Why the study?
Cardiovascular disease is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity in pediatric chronic kidney disease, making early identification of ideal CVD risk markers crucial to improve care.
Is plasma pregnancy zone protein (PZP) concentration associated with cardiovascular risk markers in children and adolescents with chronic kidney disease?
Is plasma pregnancy zone protein (PZP) concentration associated with cardiovascular risk markers in children and adolescents with chronic kidney disease?
May flag early CVD risk in pediatric CKD via protein markers; hypothesis-generating and needs prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity among children with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The causes of pediatric CKD differ from those in adults, as congenital anomalies in the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) are the leading causes in childhood. Identifying ideal markers of CVD risk early is crucial for CKD children to improve their care. Previously, we screened differentially expressed proteins in CKD children with or without blood pressure (BP) abnormalities and identified pregnancy zone protein (PZP). In 106 children and adolescents with CKD stages G1-G4, we analyzed plasma PZP concentration. The associations between PZP and ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) profile, parameters of cardiac and carotid ultrasounds, indices of arterial stiffness, and nitric oxide (NO) parameters were determined. We observed that PZP positively correlated with arterial stiffness indices, beta index, and pulse wave velocity in CAKUT. CKD children with abnormalities in ABPM and night dipping displayed a higher PZP concentration than those without. Additionally, the PZP level was positively correlated with NO bioavailability. In conclusion, our results suggest PZP has differential influences on cardiovascular risk in CAKUT and non-CAKUT children. Identification of this relationship is novel in the pediatric CKD literature.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: