Search

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are evolving as novel cell mediators, biomarkers, and therapeutic targets in kidney health and disease. They are naturally derived from cells both within and outside the kidney and carry cargo which mirrors the state of the parent cell. Thus, they are potentially more sensitive and disease-specific as biomarkers and messengers in various kidney diseases. Beside their role as novel communicators within the nephron, they likely communicate between different organs affected by various kidney diseases. Study of urinary EVs (uEVs) can help to fill current knowledge gaps in kidney diseases. However, separation and characterization are challenged by their heterogeneity in size, shape, and cargo. Fortunately, more sensitive and direct EV measuring tools are in development. Many clinical syndromes in nephrology from acute to chronic kidney and glomerular to tubular diseases have been studied. Yet, validation of biomarkers in larger cohorts is warranted and simpler tools are needed. Translation from in vitro to in vivo studies is also urgently needed. The therapeutic role of uEVs in kidney diseases has been studied extensively in rodent models of AKI. On the basis of the current exponential growth of EV research, the field of EV diagnostics and therapeutics is moving forward.

Tubular transport is a key function of the kidney to maintain electrolyte and acid-base homeostasis. Urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) harbor water, electrolyte, and acid-base transporters expressed at the apical plasma membrane of tubular epithelial cells. Within the uEV proteome, the correlations between kidney and uEV protein abundances are strongest for tubular transporters. Therefore, uEVs offer a noninvasive approach to probing tubular transport in health and disease. Here, we review how kidney tubular physiology is reflected in uEVs and, conversely, how uEVs may modify tubular transport. Clinically, uEV tubular transporter profiling has been applied to rare diseases, such as inherited tubulopathies, but also to more common conditions, such as hypertension and kidney disease. Although uEVs hold the promise to advance the diagnosis of kidney disease to the molecular level, several biological and technical complexities must still be addressed. The future will tell whether uEV analysis will mainly be a powerful tool to study tubular physiology in humans or whether it will move forward to become a diagnostic bedside test.

“Urine can provide us day by day, month by month, and year by year with a serial story of the major events within the kidney.” Dr. Thomas Addis, pioneer in renal physiology, came to this conclusion in 1948. The discovery of urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) as molecular mimics of kidney cells has taken his view to a new level (Figure 1). uEVs include nano-sized vesicles that bud outward from the cell plasma membrane of healthy or dying cells (microvesicles or apoptotic bodies, respectively) or are excreted via multivesicular bodies in a regulated process (exosomes). True to Dr. Addis’ view, uEVs contain disease- and site-specific markers from cells lining the kidney’s tubules and urinary tract,1 making them an invaluable addition to markers of kidney dysfunction such as serum creatinine and proteinuria, which are nonspecific and late to manifest. Evolving evidence demonstrates uEVs’ potential to predict disease earlier than conventional markers. Indeed, the first uEV-based biomarker was recently Food and Drug Administration approved in the field of urology, where a uEV RNA signature serves as a noninvasive screening method for prostate cancer. Other than their role in diagnosis and prognosis, uEVs are increasingly studied as novel messengers in renal disease mechanisms and in the context of regenerative medicine. Recently, a position statement was published by the Urine Task Force of the International Society of Extracellular Vesicles to advance rigor and standardization of uEV analysis and accelerate clinical application of uEVs.

Urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) are emerging as non-invasive biomarkers for various kidney diseases, but it is unknown how differences in nephron mass impact uEV excretion. To address this, uEV excretion was measured before and after human kidney donor nephrectomy and rat nephrectomy. In male and female donors, uEVs were quantified in cell-free spot and 24-h urine samples using nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), EVQuant, and CD9-time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay. Female donors had significantly lower total kidney volume (TKV) and excreted 49% fewer uEVs than male donors. uEV excretion correlated positively with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), creatinine clearance, and TKV (R's between 0.6 and 0.7). uEV excretion rate could also be predicted from spot urines after multiplying spot uEV/creatinine by 24-h urine creatinine. Donor nephrectomy reduced eGFR by 36% ± 10%, but the excretion of uEVs by only 16% (CD9+ uEVs -37%, CD9- uEVs no decrease). Donor nephrectomy increased the podocyte marker WT-1 and the proximal tubule markers NHE3, NaPi-IIa, and cubilin in uEVs two- to four-fold when correcting for the nephrectomy. In rats, the changes in GFR and kidney weight correlated with the changes in uEV excretion rate (R = 0.46 and 0.60, P th nephrectomy). Taken together, our data show that uEV excretion depends on nephron mass, and that nephrectomy reduces uEV excretion less than expected based on nephron loss due to compensatory hypertrophy. The major implication of our findings is that a measure for nephron mass or uEV excretion rate should be included when comparing uEV biomarkers between individuals.

