AGEs/sRAGE, a novel risk factor in the pathogenesis of end-stage renal disease

Interaction of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) with its cell-bound receptor (RAGE) results in cell dysfunction through activation of nuclear factor kappa-B, increase in expression and release of inflammatory cytokines, and generation of oxygen radicals. Circulating soluble receptors, soluble receptor (sRAGE), endogenous secretory receptor (esRAGE) and cleaved receptor (cRGAE) act as decoy for RAGE ligands and thus have cytoprotective effects. Low levels of sRAGE and esRAGE have been proposed as biomarkers for many diseases. However sRAGE and esRAGE levels are elevated in diabetes and chronic renal diseases and still tissue injury occurs. It is possible that increases in levels of AGEs are greater than increases in the levels of soluble receptors in these two diseases. Some new parameters have to be used which could be an universal biomarkers for cell dysfunction. It is hypothesized that increases in serum levels of AGEs are greater than the increases in the soluble receptors, and that the levels of AGEs is correlated with soluble receptors and that the ratios of AGEs/sRAGE, AGEs/esRAGE and AGEs/cRAGE are elevated in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and would serve as an universal risk marker for ESRD. The study subject comprised of 88 patients with ESRD and 20 healthy controls. AGEs, sRAGE and esRAGE were measured using commercially available enzyme linked immune assay kits. cRAGE was calculated by subtracting esRAGE from sRAGE. The data show that the serum levels of AGEs, sRAGE, cRAGE are elevated and that the elevation of AGEs was greater than those of soluble receptors. The ratios of AGEs/sRAGE, AGEs/esRAGE and AGEs/cRAGE were elevated and the elevation was similar in AGEs/sRAGE and AGEs/cRAGE but greater than AGEs/esRAGE. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive value of AGEs/sRAGE and AGEs/cRAGE were 86.36 and 84.88 %, 86.36 and 80.95 %, 0.98 and 0.905, 96.2 and 94.8 %, and 61.29 and 56.67 % respectively. There was a positive correlation of sRAGE with esRAGE and cRAGE, and AGEs with esRAGE; and negative correlation between sRAGE and AGEs/sRAGE, esRAGE and AGES/esRAGE, and cRAGE and AGES/cRAGE. In conclusion, AGEs/sRAGE, AGEs/cRAGE and AGEs/esRAGE may serve as universal risk biomarkers for ESRD and that AGEs/sRAGE and AGEs/cRAGE are better risk biomarkers than AGEs/esRAGE.