Measuring albuminuria or proteinuria: does one answer fit all?

Measurement of proteinuria is critical for diagnosing and monitoring kidney disease. A variety of measures are available to clinicians and can identify all urinary proteins (proteinuria) or urine albumin alone (albuminuria). Proteinuria and albuminuria can be measured in either a random urine sample or a timed urine collection (often over 24 hours). Although an international guideline advocates the use of the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio for most purposes, this measure is not universally available worldwide and historically has been more costly than alternatives. In addition, there may be important differences in accuracy between the albumin-to-creatinine ratio and others based on magnitude of albuminuria, sex, and certain clinical contexts. In this mini review, we review recommendations from international guidelines and discuss specific contexts where the optimal measure of proteinuria is unclear and, in some situations, controversial. We discuss the evidence supporting current recommendations for choice of measure, including the clinical settings of glomerulonephritis, transplantation, and pregnancy. We also discuss how patient sex and cost may impact this decision.

Spot Urine Protein Excretion in the First Year Following Kidney Transplantation Associates With Allograft Rejection Phenotype at 1-Year Surveillance Biopsies: An Observational National-Cohort Study

Introduction: Urine protein excretion is routinely measured to assess kidney allograft injury, but the diagnostic value of this measurement for kidney transplant pathology remains unclear. Here we investigated whether spot urine protein excretion in the first year following transplantation associates with allograft rejection phenotype at 1-year surveillance biopsies and de-novo occurrence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Patients and Methods: This prospective, observational national-cohort study included 139 non-sensitized patients who received a deceased donor kidney transplant between December 2014 and 2018. All patients received basiliximab induction and tacrolimus-based immunosuppression. Estimated protein excretion rate (ePER) was calculated monthly from spot urine protein-to-creatinine ratios. At 1-year, all recipients underwent surveillance graft biopsy and were screened for de-novo DSA. Screening-positive sera were subjected to single antigen bead (SAB) testing. The occurrence of de-novo DSA was determined based on SAB reactivity patterns using a mean fluorescence intensity threshold >1,000. Results: Among the 139 study patients, 27 patients (19%) had histologic evidence of T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), and 9 patients (7%) had histologic evidence of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) at 1-year surveillance biopsy. One year after transplant, 19 patients (14%) developed de-novo DSA. Compared with patients without rejection and no de-novo DSA, mixed-effects linear regression analysis showed a significant difference in slope of ePER during the first year in patients with AMR and de-novo DSA at 1-year (46, 95% CI 25-68 mg/day/1.73 m² per month and 34, 95% CI 20-49 mg/day/1.73 m² per month, respectively). Patients with vascular TCMR also showed a significant difference in ePER slope over time compared with patients with non-rejection findings (31, 95% CI 9-52 mg/day/1.73 m² per month). The discriminatory power of ePER for intragraft rejection processes was better in patients with AMR (AUC 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-0.99; P < 0.001) than in those with TCMR (AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.79; P = 0.002), with 89% sensitivity and 93% specificity for proteinuria >550 mg/day/1.73m². Conclusions: An increase in ePER in the first year following kidney transplantation associates with AMR, vascular TCMR and de-novo DSA at 1-year and may be used as a non-invasive clinical marker of intragraft endothelial cell injury.

Transplant kidney biopsy for proteinuria with stable creatinine: Findings and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Little is known aboutbiopsy findings and outcomes when kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) undergo biopsy for isolated proteinuria with stable serum creatinine (SCr).

METHODS

We analyzed all KTRs who underwent biopsy for isolated proteinuria with stable SCr between January 2016 and June 2020. Patients were divided into three groups based on the biopsy findings: Active Rejection (AR), Glomerulonephritis (GN), and Other.

RESULTS

A total of 130 KTRs fulfilled our selection criteria; 38 (29%) in the AR group, 26 (20%) in the GN group, and 66 (51%) in the Other group. Most baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. In multivariate analysis, higher HLA mismatch (HR per mismatch: 1.30; 95% CI:1.06-1.59; P = .01) and male gender (HR: .45; 95% CI .23-.89; P = .02) were associated with AR. There was no significant correlation between the degree of proteinuria and rejection (r = .05, P = .58) or GN (r = .07, P = .53). Graft survival was also similar between the groups. Likely due to the early diagnosis without a significant rise in SCr, outcomes were similar among all three groups.

