Znaczenie układu enzymatycznego MMPs/TIMPs w upośledzonej degradacji macierzy pozakomórkowej w przewlekłym uszkodzeniu aloprzeszczepu nerki
The importance of MMPs/TIMPs system for impaired degradation of extracellular matrix in chronic kidney allograft injury
Department of Nephrology and Transplantation Medicine, Wrocław Medical University
Head of Department: prof. Marian Klinger, MD, PhD
Kidney transplantation is a form of renal replacement therapy that gives the greatest benefits for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Transplantation is more effective (medically and economically) than chronic dialysis therapy, with lower mortality rate and twice longer life expectancy, and improved quality of life (1). The clinical goal of transplantation is long-lasting patients’ and grafts’ survival. Despite improvements in immunosuppression and increased knowledge about the processes taking place in the transplanted organ, long-term graft survival is not satisfactory. In some patients after kidney transplantation, within a short time, develop processes of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IF/TA), resulting in a chronic allograft injury (CAI) and graft loss in more than 50% of renal transplant recipients (RTR) after several years. In 10 years these patients need dialysis treatment and re-transplantation. Chronic allograft injury (CAI) remains the most important single cause of late graft loss after kidney transplantation (2-4). In two last decades of 20th century graft survival improved significantly and 1-year renal allografts survival rates are over 80% for cadaveric and 90-95% for living related donors (5). Despite reducing the frequency and severity of acute rejection episodes, calcineurin inhibitors (Tac and CsA) have no protective effect on the development of chronic allograft dysfunction (2), with inconsiderable improvement of the half-life of renal allografts, and renal allografts continue to be lost at the rate of 2 to 4% per year due to CAI (6, 7). More than 1 million of renal transplant recipients live over the world. The mechanisms of fibrosis are complex, and may involve excess synthesis of collagen with decreased degradation, in association with interstitial injury and loss of functional tubules and glomeruli. Better understanding of mechanisms of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IF/TA), as the morphological surrogate of renal allograft deterioration may improve outcome after renal transplantation (8).
Chronic allograft injury (CAI) is a multifactorial clinical and pathological entity with progressive decline in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and not fully understood etiology (9). Both immune (antigen dependent) and nonimmune (antigen independent) events may promote graft injury (10). Wide repertoire of factors is involved: chemokines, profibrotic cytokines, growth factors, pro-angiogenic factors and proteolytic enzymes. The whole sequence of events is taken into account, ranging from the excessive accumulation of extracellular matrix (ECM) to reduced degradation of ECM proteins by proteolytic enzymes. One of the possible hypotheses of CAI is irreversible disruption of three-dimensional structure of ECM. Besides ECM expansion also occur significant changes in kidney allografts’ architectonics, with myofibroblasts accumulation and fibrosis induced by epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, glomerular hypertrophy and sclerosis, as well as tubular atrophy and loss of peritubular capillars. The inflammatory cells (macrophages, various T-cells, dendritic cells, plasma cells and granulocytes) infiltrate is present in acute phase of injury. These findings give the histopathological picture of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IF/TA). The term IF/TA is reserved for unclear and unspecific etiology of graft dysfunction. Changes in serum creatinine levels and proteinuria occur late and may not represent the actual state of allograft damage. In protocol biopsies it was shown that structural injury develops early and the presence of IF/TA occurs before functional dysfunction. The presence of IFTA has a predictive impact, independent from other classic factors of graft injury (11). More advanced fibrosis correlate with progressing allograft dysfunction (12).
1. Matas AJ, Gillingham KJ, Humar A et al.: 2202 kidney transplant recipients with 10 years of graft function: what happens next? Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 2410-2419.
2. Campistol JM, Sacks SH: Mechanism of nephrotoxicity. Transplantation 2000; 69 (suppl. 12): S5-S10.
3. Chapman JR, O’Connell PJ, Nankivell BJ: Chronic renal allograft dysfunction. J Am Soc Nephrol 2005; 16: 3015-3026.
4. Waller JR, Nicholson ML: Molecular mechanisms of renal allograft fibrosis. Br J Surgery 2001; 88: 1429-1441.
5. Paul LC: Chronic allograft nephropathy – a model of impaired repair from injury. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2000; 15: 149-151.
6. Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan A et al.: Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 605-612.
7. Pascual M, Theruvath T, Kawai T et al.: Strategies to improve long-term outcomes after renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 580-590.
