Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Other
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Society of Nephrology
  • Other
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Advertisement
American Society of Nephrology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Visit ASN on Facebook
  • Follow CJASN on Twitter
  • CJASN RSS
  • Community Forum
Editorials
You have accessRestricted Access

Gut-Derived Metabolites and Chronic Kidney Disease

The Forest (F)or the Trees?

Raymond Vanholder and Griet Glorieux
CJASN September 2018, 13 (9) 1311-1313; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.08200718
Raymond Vanholder
Nephrology Section, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Griet Glorieux
Nephrology Section, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF
Loading
  • uremia
  • uremic toxins
  • intestine
  • colon
  • microbiome
  • gut
  • metabolome
  • indoxyl sulfate
  • p-cresyl sulfate
  • regenerative medicine
  • sorption
  • adsorption
  • prebiotics
  • probiotics
  • synbiotics
  • xenobiotics
  • antibiotics
  • metabolomics

As CKD progresses, the capacity of the kidneys to eliminate metabolic waste is gradually lost, resulting in the retention of a host of compounds. Many of these solutes affect biologic functions and are likely contributing to the uremic syndrome, affecting not only morbidity and mortality but also patient-centered outcomes (fatigue, pruritus, sleep disorders) and quality of life (1). Our knowledge on the nature and action of the uremic compounds is still expanding—a progress at least partly attributable to the acquisitions of metabolomic analysis, which allows the blinded search for previously unknown molecules (2).

The intensive exploration of the role of the intestine in the generation of uremic toxins was set in motion only during the past decade (3). The chain of events at play generally begins with dietary protein degradation followed by the metabolic transformation (fermentation) of amino acids by the gut microbiota and their conjugation (mostly sulfatation and glucuronidation) in the intestinal wall or liver by phase 1 and phase 2 metabolizing enzymes. Conjugation is, essentially, intended to increase solubility and neutralize toxicity, but the latter effect may remain incomplete, as several end-products still exert toxicity (4).

In the search for intestinally generated uremic solutes, some proof-of-concept metabolomic studies identified a number of discriminators by comparing plasma or urine from either germfree rodents with control animals (5) or human subjects with and without a colon (6). Several identified molecules appeared to be known protein-bound uremic toxins, such as indoxyl sulfate, p-cresyl sulfate, and phenyl sulfate.

In this issue of the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, Mair et al., in their study on patients on dialysis with and without a colon, used a slightly different approach than in their previous study (6), resulting in a considerable extension of our knowledge on uremic solutes of intestinal origin (7). A sophisticated analytic platform comparing urine of patients with normal kidney function with or without colon yielded 91 colon-derived molecules. This selection was then narrowed by comparing the plasma of controls with that of patients on maintenance hemodialysis, resulting in a definite list of 60 intestinally generated uremic solutes. By using a chemical reference library, Mair et al. (7) could then define the structure of 34 of these substances, among which 22 were classified as newly detected intestinally generated retention products. Many (but not all) of these solutes were protein bound and/or sulfates, glucuronides (as demonstrated by sample sulfatase treatment), or metabolites of phenyl acetic acid. For the majority of compounds of which it was possible to calculate kidney clearance, this parameter exceeded creatinine clearance. As the latter can be considered a proxy of GFR, this suggests substantial active kidney tubular secretion, and may cast some doubts on the value of GFR as an all-inclusive measure of kidney function.

The question is how this considerable extension of knowledge can be applied for the better to improve the quality and sustainability of the treatment and life quality of patients with kidney failure. One point is certain: the idea that the uremic syndrome is a simple condition, resulting from the activity of one or a few retention solutes, is further away than ever.

It seems tempting to embark upon a large experimental effort to unravel the toxicity of the newly detected solutes, but such an endeavor should not be underestimated. Next to the identification of the solutes per se, the uremic concentration needs to be determined which necessitates the availability of the pure compound (either purchased or synthesized) before the biochemical impact can be tested, preferably in several appropriate organ or cell systems (4). Such approach may be extremely time-consuming unless well designed, high-throughput systems can be applied. The number of solutes to be tested could, however, be reduced on the basis of data from large sample collections and big data analysis, taking into consideration hard outcomes as well as patient-centered end points. In addition, systems biology could be used to unravel interactions among metabolites, the most important pathways involved and the most important metabolites. Another option could be the selection of solutes with the most outspoken characteristics, e.g., the largest concentration gap between normal and hemodialysis or between those with and without a colon, or those solutes with the highest tubular secretion.

Perhaps more importantly, the reported data may help guiding the development of novel therapeutic procedures. As the study by Mair et al. detected large clusters with common characteristics (sulfates and glucuronides; phenols, cresols, and indoles), these could be approached by specific sorption methods aimed at capturing these structures. If such methods can be developed, they could also help to offer proof of concept regarding whether removing those solutes improves outcomes.

