Specific populations of urinary extracellular vesicles and proteins differentiate type 1 primary hyperoxaluria patients without and with nephrocalcinosis or kidney stones

Background: Primary hyperoxaluria type 1 (PH1) is associated with nephrocalcinosis (NC) and calcium oxalate (CaOx) kidney stones (KS). Populations of urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) can reflect kidney pathology. The aim of this study was to determine whether urinary EVs carrying specific biomarkers and proteins differ among PH1 patients with NC, KS or with neither disease process. Methods: Mayo Clinic Rare Kidney Stone Consortium bio-banked cell-free urine from male and female PH1 patients without (n = 10) and with NC (n = 6) or KS (n = 9) and an eGFR > 40 mL/min/1.73 m² were studied. Urinary EVs were quantified by digital flow cytometer and results expressed as EVs/ mg creatinine. Expressions of urinary proteins were measured by customized antibody array and results expressed as relative intensity. Data were analyzed by ANCOVA adjusting for sex, and biomarkers differences were considered statistically significant among groups at a false discovery rate threshold of Q < 0.20. Results: Total EVs and EVs from different types of glomerular and renal tubular cells (11/13 markers) were significantly (Q < 0.20) altered among PH1 patients without NC and KS, patients with NC or patients with KS alone. Three cellular adhesion/inflammatory (ICAM-1, MCP-1, and tissue factor) markers carrying EVs were statistically (Q < 0.20) different between PH1 patients groups. Three renal injury (β2-microglobulin, laminin α5, and NGAL) marker-positive urinary EVs out of 5 marker assayed were statistically (Q < 0.20) different among PH1 patients without and with NC or KS. The number of immune/inflammatory cell-derived (8 different cell markers positive) EVs were statistically (Q < 0.20) different between PH1 patients groups. EV generation markers (ANO4 and HIP1) and renal calcium/phosphate regulation or calcifying matrixvesicles markers (klotho, PiT1/2) were also statistically (Q < 0.20) different between PH1 patients groups. Only 13 (CD14, CD40, CFVII, CRP, E-cadherin, EGFR, endoglin, fetuin A, MCP-1, neprilysin, OPN, OPGN, and PDGFRβ) out of 40 proteins were significantly (Q < 0.20) different between PH1 patients without and with NC or KS. Conclusions: These results imply activation of distinct renal tubular and interstitial cell populations and processes associated with KS and NC, and suggest specific populations of urinary EVs and proteins are potential biomarkers to assess the pathogenic mechanisms between KS versus NC among PH1 patients.