8. Mengel M, Bock O, Priess M et al.: Expression of pro- and antifibrotic genes in protocol biopsies from renal allografts with interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy. Clin Nephrol 2008; 69: 408-416.
9. Pascual J, Pèrez-Sáez MJ, Mir M, Crespo M: Chronic renal allograft injury: early detection, accurate diagnosis and management. Transpl Rev 2012; 26: 280-290.
10. Jevnikar AM, Mannon RB: Late kidney allograft loss: What we know about it, and what we can do about it. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 3: S55-S67.
11. Seron D: Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy in renal allograft protocol biopsies as a surrogate of graft survival. Transplant Proc 2009; 41: 769-770.
12. Strutz F: Pathogenesis of tubulointerstitial fibrosis in chronic allograft dysfunction. Clin Transplant 2009; 23 (suppl. 21): 26-32.
13. Mengel M, Reeve J, Bunnag S et al.: Scoring total inflammation is superior to the current Banff inflammation score in predicting outcome and degree of molecular disturbance in renal allografts. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1859-1867.
14. Mannon RB, Matas AJ, Grande J et al.: Inflammation in areas of tubular atrophy in kidney allograft biopsies: a potent predictor of allograft failure. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2066-2073.
15. Racusen LC, Colvin RB, Solez K et al.: Antibody – mediated rejection criteria – an addition to the Banff ‘97 classification of renal allograft rejection. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 708-714.
16. Racusen LC, Regele H: The pathology of chronic allograft dysfunction. Kidney Int 2010; 78 (suppl. 119): S27-S32.
17. Stegall MD, Park WD, Larson TS et al.: The histology of solitary renal allografts at 1 and 5 years after transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 698-707.
18. Baboolal K, Jones GA, Janezic A et al.: Molecular and structural consequences of early renal allograft injury. Kidney Int 2002; 61: 686-696.
19. Harris S, Coupes BM, Roberts SA et al.: TGF-beta1 in chronic allograft nephropathy following renal transplantation. J Nephrol 2007; 20: 177-185.
20. Weir M, Wali RK: Minimizing the risk of chronic allograft nephropathy. Transplantation 2009; 87: S14-S18.
21. Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CL et al.: The natural history of chronic allograft nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2326-2333.
22. Cosio FG, Grande JP, Larson TS et al.: Kidney allograft fibrosis and atrophy early after living donor transplantation. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 1130-1136.
23. Nankivell BJ, Chapman JR: Chronic allograft nephropathy: current concepts and future directions. Transplantation 2006; 81: 643-654.
24. Nicholson ML, Waller JR, Bicknell GR: Renal transplant fibrosis correlates with intragraft expression of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase messenger RNA. Br J Surgery 2002; 89: 933-937.
25. Catania JM, Chen G, Parrish AR: Role of matrix metalloproteinases in renal pathophysiologies. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 2007; 292: F905-911.
26. Lelongt B, Legallicier B, Piedagnel R, Ronco PM: Do matrix metalloproteinases MMP-2 and MMP-9 (gelatinases) play a role in renal development, physiology and glomerular diseases? Current Op Nephrol Hypertension 2001; 10: 7-11.
27. Page-McCaw A, Ewald AJ, Werb Z: Matrix metalloproteinases and the regulation of tissue remodeling. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2007; 8: 221-233.
28. Wong W, DeVito J, Nguyen H et al.: Chronic humoral rejection of human kidney allografts is associated with MMP-2 accumulation in podocytes and its release in the urine. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2463-2471.
29. Rodrigo E, López-Hoyos M, Escallada R et al.: Circulating levels of matrix metalloproteinases MMP-3 and MMP-2 in renal transplant recipients with chronic transplant nephropathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2000; 15: 2041-2045.
30. Mandal M, Mandal A, Das S et al.: Clinical implications of matrix metalloproteinases. Mol Cell Biochem 2003; 252: 305-329.
31. Baricos WH: Chronic renal disease: Do metalloproteinase inhibitors have a demonstrable role in extracellular matrix accumulation? Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 1995; 4: 365-368.
32. Hörstrup JH, Gehrmann M, Schneider B et al.: Elevation of serum and urine levels of TIMP-1 and tenescin in patients with renal disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17: 1005-1013.
33. Mazanowska O, Kamińska D, Krajewska M et al.: Increased plasma tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase concentrations as negative predictors associated with deterioration of kidney allograft function upon long-term observation. Transplant Proc 2013; 45: 1458-1461.