CONCLUSION

Routine monitoring for proteinuria followed by a biopsy and appropriate management may help to identify early acute graft injury and prevent graft failure.

First and second morning spot urine protein measurements for the assessment of proteinuria: a diagnostic accuracy study in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Quantification of proteinuria in kidney transplant recipients is important for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. Apart from correlation tests, there have been few evaluations of spot urine protein measurements in kidney transplantation.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study involving 151 transplanted patients, we investigated measures of agreement (bias and accuracy) between the estimated protein excretion rate (ePER), determined from the protein-to-creatinine ratio in the first and second morning urine, and 24-h proteinuria and studied their performance at different levels of proteinuria. Measures of agreement were reanalyzed in relation to allograft histology in 76 patients with kidney biopsies performed for cause before enrolment in the study.

RESULTS

For ePER in the first morning urine, percent bias ranged from 1 to 28% and accuracy (within 30% of 24-h collection) ranged from 56 to 73%. For the second morning urine, percent bias ranged from 2 to 11%, and accuracy ranged from 71 to 78%. The accuracy of ePER (within 30%) in first and second morning urine progressively increased from 56 and 71% for low-grade proteinuria (150-299 mg/day) to 60 and 74% for moderate proteinuria (300-999 mg/day), and to 73 and 78% for high-grade proteinuria (≥1000 mg/day). Measures of agreement were similar across histologic phenotypes of allograft injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of ePER to accurately predict 24-h proteinuria in kidney transplant recipients is modest. However, accuracy improves with an increase in proteinuria. Given the similar accuracy of ePER measurements in first and second morning urine, second morning urine can be used to monitor protein excretion.

Diagnostic utility of protein to creatinine ratio (P/C ratio) in spot urine sample within routine clinical practice

The spot (random) urine protein to creatinine ratio (P/C ratio) is an alternative, fast and simple method of detecting and estimating the quantitative assessment of proteinuria. The aim of the work was to review the literature concerning the usefulness of spot urine P/C ratio evaluation in the diagnosis of proteinuria in the course of kidney disease, hypertension, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, immunological diseases, diabetes mellitus, and multiple myeloma, and in the diagnosis of proteinuria in children. We searched the PubMed and Google Scholar databases using the following keywords: proteinuria, spot urine protein to creatinine ratio, spot urine P/C ratio, protein creatinine index, PCR (protein to creatinine ratio), P/C ratio and methods, Jaffe versus enzymatic creatinine methods, urine protein methods, spot urine protein to creatinine ratio versus ACR (albumin to creatinine ratio), proteinuria versus albuminuria, limitations of the P/C ratio. More weight was given to the articles published in the last 10-20 years. A spot urine P/C ratio >20 mg/mmol (0.2 mg/mg) is the most commonly reported cutoff value for detecting proteinuria, while a P/C ratio value >350 mg/mmol (3.5 mg/mg) confirms nephrotic proteinuria. The International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy recommends a P/C ratio of 30 mg/mmol (0.3 mg/mg) for the classification of proteinuria in pregnant women at risk of preeclampsia. A high degree of correlation was observed between P/C ratio values and the protein concentration in 24-h urine collections. The spot urine P/C ratio is a quick and reliable test that can eliminate the need for a daily 24-h urine collection. However, in doubtful situations, it is still recommended to assess proteinuria in a 24-h urine collection. The literature review indicates the usefulness of the spot P/C ratio in various disease states; therefore, this test should be available in every laboratory. However, the challenge for the primary care physician is to know the limitations of the methods used to determine the protein and creatinine concentrations that are used to calculate the P/C ratio. Moreover, the P/C ratio cutoff used should be determined in individual laboratories because it depends on the patient population and the laboratory methodologies.

24-Hour Proteinuria Versus Spot Protein-Creatinine Ratio for Kidney Transplant Management in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

24-hour proteinuria (24h-P) has been the most widespread test for clinical follow-up of proteinuria after kidney transplantation (KT), but urine collection is often not properly collected. Spot protein-creatinine ratio (P/Cr) has become the alternative to 24h-P for proteinuria evaluation in many KT units. However, its reliability, equivalence to 24h-P, and prognostic value regarding allograft outcome remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation and agreement between both methods for assessing proteinuria and to analyze which of them is a better predictor of graft survival.

