KIM-1 in Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Urinary biomarkers like neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) do not only allow an early diagnosis of acute kidney injury, but also provide prognostic information in this setting. The present prospective study investigates, whether the urinary biomarkers NGAL, KIM-1 and calprotectin have prognostic information in chronic kidney disease (CKD) as well. METHODS: Urinary calprotectin, NGAL and KIM-1 concentrations were assessed in a study population of 143 patients with stable CKD comprising diabetic and hypertensive nephropathy, glomerulonephritis/vasculitis, and autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. An eGFR fluctuation > 5ml/min/1.73m2 in the past 12 months was defined as an exclusion criterion in order to exclude cases with acute on chronic kidney injury. Renal function was monitored for a median follow-up of 37 months. RESULTS: In the overall study population, all the three biomarkers failed to predict DeGFR and DACR from baseline to follow-up in linear regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, and baseline eGFR. Contrarily, baseline ACR was significantly associated with DeGFR (p< 0.001). In the subgroup of patients with vasculitis and glomerulonephritis, all the three biomarkers were significantly associated with DeGFR, with calprotectin having the highest regression coefficient. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the traditional biomarker "albuminuria", neither the inflammatory biomarker calprotectin, nor the tubular biomarkers NGAL and KIM-1, provide robust prognostic information on the loss or renal function in a heterogeneous CKD population. All of them, however, are candidate prognostic biomarkers in primarily inflammatory renal diseases.

Low-density lipoprotein apheresis is associated with removal of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein apheresis is not specific to lipoproteins but removes immunoglobulins as well. It remains elusive, whether protective SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination from COVID-19 are eliminated as well. METHODS: A cross-sectional case-control study on 55 patients undergoing weekly lipoprotein apheresis and 21 patients with comparable comorbidities and epidemiology not undergoing apheresis. SARS-CoV-2 IgG was assessed in all patients prior to apheresis and in 38 patients both before and after apheresis. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 IgG concentrations before a session of lipoprotein apheresis were comparable to control patients not undergoing apheresis(1727 IU/ml, IQR 365-2500) vs. 1652 IU/ml,(IQR408.8-2500), p = 0.78). SARS-CoV-2 IgG concentrations were reduced by lipoprotein apheresis from 1656 IU/ml(IQR 540.5-2500) prior to 1305 IU/ml (IQR 449-2500) afterwards(p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Lipoprotein apheresis removes SARS-CoV-2 IgG. The average elimination rate was 21.2%. In the present population of patients undergoing apheresis once weekly, however, the elimination did not lead to inferior concentrations compared to patients not undergoing lipoprotein apheresis.