Serum aminoacylase-1 is a novel biomarker with potential prognostic utility for long-term outcome in patients with delayed graft function following renal transplantation

Kidney International

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1214-1225

  Welberry Smith, Matthew P ^a   Zougman, Alexandre ^a   Cairns, David A ^a   Wilson, Michelle ^a   Wind, Tobias ^a   Wood, Steven L ^a   Thompson, Douglas ^a   Messenger, Michael P ^a   Mooney, Andrew ^a   Selby, Peter J ^a   Lewington, Andrew J P ^a   Banks, Rosamonde E ^a  

^a ST JAMES S UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

delayed graft function; diagnosis; kidney transplantation; outcomes; renal transplantation

Indexed keywords

AMINOACYLASE; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CREATININE; CYSTATIN C;

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; ENZYME ASSAY; ENZYME BLOOD LEVEL; FEMALE; HUMAN; KIDNEY DONOR; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; LONG TERM CARE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROTEOMICS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURVIVAL; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

ADULT; AGED; AMIDOHYDROLASES; AREA UNDER CURVE; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CREATININE; CYSTATIN C; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ENZYME-LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROTEOMICS; RENAL DIALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84888639143     PISSN: 00852538     EISSN: 15231755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ki.2013.200     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Port FK, Wolfe RA, Mauger EA et al. Comparison of survival probabilities for dialysis patients vs cadaveric renal transplant recipients. JAMA 1993; 270: 1339-1343.
2. Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL et al. Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1725-1730.
3. de Wit GA, Ramsteijn PG, de Charro FT. Economic evaluation of end stage renal disease treatment. Health Policy 1998; 44: 215-232.
4. Kontodimopoulos N, Niakas D. An estimate of lifelong costs and QALYs in renal replacement therapy based on patients' life expectancy. Health Policy 2008; 86: 85-96.
5. Tapiawala SN, Tinckam KJ, Cardella CJ et al. Delayed graft function and the risk for death with a functioning graft. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 153-161.
6. Akkina SK, Connaire JJ, Israni AK et al. Similar outcomes with different rates of delayed graft function may reflect center practice, not center performance. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1460-1466.
7. Roels L, Coosemans W, Donck J et al. Inferior outcome of cadaveric kidneys preserved for more than 24 h in histidine-tryptophanketoglutarate solution. Leuven Collaborative Group for Transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 66: 1660-1664.
8. Chang SH, Russ GR, Chadban SJ et al. Trends in kidney transplantation in Australia and New Zealand, 1993-2004. Transplantation 2007; 84: 611-618.
9. Siedlecki A, Irish W, Brennan DC. Delayed graft function in the kidney transplant. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 2279-2296.
10. Keitel E, Michelon T, dos Santos AF et al. Renal transplants using expanded cadaver donor criteria. Ann Transplant 2004; 9: 23-24.
11. Halloran PF, Aprile MA, Farewell V et al. Early function as the principal correlate of graft survival. A multivariate analysis of 200 cadaveric renal transplants treated with a protocol incorporating antilymphocyte globulin and cyclosporine. Transplantation 1988; 46: 223-228.
12. Snyder JJ, Kasiske BL, Gilbertson DT et al. A comparison of transplant outcomes in peritoneal and hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int 2002; 62: 1423-1430.
13. Sola R, Alarcon A, Jimenez C et al. The influence of delayed graft function. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19(Suppl 3): Iii32-iii37.
14. Yarlagadda SG, Coca SG, Formica RN Jr. et al. Association between delayed graft function and allograft and patient survival: A systematic review and meta-Analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24: 1039-1047.
15. Muhlberger I, Perco P, Fechete R et al. Biomarkers in renal transplantation ischemia reperfusion injury. Transplantation 2009; 88: S14-S19.
16. Smith MP, Banks RE, Wood SL et al. Application of proteomic analysis to the study of renal diseases. Nat Rev Nephrol 2009; 5: 701-712.