METHODS

We collected proteinuria measurements from KT patients in our center. 24h-P was adjusted for body surface area. Pearson correlation test and the Bland-Altman method were used to analyze correlation and agreement. Survival analysis was performed with the use of the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

A total of 8,549 urine samples were analyzed from 472 patients in whom 24h-P and P/Cr were simultaneously measured. A significant correlation was observed between 24h-P and P/Cr (r = .76; P < .001); however, the agreement between methods showed that P/Cr overestimated proteinuria compared with 24h-P, particularly when the latter was >1 g/24 h. The Cox regression multivariate model showed an increased risk of graft loss associated with proteinuria when assessed by either 24h-P (hazard ratio [HR] 6.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.49-17.1) or P/Cr (HR 3.34, 95% CI 1.04-10.7).

CONCLUSIONS

P/Cr is an method interchangeable with 24h-P for detecting proteinuria after KT. When proteinuria increases, the P/Cr overestimates 24h-P, even though it also has a significant and similar prognostic value for predicting graft survival.

The Oxidative and Inflammatory State in Patients with Acute Renal Graft Dysfunction Treated with Tacrolimus

Objective. To determine the oxidative stress/inflammation behavior in patients with/without acute graft dysfunction (AGD) with Tacrolimus. Methods. Cross-sectional study, in renal transplant (RT) recipients (1-yr follow-up). Patients with AGD and without AGD were included. Serum IL-6, TNF-α, 8-isoprostanes (8-IP), and Nitric Oxide (NO) were determined by ELISA; C-reactive protein (CRP) was determined by nephelometry; lipid peroxidation products (LPO) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) were determined by colorimetry. Results. The AGD presentation was at 5.09 ± 3.07 versus 8.27 ± 3.78 months (p < 0.001); CRP >3.19 mg/L was found in 21 versus 19 in the N-AGD group (p = 0.83); TNF-α 145.53 ± 18.87 pg/mL versus 125.54 ± 15.92 pg/mL in N-AGD (p = 0.64); IL-6 2110.69 ± 350.97 pg/mL versus 1933.42 ± 235.38 pg/mL in N-AGD (p = 0.13). The LPO were higher in AGD (p = 0.014): 4.10 ± 0.69 µM versus 2.41 ± 0.29 µM; also levels of 8-IP were higher in AGD 27.47 ± 9.28 pg/mL versus 8.64 ± 1.54 pg/mL (p = 0.01). Serum levels of NO in AGD were lower 138.44 ± 19.20 µmol/L versus 190.57 ± 22.04 µmol/L in N-AGD (p = 0.042); antioxidant enzyme SOD activity was significantly diminished in AGD with 9.75 ± 0.52 U/mL versus 11.69 ± 0.55 U/mL in N-AGD (p = 0.012). Discussion. Patients with RT present with a similar state of the proinflammatory cytokines whether or not they have AGD. The patients with AGD showed deregulation of the oxidative state with increased LPO and 8-IP and decreased NO and SOD.

Biomarkers in lupus nephritis

Lupus nephritis (LN) has significant impact on the outcome of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In the absence of any new breakthrough for management of LN over the last few years, using existing treatment modalities in a more effective manner is the mainstay of improving outcomes. For effectively using the drugs, disease activity needs to be assessed accurately and more objectively, which is not possible with present clinical assessment tools. Biomarkers help in accurate assessment of disease activity and enable the physician to individualize the therapy. Conventional disease activity markers have limitations which need to be addressed and research in the area of biomarker discovery in LN has immensely expanded over the last two decades as evident by the literature. Moreover, biomarkers for LN should be different from the markers of overall disease activity as LN requires significant immunosuppression, unlike other non-renal manifestations of SLE. Newly discovered biomarkers exhibit qualities pertaining to different aspects of disease activity and damage. In this review, we discuss the established as well as new biomarkers of SLE in the light of their role in LN diagnosis, follow-up, prediction of renal flare and correlation with renal histology findings.