Evenepoel Pieter, Cavalier Etienne, D'Haese Patrick C
Department of Immunology and Microbiology, Laboratory of Nephrology, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Nephrology and Renal Transplantation, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2017 Jun;15(3):178-186. doi: 10.1007/s11914-017-0362-3.
Impaired bone quality contributes to the increased fracture risk in chronic kidney disease patients. Both low and high turnover bone disease may compromise bone quality. The question arises whether bone biomarkers may be additive or replace bone histormorphometry for diagnosing the extremes of bone turnover.
Studies exploring the performance of established and emerging bone biomarkers against histomorphometric assessment of bone turnover are limited and overall yield inconclusive results as to their diagnostic utility. Bone biomarkers, although promising, currently fail to meet the needed diagnostic accuracy to replace bone histomorphometry and thus are not yet ready for clinical use. Bone biomarkers have not only several advantages, but also important limitations such as high biological variability, retention with kidney disease, preanalytical issues, and interassay variability. These important issues must be considered when developing and evaluating bone biomarkers. There is an urgent need for harmonization and standardization of available assays and additional bone biopsy studies.
骨质量受损会导致慢性肾病患者骨折风险增加。低转换型和高转换型骨病均可能损害骨质量。于是出现了一个问题,即骨生物标志物在诊断骨转换的极端情况时,是否可作为骨组织形态计量学的补充或替代方法。
探索已有的和新出现的骨生物标志物相对于骨转换组织形态计量学评估表现的研究有限,总体上关于其诊断效用的结果尚无定论。骨生物标志物虽然前景可期,但目前仍未达到替代骨组织形态计量学所需的诊断准确性,因此尚未准备好用于临床。骨生物标志物不仅有若干优点,也有重要局限性,如生物学变异性高、在肾病中的潴留、分析前问题以及检测间变异性。在开发和评估骨生物标志物时,必须考虑这些重要问题。迫切需要对现有检测方法进行协调和标准化,并开展更多骨活检研究。