Another option suggested by this study is correction of the intestinal dysbiosis by modifying intestinal bacterial metabolism, for which several proof-of-concept studies are already available, applying different diets, probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, or antibiotics (8). However, it might be dangerous to jump to conclusions. When Mair et al. considered the urinary excretion ratio of patients without a colon versus controls per individual molecule, it almost always exceeded zero (7), suggesting extraintestinal sources. Likewise, even if one does not account for the five patients with an ileal pouch, which appears to preserve some intestinal microbial activity, more than 20 intestinally generated uremic solutes were found in the urine of some patients and seven were found in all patients without a colon.

Also for other reasons, targeting the colon as an isolated effort may offer an insufficient response to the uremic problem. A recent classification on the basis of preset criteria summing up 24 uremic solutes with the most important biochemical and clinical impact (9) contained only four of the solutes retrieved in the analysis of Mair et al. (7) (indoxyl sulfate, p-cresyl sulfate, trimethylamine-N-oxide, and indole acetic acid). This does not exclude yet unproven toxicity of some of the newly retrieved solutes by this study (7), but does suggest that a large number of solutes with toxic potential may not be entirely of intestinal origin. Of note, the aggregated results of the study by Mair et al. (7) also point to the role of an axis comprising the intestine, liver, plasma protein binding, and tubular excretion, rather than one of the intestine alone.

All these observations might translate into difficulties to sufficiently reduce concentration of the concerned solutes by applying intestinal methods only. Tackling the intestine may be one of the solutions, but it is not the only solution. Subsequently, research efforts should be continued and strengthened to develop also other alternative ways to enhance toxin removal, such as decreasing protein binding, sorption, preservation of kidney function, increasing tubular secretion, and applying various acquisitions at the intersection of kidney replacement therapy and regenerative medicine (bioartificial kidney) or regenerative medicine per se (stem cells, organoids, bioengineered kidneys). Stimulating research in these areas is an important task for the nephrological community and all those involved in health policy, as patients, their families, and health professionals are in need of innovations in a field that has stagnated for too long and has too high amounts of health expenditures in its current form. In this context, targeting the intestinal microbiome remains a cheap and noninvasive therapeutic option, with a potential outreach to a large number of patients.

In spite of the impressive efforts to accomplish this analysis and the vast amount of information offered, the study by Mair et al. (7) unavoidably raises some questions and concerns. Regardless of the comforting double-check of the reliability of the data provided for the most familiar uremic solutes, mass spectrometric analysis as used here remains semiquantitative, which may be a source of error, especially for calculated values such as clearances, ratios, or free fractions. Also, the use of spot urines sometimes necessitating drastic dilution is a potential source of error. Some seemingly obvious colon-derived candidate molecules, such as indoxyl glucuronide, hippuric acid, or phenyl acetic acid, that were traced by other metabolomic studies, sometimes by the same group (6), were absent in this analysis, which makes one suspect that either analytical bias or individual differences in nutritional status, metabolism, or genetics, may affect the findings. Other potentially skewing factors may be the overwhelming majority of patients with CKD and those on hemodialysis suffering from diabetes versus none in the control and colectomy groups, or the presence in the colectomy group of patients on immunosuppressive agents, as both may modify the intestinal microbiome (10,11).

In conclusion, this study contains convincing but not entirely unexpected evidence that colonic generation of uremic toxins concerns even more molecules than previously demonstrated. GFR is, in many cases, not representative of kidney clearance. The study also supports the concept of molecule families and the existence of a gut/liver/plasma protein binding/kidney tubular axis, the disruption of which by one or more therapeutic measures could bring down the concentration of those solutes. Research in these areas should be able to modify the current paradigm of kidney treatment to make it more sustainable. This includes the exploration of previously underexploited areas such as manipulation of intestinal function, and alternative extracorporeal removal strategies such as adsorption and regenerative medicine.

Disclosures

R.V. has received travel support and speakers fees from Nikisho and BBraun, and is a consultant for Debiotech, the Dutch Kidney Foundation, and Astra-Zeneca. G.G. reports no conflict.

Footnotes

  • Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org.

  • See related article, “Characteristics of Colon-Derived Uremic Solutes,” on pages 1398–1404.