17. Hall IE, Yarlagadda SG, Coca SG et al. IL-18 and urinary NGAL predict dialysis and graft recovery after kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 189-197.
18. Schwarz C, Regele H, Steininger R et al. The contribution of adhesion molecule expression in donor kidney biopsies to early allograft dysfunction. Transplantation 2001; 71: 1666-1670.
19. Hall IE, Doshi MD, Poggio ED et al. A comparison of alternative serum biomarkers with creatinine for predicting allograft function after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2011; 91: 48-56.
20. Anderson NL, Anderson NG. The human plasma proteome: History, character, and diagnostic prospects. Mol Cell Proteomics 2002; 1: 845-867.
21. Smith MP, Wood SL, Zougman A et al. A systematic analysis of the effects of increasing degrees of serum immunodepletion in terms of depth of coverage and other key aspects in top-down and bottom-up proteomic analyses. Proteomics Clin Appl 2011; 5: 561.
22. Johnston O, O'Kelly P, Spencer S et al. Reduced graft function (with or without dialysis) vs immediate graft function-A comparison of long-term renal allograft survival. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006; 21: 2270-2274.
23. Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3: 32-35.
24. Cook RM, Burke BJ, Buchhagen DL et al. Human aminoacylase-1. Cloning, sequence, and expression analysis of a chromosome 3p21 gene inactivated in small cell lung cancer. J Biol Chem 1993; 268: 17010-17017.
25. Perrier J, Durand A, Giardina T et al. Catabolism of intracellular N-terminal acetylated proteins: Involvement of acylpeptide hydrolase and acylase. Biochimie 2005; 87: 673-685.
26. Lindner H, Hopfner S, Tafler-Naumann M et al. The distribution of aminoacylase I among mammalian species and localization of the enzyme in porcine kidney. Biochimie 2000; 82: 129-137.
27. Sass JO, Mohr V, Olbrich H et al. Mutations in ACY1, the gene encoding aminoacylase 1, cause a novel inborn error of metabolism. Am J Hum Genet 2006; 78: 401-409.
28. Yamauchi A, Ueda N, Hanafusa S et al. Tissue distribution of and species differences in deacetylation of N-Acetyl-L-cysteine and immunohistochemical localization of acylase I in the primate kidney. J Pharmacy Pharmacol 2002; 54: 205-212.
29. Miller YE, Kao B. Monoclonal antibody based immunoassay for human aminoacylase-1. J Immunoassay 1989; 10: 129-152.
30. Lindner HA, Tafler-Naumann M, Rohm KH. N-Acetylamino acid utilization by kidney aminoacylase-1. Biochimie 2008; 90: 773-780.
31. Sommer A, Christensen E, Schwenger S et al. The molecular basis of aminoacylase 1 deficiency. Biochim Biophys Acta 2011; 1812: 685-690.
32. Zhong Y, Onuki J, Yamasaki T et al. Genome-wide analysis identifies a tumor suppressor role for aminoacylase 1 in iron-induced rat renal cell carcinoma. Carcinogenesis 2009; 30: 158-164.
33. Miller YE, Minna JD, Gazdar AF. Lack of expression of aminoacylase-1 in small cell lung cancer. Evidence for inactivation of genes encoded by chromosome 3p. J Clin Invest 1989; 83: 2120-2124.
34. Abu Jawdeh BG, Rabb H. Delayed kidney allograft function-what does it tell us about acute kidney injury? Contrib Nephrol 2011; 174: 173-181.
35. Klawitter J, Kushner E, Jonscher K et al. Association of immunosuppressant-induced protein changes in the rat kidney with changes in urine metabolite patterns: A proteo-metabonomic study. J Proteome Res 2010; 9: 865-875.
36. Asif AR, Armstrong VW, Voland A et al. Proteins identified as targets of the acyl glucuronide metabolite of mycophenolic acid in kidney tissue from mycophenolate mofetil treated rats. Biochimie 2007; 89: 393-402.
37. Kotsch K, Kunert K, Merk V et al. Novel markers in zero-hour kidney biopsies indicate graft quality and clinical outcome. Transplantation 2010; 90: 958-965.
38. Dikow R, Becker LE, Schaier M et al. In renal transplants with delayed graft function chemokines and chemokine receptor expression predict long-term allograft function. Transplantation 2010; 90: 771-776.
39. Halawa A. The early diagnosis of acute renal graft dysfunction: A challenge we face. The role of novel biomarkers. Ann Transplant 2011; 16: 90-98.
40. Malyszko J. Biomarkers of acute kidney injury in different clinical settings: A time to change the paradigm? Kidney Blood Press Res 2010; 33: 368-382.
41. Schroppel B, Kruger B, Walsh L et al. Tubular expression of KIM-1 does not predict delayed function after transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 536-542.
42. Parikh CR, Jani A, Mishra J et al. Urine NGAL and IL-18 are predictive biomarkers for delayed graft function following kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1639-1645.