Urine is commonly used for clinical diagnosis and biomedical research. The discovery of extracellular vesicles (EV) in urine opened a new fast-growing scientific field. In the last decade urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) were shown to mirror molecular processes as well as physiological and pathological conditions in kidney, urothelial and prostate tissue. Therefore, several methods to isolate and characterize uEVs have been developed. However, methodological aspects of EV separation and analysis, including normalization of results, need further optimization and standardization to foster scientific advances in uEV research and a subsequent successful translation into clinical practice. This position paper is written by the Urine Task Force of the Rigor and Standardization Subcommittee of ISEV consisting of nephrologists, urologists, cardiologists and biologists with active experience in uEV research. Our aim is to present the state of the art and identify challenges and gaps in current uEV-based analyses for clinical applications. Finally, recommendations for improved rigor, reproducibility and interoperability in uEV research are provided in order to facilitate advances in the field. ESM-U, CG, GV, GJ, IVB, MvR, and VvS, are members of the “IMMPROVE” consortium (Innovative Measurements and Markers for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis using Extracellular Vesicles), which is sponsored by an Alpe d'HuZes grant of the Dutch Cancer Society (grant #EMCR2015-8022). AL is supported by Norges Forskningsråd, Kreftforeningen and Helse Sør-Øst RHF (NO). UE is supported by the NIH, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Award number K23-HL-126101. CJB and EJH are supported by the Dutch Kidney Foundation (Nierstichting), Award number: CP18.05.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) are well-established glucose-lowering drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management. Acute GLP-1RA administration increases urinary excretion of sodium and other electrolytes. However, the renal tubular effects of prolonged GLP-1RA treatment are largely unknown. In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial, we determined the renal tubular effects of 8-wk treatment with 20 μg lixisenatide, a short-acting (prandial) GLP-1RA, versus titrated once-daily insulin glulisine in 35 overweight T2DM-patients on stable insulin glargine background therapy (age: 62 ± 7 yr, glycated hemoglobin: 8.0 ± 0.9%, estimated glomerular filtration rate: >60 ml·min−1·1.73 m−2). After a standardized breakfast, lixisenatide increased absolute and fractional excretions of sodium, chloride, and potassium and increased urinary pH. In contrast, lixisenatide reduced absolute and fractional excretions of magnesium, calcium, and phosphate. At week 8, patients treated with lixisenatide had significantly more phosphorylated sodium-hydrogen exchanger isoform 3 (NHE3) in urinary extracellular vesicles than those on insulin glulisine treatment, which suggested decreased NHE3 activity in the proximal tubule. A rise in postprandial blood pressure with lixisenatide partly explained the changes in the urinary excretion of sodium, potassium, magnesium, and phosphate and the changes in urinary pH. In conclusion, lixisenatide affects postprandial urinary excretion of several electrolytes and increases urinary pH compared with insulin glulisine in T2DM patients after 8 wk of treatment. This is most likely explained by a drug-induced rise in blood pressure or direct inhibitory effects on NHE3 in the proximal tubule.

Background Urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) are a promising source for biomarker discovery, but optimal approaches for normalization, quantification, and characterization in spot urines are unclear. Methods Urine samples were analyzed in a water-loading study, from healthy subjects and patients with kidney disease. Urine particles were quantified in whole urine using nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay (TR-FIA), and EVQuant, a novel method quantifying particles via gel immobilization. Results Urine particle and creatinine concentrations were highly correlated in the water-loading study (R2 0.96) and in random spot urines from healthy subjects (R2 0.47-0.95) and patients (R2 0.41-0.81). Water loading reduced aquaporin-2 but increased Tamm-Horsfall protein (THP) and particle detection by NTA. This finding was attributed to hypotonicity increasing uEV size (more EVs reach the NTA size detection limit) and reducing THP polymerization. Adding THP to urine also significantly increased particle count by NTA. In both fluorescence NTA and EVQuant, adding 0.01% SDS maintained uEV integrity and increased aquaporin-2 detection. Comparison of intracellular- and extracellular-epitope antibodies suggested the presence of reverse topology uEVs. The exosome markers CD9 and CD63 colocalized and immunoprecipitated selectively with distal nephron markers. Conclusions uEV concentration is highly correlated with urine creatinine, potentially replacing the need for uEV quantification to normalize spot urines. Additional findings relevant for future uEV studies in whole urine include the interference of THP with NTA, excretion of larger uEVs in dilute urine, the ability to use detergent to increase intracellular-epitope recognition in uEVs, and CD9 or CD63 capture of nephron segment-specific EVs.