Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32545899›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Differential Urinary Proteome Analysis for Predicting Prognosis in Type 2 Diabetes Patients with and without Renal Dysfunction.

Hee-Sung Ahn, Jong Ho Kim, Hwangkyo Jeong, Jiyoung Yu, Jeonghun Yeom, Sang Heon Song, Sang Soo Kim, In Joo Kim, Kyunggon Kim

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Gut microbes · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. A new journey to predict the prognosis of diabetic kidney disease.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hee-Sung AhnAsan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul 05505, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2241-6536
Jong Ho KimDepartment of Internal Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan 49241, Korea.
Hwangkyo JeongDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.
Jiyoung YuAsan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul 05505, Korea.
Jeonghun YeomConvergence Medicine Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Seoul 05505, Korea.
Sang Heon SongDepartment of Internal Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan 49241, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8218-6974
Sang Soo KimDepartment of Internal Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan 49241, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9687-8357
In Joo KimDepartment of Internal Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan 49241, Korea.
Kyunggon KimAsan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul 05505, Korea.

Funding

Pusan National University Hospital Biomedical Research Institute Grant (2017-20)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renal dysfunction, a major complication of type 2 diabetes, can be predicted from estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and protein markers such as albumin concentration. Urinary protein biomarkers may be used to monitor or predict patient status. Urine samples were selected from patients enrolled in the retrospective diabetic kidney disease (DKD) study, including 35 with good and 19 with poor prognosis. After removal of albumin and immunoglobulin, the remaining proteins were reduced, alkylated, digested, and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively with a nano LC-MS platform. Each protein was identified, and its concentration normalized to that of creatinine. A prognostic model of DKD was formulated based on the adjusted quantities of each protein in the two groups. Of 1296 proteins identified in the 54 urine samples, 66 were differentially abundant in the two groups (area under the curve (AUC):

Indexed as

Acid PhosphataseAdultAgedBiomarkersCalcium-Binding ProteinsCase-Control StudiesCathepsin AChromatography, LiquidDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic NephropathiesExtracellular Matrix ProteinsFemaleG(M2) Activator ProteinHumansMaleMass SpectrometryAcid PhosphataseACP2 protein, humanBiomarkersCalcium-Binding ProteinsCathepsin ACTSA protein, humanExtracellular Matrix ProteinsG(M2) Activator ProteinMUC1 protein, humanMucin-1SPARCL1 protein, humandiabetic kidney diseasekidney functionmachine learningmass spectrometryproteomicsstatistical clinical modelurine

Identifiers

PMID32545899
PMCPMC7352871

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.