Value of Urinary Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin versus Conventional Biomarkers in Predicting Response to Treatment of Active Lupus Nephritis.
Journal
International journal of nephrology
ISSN: 2090-214X
Titre abrégé: Int J Nephrol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101546753
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
31
07
2020
revised:
28
08
2020
accepted:
07
09
2020
entrez:
21
10
2020
pubmed:
22
10
2020
medline:
22
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lupus nephritis (LN) affects almost two-thirds of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients. Despite initial aggressive therapy, up to 25% of patients with LN will progress to permanent renal damage. Conventional serum markers for LN lack the sensitivity of an ideal biomarker. Urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (UNGAL) is an excellent biomarker for early diagnosis of acute kidney injury and predicting renal outcomes. To measure UNGAL among LN patients to correlate its levels with renal disease activity and to investigate its predictive performance in response to induction therapy. In LN patients at baseline, the mean serum creatinine was 2.57 ± 0.96 mg/dL and the mean UNGAL was 33.50 ± 18.34 ng/dL. Mean UNGAL levels of complete response, partial response, and nonresponse groups were 14.48 ± 2.99 ng/mL, 34.49 ± 4.09 ng/mL, and 62.07 ± 14.44 ng/mL, respectively. Based on the ROC curve, we found a better performance of baseline UNGAL to discriminate the complete response group from partial and nonresponse groups to predict response to induction, outperforming conventional biomarkers. The area under the curve was 0.943, and the best cutoff level was 26.5 ng/mL (92.31% sensitivity and 88.89% specificity). UNGAL performed better than conventional biomarkers in predicting response to treatment of active LN.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33083057
doi: 10.1155/2020/8855614
pmc: PMC7563084
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
8855614Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Mohamed Abd El-Mohsen et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Références
BMC Nephrol. 2017 Aug 4;18(1):263
pubmed: 28778196
Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2018 Jul;78(4):264-268
pubmed: 29533691
Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2012 Mar;19(2):93-100
pubmed: 22449346
Int J Rheum Dis. 2015 Feb;18(2):219-32
pubmed: 25884459
Reumatol Clin. 2011 Jan-Feb;7(1):3-6
pubmed: 21794772
Genomics. 1997 Oct 1;45(1):17-23
pubmed: 9339356
Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(5):R143
pubmed: 19785730
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2017 Apr 1;56(suppl_1):i3-i13
pubmed: 28013206
J Rheumatol. 2002 Feb;29(2):288-91
pubmed: 11838846
Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2005 Sep;17(5):543-9
pubmed: 16093831
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 May 8;12(5):825-835
pubmed: 27821390
J Clin Invest. 2005 Mar;115(3):610-21
pubmed: 15711640
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Aug;54(8):2577-84
pubmed: 16868980
Lupus Sci Med. 2014 Aug 06;1(1):e000018
pubmed: 25379188
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010 May;49(5):960-71
pubmed: 20144927
Clin Chim Acta. 2013 Oct 21;425:163-8
pubmed: 23954775
Int J Nephrol. 2016;2016:4904502
pubmed: 27525120
Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Aug;64(8):2677-86
pubmed: 22553077
Kidney Int. 1984 Apr;25(4):689-95
pubmed: 6482173
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Jan;8(1):138-45
pubmed: 22977215
Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Sep;69(9):1603-11
pubmed: 20699243
Pediatr Nephrol. 2006 Jun;21(6):856-63
pubmed: 16528543