  • Copyright © 2018 by the American Society of Nephrology

References

  1. ↵
    1. Vanholder R,
    2. Fouque D,
    3. Glorieux G,
    4. Heine GH,
    5. Kanbay M,
    6. Mallamaci F,
    7. Massy ZA,
    8. Ortiz A,
    9. Rossignol P,
    10. Wiecek A,
    11. Zoccali C,
    12. London GM; European Renal Association European Dialysis; Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) European Renal; Cardiovascular Medicine (EURECA-m) working group
    : Clinical management of the uraemic syndrome in chronic kidney disease. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 4: 360–373, 2016pmid:26948372
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Boelaert J,
    2. Lynen F,
    3. Glorieux G,
    4. Schepers E,
    5. Neirynck N,
    6. Vanholder R
    : Metabolic profiling of human plasma and urine in chronic kidney disease by hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography coupled with time-of-flight mass spectrometry: A pilot study. Anal Bioanal Chem 409: 2201–2211, 2017pmid:28083662
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Schepers E,
    2. Glorieux G,
    3. Vanholder R
    : The gut: The forgotten organ in uremia? Blood Purif 29: 130–136, 2010pmid:20093818
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Vanholder R,
    2. Schepers E,
    3. Pletinck A,
    4. Nagler EV,
    5. Glorieux G
    : The uremic toxicity of indoxyl sulfate and p-cresyl sulfate: A systematic review. J Am Soc Nephrol 25: 1897–1907, 2014pmid:24812165
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Mishima E,
    2. Fukuda S,
    3. Mukawa C,
    4. Yuri A,
    5. Kanemitsu Y,
    6. Matsumoto Y,
    7. Akiyama Y,
    8. Fukuda NN,
    9. Tsukamoto H,
    10. Asaji K,
    11. Shima H,
    12. Kikuchi K,
    13. Suzuki C,
    14. Suzuki T,
    15. Tomioka Y,
    16. Soga T,
    17. Ito S,
    18. Abe T
    : Evaluation of the impact of gut microbiota on uremic solute accumulation by a CE-TOFMS-based metabolomics approach. Kidney Int 92: 634–645, 2017pmid:28396122
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Aronov PA,
    2. Luo FJ,
    3. Plummer NS,
    4. Quan Z,
    5. Holmes S,
    6. Hostetter TH,
    7. Meyer TW
    : Colonic contribution to uremic solutes. J Am Soc Nephrol 22: 1769–1776, 2011pmid:21784895
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Mair R,
    2. Sirich T,
    3. Plummer N,
    4. Meyer T
    : Characteristics of colon-derived uremic solutes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 13, 1398–1404, 2018
  8. ↵
    1. Singh RK,
    2. Chang HW,
    3. Yan D,
    4. Lee KM,
    5. Ucmak D,
    6. Wong K,
    7. Abrouk M,
    8. Farahnik B,
    9. Nakamura M,
    10. Zhu TH,
    11. Bhutani T,
    12. Liao W
    : Influence of diet on the gut microbiome and implications for human health. J Transl Med 15: 73, 2017pmid:28388917
  9. ↵
    1. Vanholder R,
    2. Pletinck A,
    3. Schepers E,
    4. Glorieux G
    : Biochemical and clinical impact of organic uremic retention solutes: A comprehensive update. Toxins (Basel) 10: 33, 2018pmid:29316724
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Liabeuf S,
    2. Desjardins L,
    3. Massy ZA,
    4. Brazier F,
    5. Westeel PF,
    6. Mazouz H,
    7. Titeca-Beauport D,
    8. Diouf M,
    9. Glorieux G,
    10. Vanholder R,
    11. Jaureguy M,
    12. Choukroun G
    : Levels of indoxyl sulfate in kidney transplant patients, and the relationship with hard outcomes. Circ J 80: 722–730, 2016pmid:26841804
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Sabatino A,
    2. Regolisti G,
    3. Cosola C,
    4. Gesualdo L,
    5. Fiaccadori E
    : Intestinal microbiota in type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Curr Diab Rep 17: 16, 2017pmid:28271466
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: 13 (9)
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Vol. 13, Issue 9
September 07, 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Sign up for Alerts
Email Article
Thank you for your help in sharing the high-quality science in CJASN.
Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Gut-Derived Metabolites and Chronic Kidney Disease
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Society of Nephrology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Society of Nephrology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Gut-Derived Metabolites and Chronic Kidney Disease
Raymond Vanholder, Griet Glorieux
CJASN Sep 2018, 13 (9) 1311-1313; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.08200718

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Gut-Derived Metabolites and Chronic Kidney Disease
Raymond Vanholder, Griet Glorieux
CJASN Sep 2018, 13 (9) 1311-1313; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.08200718
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Disclosures
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Growing Understanding of the Antigenic Basis for Membranous Nephropathy
  • The Promise and Challenge of Aerobic Exercise in People Undergoing Long-Term Hemodialysis
  • Therapeutic Options to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes with Long-Term Hemodialysis
Show more Editorials

Cited By...

  • Gut microbiota dynamics and uraemic toxins: one size does not fit all
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Related Articles

  • Characteristics of Colon-Derived Uremic Solutes
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Keywords

  • uremia
  • uremic toxins
  • intestine
  • Colon
  • microbiome
  • gut
  • metabolome
  • Indoxyl sulfate
  • p-Cresyl sulfate
  • regenerative medicine
  • sorption
  • adsorption
  • prebiotics
  • probiotics
  • synbiotics
  • xenobiotics
  • antibiotics
  • Metabolomics

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Access
  • Subject Collections
  • Article Archive
  • ASN Meeting Abstracts

Information for Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Trainee of the Year
  • Author Resources
  • ASN Journal Policies
  • Reuse/Reprint Policy

About

  • CJASN
  • ASN
  • ASN Journals
  • ASN Kidney News

Journal Information

  • About CJASN
  • CJASN Email Alerts
  • CJASN Key Impact Information
  • CJASN Podcasts
  • CJASN RSS Feeds
  • Editorial Board

More Information

  • Advertise
  • ASN Podcasts
  • ASN Publications
  • Become an ASN Member
  • Feedback
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Password/Email Address Changes
  • Subscribe to ASN Journals

© 2021 American Society of Nephrology

Print ISSN - 1555-9041 Online ISSN - 1555-905X

Powered by HighWire