4.7 Article

Mitochondrial DNA Injury and Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 189-196

Publisher

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2007091031

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes Of Health [DK 2819-O1A1]
  2. Satellite Healthcare
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [K08DK002819] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The role of mitochondrial injury in the pathogenesis of complications of uremia is incompletely defined, although diminished bioenergetic capacity and the accumulation of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations have been reported. This study was undertaken to evaluate the prevalence of mtDNA injury in 180 patients who had ESRD and were enrolled into the baseline phase of the HEMO study and to relate these markers to all-cause mortality. The mitochondrial injury markers studied in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were the mtDNA copy number per cell, measured by quantitative PCR, and the presence of the mtDNA(4977) mutation. After frequency-matching healthy control subjects for age, mtDNA copy number was lower among older dialysis patients compared with older healthy subjects (P = 0.01). A one-log increase in mtDNA copy number was independently associated with a decreased hazard for mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64; 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.89). The mtDNA(4977) deletion was present in 48 (31%) patients and was independently associated with a decreased hazard for mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.33; 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 0.56). In summary, the mtDNA(4977) seems to predict survival in ESRD, but a reduced mitochondrial copy number seems to predict a poor outcome. Although further exploration of these associations is needed, evaluation of mitochondrial DNA copy number and somatic mtDNA mutations may provide simple genomic biomarkers to predict clinical outcomes among patients with ESRD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available