Search

We describe a proteomics analysis to determine the molecular differences between normothermically perfused (normothermic machine perfusion, NMP) human kidneys with urine recirculation (URC) and urine replacement (UR). Proteins were extracted from 16 kidney biopsies with URC (n = 8 donors after brain death [DBD], n = 8 donors after circulatory death [DCD]) and three with UR (n = 2 DBD, n = 1 DCD), followed by quantitative analysis by mass spectrometry. Damage‐associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) were decreased in kidney tissue after 6 hours NMP with URC, suggesting reduced inflammation. Vasoconstriction was also attenuated in kidneys with URC as angiotensinogen levels were reduced. Strikingly, kidneys became metabolically active during NMP, which could be enhanced and prolonged by URC. For instance, mitochondrial succinate dehydrogenase enzyme levels as well as carbonic anhydrase were enhanced with URC, contributing to pH stabilization. Levels of cytosolic and the mitochondrial phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase were elevated after 24 hours of NMP, more prevalent in DCD than DBD tissue. Key enzymes involved in glucose metabolism were also increased after 12 and 24 hours of NMP with URC, including mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase and glutamic‐oxaloacetic transaminase, predominantly in DCD tissue. We conclude that NMP with URC permits prolonged preservation and revitalizes metabolism to possibly better cope with ischemia reperfusion injury in discarded kidneys., The authors perform a proteomics analysis to identify molecular differences between normothermically machine perfused and discarded human kidneys with urine recirculation and urine replacement using lactated Ringers.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic caused >1 million infections during January-March 2020. There is an urgent need for reliable antibody detection approaches to support diagnosis, vaccine development, safe release of individuals from quarantine, and population lock-down exit strategies. We set out to evaluate the performance of ELISA and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) devices.MethodsWe tested plasma for COVID (SARS-CoV-2) IgM and IgG antibodies by ELISA and using nine different LFIA devices. We used a panel of plasma samples from individuals who have had confirmed COVID infection based on a PCR result (n=40), and pre-pandemic negative control samples banked in the UK prior to December-2019 (n=142).ResultsELISA detected IgM or IgG in 34/40 individuals with a confirmed history of COVID infection (sensitivity 85%, 95%CI 70-94%), vs. 0/50 pre-pandemic controls (specificity 100% [95%CI 93-100%]). IgG levels were detected in 31/31 COVID-positive individuals tested ≥10 days after symptom onset (sensitivity 100%, 95%CI 89-100%). IgG titres rose during the 3 weeks post symptom onset and began to fall by 8 weeks, but remained above the detection threshold. Point estimates for the sensitivity of LFIA devices ranged from 55-70% versus RT-PCR and 65-85% versus ELISA, with specificity 95-100% and 93-100% respectively. Within the limits of the study size, the performance of most LFIA devices was similar.ConclusionsCurrently available commercial LFIA devices do not perform sufficiently well for individual patient applications. However, ELISA can be calibrated to be specific for detecting and quantifying SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG and is highly sensitive for IgG from 10 days following first symptoms.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused >1 million infections during January-March 2020. There is an urgent need for reliable antibody detection approaches to support diagnosis, vaccine development, safe release of individuals from quarantine, and population lock-down exit strategies. We set out to evaluate the performance of ELISA and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) devices. Methods: We tested plasma for COVID (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SARS-CoV-2) IgM and IgG antibodies by ELISA and using nine different LFIA devices. We used a panel of plasma samples from individuals who have had confirmed COVID infection based on a PCR result (n=40), and pre-pandemic negative control samples banked in the UK prior to December-2019 (n=142). Results: ELISA detected IgM or IgG in 34/40 individuals with a confirmed history of COVID infection (sensitivity 85%, 95%CI 70-94%), vs. 0/50 pre-pandemic controls (specificity 100% [95%CI 93-100%]). IgG levels were detected in 31/31 COVID-positive individuals tested ≥10 days after symptom onset (sensitivity 100%, 95%CI 89-100%). IgG titres rose during the 3 weeks post symptom onset and began to fall by 8 weeks, but remained above the detection threshold. Point estimates for the sensitivity of LFIA devices ranged from 55-70% versus RT-PCR and 65-85% versus ELISA, with specificity 95-100% and 93-100% respectively. Within the limits of the study size, the performance of most LFIA devices was similar. Conclusions: Currently available commercial LFIA devices do not perform sufficiently well for individual patient applications. However, ELISA can be calibrated to be specific for detecting and quantifying SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG and is highly sensitive for IgG from 10 days following first symptoms.