Urinary proteomics in sepsis-associated AKI

Abstract

To the Editor,

We read with interest the recent article by Stanaway et al. titled “Urinary proteomics identifies distinct immunological profiles of sepsis-associated AKI sub-phenotypes” [1]. The study represents a significant advancement in understanding acute kidney injury (AKI) in sepsis through urinary proteomics, offering promising insights to improve early recognition, predict responses to therapy, and implement or develop targeted treatment strategies. However, some aspects of the study warrant further discussion.

The observation that bacterial infections were more common in AKI-SP2, whereas COVID-19 predominated in AKI-SP1, supports the phenotype of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. However, this raises the question of whether AKI-SP2 represents a distinct AKI sub-phenotype or reflects endothelial dysfunction typically associated with bacterial sepsis. Additionally, the observed overlap of proteins associated with AKI-SP2 and those linked to the risk of renal replacement therapy (RRT) raises the question of whether AKI-SP2 represents a distinct sub-phenotype or reflects a continuum of severe AKI. Clarification of this overlap could enhance our biological understanding of these processes. Moreover, the finding that urinary proteomic profiles of AKI-SP1 were largely similar to those of non-AKI patients suggests the need to refine diagnostic thresholds or explore alternative biomarker panels to improve classification accuracy. Addressing this issue may require the use of more specific biomarkers directly associated with the pathophysiological mechanisms of AKI to improve patient phenotyping. Given the study’s emphasis on urinary proteomics, defining sub-phenotypes directly from urinary proteomic data seems feasible, potentially yielding kidney-specific classifications that more accurately reflect local injury processes, which could enable tailored therapeutic strategies.

The timing of sample collection from patients with sepsis remains a significant challenge as the onset and progression of critical symptoms can vary widely between individuals. This variability is influenced by patient-related factors, type of pathogen involved, and specific organs affected. Given the dynamic progression of sepsis, aligning sample collection more precisely with the timing of sepsis onset could reduce variability and improve data consistency; however, this remains an extremely challenging, if not impossible, task. Alternatively, patients could be aligned based on the onset of AKI as defined by the KDIGO guidelines [2] or using predictive or functional AKI biomarkers such as Cystatin C rather than ICU admission, which may provide a more clinically relevant timeline for analysis, reduce inter-patient variability, and provide a clearer picture of AKI-related changes in urinary proteomic profiles as AKI evolves. Longitudinal analysis with repeated sampling could enable the identification of temporal proteomic changes associated with the onset or recovery of AKI. However, it is important to realize that the pathways differentially expressed after AKI onset may not represent therapeutic targets to prevent AKI development in sepsis effectively. Finally, while plasma biomarkers were used to define AKI sub-phenotypes, no direct comparison was made between urinary proteomic data and systemic circulation proteomic profiles. Integrating these datasets could provide a more comprehensive understanding of local kidney-specific processes versus systemic inflammatory responses in sepsis-associated AKI.

Future studies should incorporate renal outcomes, including the duration and severity of AKI and its progression to acute kidney disease (AKD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). This would further strengthen the claim that this biomarker panel can identify meaningful AKI phenotypes beyond acute prognostication. While the study primarily focused on in-hospital mortality and the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), these outcomes often correlate with sepsis severity and serve as prognostic indicators rather than actionable clinical insights for long-term care. The authors highlight potential treatable targets, yet these largely align with the well-established inflammatory response and endothelial activation pathways in sepsis. From a clinical perspective, a more pressing question is how these AKI phenotypes can directly inform patient management. Moreover, identifying patients at risk of long-term renal dysfunction could guide post-ICU follow-up strategies and interventions, ultimately improving outcomes for sepsis survivors. This approach would be far more impactful than yet another predictive biomarker panel primarily aimed at predicting mortality, especially when more accessible biomarkers already exist for that purpose.

In conclusion, the study by Stanaway et al., provides valuable insights into the proteomic characterization of sepsis-associated AKI, underscoring the potential of urinary biomarkers in advancing precision medicine for sepsis. Interventional studies in preclinical models or human patients are needed to assess whether the identified pathways are potential therapeutic targets for alleviating AKI in sepsis. Addressing these points will be essential to further enhance the potential of urinary proteomics to tailor sepsis care.

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

ICU:

Intensive care unit

AKI:

Acute kidney injury

AKD:

Acute kidney disease

CKD:

Chronic kidney disease

RRT:

Renal replacement therapy

1. Stanaway IB, Morrell ED, Mabrey FL, Sathe NA, Bailey Z, Speckmaier S, et al. Urinary proteomics identifies distinct immunological profiles of sepsis associated AKI sub-phenotypes. Crit Care. 2024;28:419.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

2. Kellum JA, Lameire N. Diagnosis, evaluation, and management of acute kidney injury: a KDIGO summary (Part 1). Crit Care. 2013;17:204.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

Not applicable

Not applicable.

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Critical Care, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

   Jill Moser

2. Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

   Tamar J. van der Aart & Hjalmar R. Bouma

3. Department of Acute Care, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

   Tamar J. van der Aart & Hjalmar R. Bouma

4. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

   Hjalmar R. Bouma

Authors

1. Jill MoserView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

2. Tamar J. van der AartView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

3. Hjalmar R. BoumaView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JM wrote the manuscript with TA and HB, providing valuable input and editing the manuscript. All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript prior to submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jill Moser.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

Cite this article

Moser, J., van der Aart, T.J. & Bouma, H.R. Urinary proteomics in sepsis-associated AKI. Crit Care 29, 77 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05306-w

Download citation

• Received: 30 January 2025

• Accepted: 01 February 2025

• Published: 16 February 2025

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05306-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative