Evaluation of novel urinary renal biomarkers: biological variation and reference change values.

A number of novel urinary biomarkers have been identified and partially qualified for use as markers for renal injury in rats. We used two multiplex assays for these novel biomarkers to quantify biomarker concentration in serial urine collections from rats of both sexes administered varying concentrations of cisplatin. From these data, we calculate inter-individual variation and reference ranges from predose animals and intra-individual variation and reference change values from undosed control animals. The biomarkers evaluated are albumin, α glutathione s-transferase, glutathione S-transferase-yb1, lipocalin-2, kidney injury molecule-1, osteopontin, and renal papillary antigen 1. For any creatinine-corrected novel biomarkers, we found intra-individual variation to be no greater than 44% and inter-individual variation to be no greater than 46%. Reference change values for most corrected analytes (except osteopontin) were 50-100%, indicating that a >100% increase in analyte concentration between serial samples would be unlikely to be associated with inherent analytical or biological variation.

Evaluation of novel urinary renal biomarkers with a cisplatin model of kidney injury: effects of collection period.

A number of novel urinary biomarkers have been identified and partially qualified for use as markers for renal injury in rats. To date, all evaluation studies have been made using 18 to 24 hour collection periods. However, shorter, more welfare friendly, urine collection periods are also used in industry. In this article, we quantify urinary biomarker concentration in serial paired sequential short and long urine collections from male rats administered varying concentrations of cisplatin. We calculate the rate of biomarker excretion in normal animals for both collection periods and the bias and correlation in urinary biomarker concentration between collection periods in dosed and control animals, and we estimate the level of agreement in biomarker concentration between both collection periods. We conclude that although there are minor differences in the concentration of some urinary biomarkers that are dependent upon the time and duration of collection, shorter collection protocols do not influence subsequent interpretation of normalized urinary biomarker data for most biomarkers.