43. Hollmen ME, Kyllonen LE, Inkinen KA et al. Urine neutrophil gelatinaseassociated lipocalin is a marker of graft recovery after kidney transplantation. Kidney Int 2011; 79: 89-98.
44. Zhang Z, Lu B, Sheng X et al. Cystatin C in prediction of acute kidney injury: A systemic review and meta-Analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2011; 58: 356-365.
45. Supavekin S, Zhang W, Kucherlapati R et al. Differential gene expression following early renal ischemia/reperfusion. Kidney Int 2003; 63: 1714-1724.
46. Park SW, Kim M, Kim M et al. Sphingosine kinase 1 protects against renal ischaemia-reperfusion injury in mice by sphingosine-1-phosphate1 receptor activation. Kidney Int 2011; 2011: 1315-1327.
47. Bajwa A, Jo SK, Ye H et al. Activation of sphingosine-1-phosphate 1 receptor in the proximal tubule protects against ischaemia-reperfusion injury. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 955-965.
48. Sola A, Weigert A, Jung M et al. Sphingosine-1-phosphate signalling induces the production of Lcn-2 by macrophages to promote kidney regeneration. J Pathol 2011; 225: 597-608.
49. Mas VR, Scian MJ, Archer KJ et al. Pretransplant transcriptome profiles identify among kidneys with delayed graft function those with poorer quality and outcome. Mol Med 2011; 17: 1311-1322.
50. Maceyka M, Nava VE, Milstien S et al. Aminoacylase 1 is a sphingosine kinase 1-interacting protein. FEBS Lett 2004; 568: 30-34.
51. Le Dinh H, Weekers L, Bonvoisin C et al. Delayed graft function does not harm the future of donation-After-cardiac death in kidney transplantation. Transpl Proc 2012; 44: 2795-2802.
52. Nagaraja P, Roberts GW, Stephens M et al. Influence of delayed graft function and acute rejection on outcomes after kidney transplantation from donors after cardiac death. Transplantation 2012; 94: 1218-1223.
53. Singh RP, Farney AC, Rogers J et al. Kidney transplantation from donation after cardiac death donors: Lack of impact of delayed graft function on post-transplant outcomes. Clin Transplant 2011; 25: 255-264.
54. Brook NR, White SA, Waller JR et al. Non-heart beating donor kidneys with delayed graft function have superior graft survival compared with conventional heart-beating donor kidneys that develop delayed graft function. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 614-618.
55. Kusaka M, Pratschke J, Wilhelm MJ et al. Activation of inflammatory mediators in rat renal isografts by donor brain death. Transplantation 2000; 69: 405-410.
56. Obuchowski NA, Lieber NL, Wians FHJ. ROC curves in clinical chemistry: Uses, misuses, and possible solutions. Clin Chem 2004; 50: 1118-1125.
57. Ziolkowski P, Gamian E, Osiecka B et al. Immunohistochemical and proteomic evaluation of nuclear ubiquitous caesein and cyclindependent kinases substrate in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. J Biomed Biotechnol 2009; 2009: 919645.
58. Zougman A, Ziolkowski P, Mann M et al. Evidence for insertional RNA editing in humans. Curr Biol 2008; 18: 1760-1765.
59. Cox J, Matic I, Hilger M et al. A practical guide to the MaxQuant computational platform for SILAC-based quantitative proteomics. Nat Protoc 2009; 4: 698-705.
60. Cox J, Neuhauser N, Michalski A et al. Andromeda: A peptide search engine integrated into the MaxQuant environment. J Proteome Res 2011; 10: 1794-1805.
61. Storey JD. A direct approach to false discovery rates. J Royal Stats Soc Series B-Stat Methodol 2002; 64: 479-498.
62. Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A et al. pROC: An open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinform 2011; 12: 77.
63. Pickering JW, Endre ZH. New metrics for assessing diagnostic potential of candidate biomarkers. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2012; 7: 1355-1364.
64. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RBS, D'Agostino RBJ et al. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: From area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med 2008; 27: 157-172.
65. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RBS, Steyerberg EW. Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med 2011; 30: 11-21.
66. Irish WD, Ilsley JN, Schnitzler MA et al. A risk prediction model for delayed graft function in the current era of deceased donor renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2279-2286.
67. Hauck WW, Donner A. Wald's test as applied to hypotheses in logit analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 1977; 72: 851-853.