Next Article in Journal
Effects of Achieving Sustained Virologic Response after Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents on Long-Term Liver Fibrosis in Diabetics vs. in Non-Diabetic Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C Infection
Next Article in Special Issue
Oral Absorbent AST-120 Is Associated with Compositional and Functional Adaptations of Gut Microbiota and Modification of Serum Short and Medium-Chain Fatty Acids in Advanced CKD Patients
Previous Article in Journal
Role of CA 19.9 in the Management of Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: State of the Art and Future Perspectives
Previous Article in Special Issue
Predictive Value of HbA1c and Metabolic Syndrome for Renal Outcome in Non-Diabetic CKD Stage 1–4 Patients
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biomedicines
Volume 10
Issue 9
10.3390/biomedicines10092092
biomedicines-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Association between Anti-Erythropoietin Receptor Antibodies and Cardiac Function in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

by
Yasuhiro Mochida
1,2,
Akinori Hara
3,4,*,
Machiko Oka
5,
Kyoko Maesato
6,
Kunihiro Ishioka
2,
Hidekazu Moriya
2,
Megumi Oshima
1,3,
Tadashi Toyama
1,3,
Shinji Kitajima
1,3,
Yasunori Iwata
1,3,
Norihiko Sakai
1,3,
Miho Shimizu
1,3,
Yoshitaka Koshino
7,
Takayasu Ohtake
2,
Sumi Hidaka
2,
Shuzo Kobayashi
2 and
Takashi Wada
1,3
1
Department of Nephrology and Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa 920-8641, Japan
2
Kidney Disease and Transplant center, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa 247-8533, Japan
3
Division of Nephrology, Kanazawa University Hospital, Kanazawa 920-8641, Japan
4
Department of Hygiene and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan
5
Department of Nephrology, Shonan Fujisawa Tokushukai Hospital, Kanagawa 251-0041, Japan
6
Department of Nephrology, Tokyo Nishi Tokushukai Hospital, Tokyo 196-0003, Japan
7
Department of Internal Medicine, Mizuho Hospital, Kahoku 929-0346, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biomedicines 2022, 10(9), 2092; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/biomedicines10092092
Submission received: 13 July 2022 / Revised: 15 August 2022 / Accepted: 22 August 2022 / Published: 26 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Pathogenesis and Treatment Progress of Chronic Kidney Diseases)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Cardiac dysfunction is an important prognostic predictor of cardiovascular mortality in patients on hemodialysis (HD). Erythropoietin (EPO) has been reported to improve cardiac function by binding to the EPO receptor (EPOR) on cardiomyocytes. This study investigated whether anti-EPOR antibodies were associated with left ventricular cardiac function in patients undergoing HD. This multicenter, cross-sectional observational study included 377 patients (median age, 70 years; 267 (70.8%) males) with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing stable maintenance HD. Serum levels of anti-EPOR antibodies were measured, and echocardiography was used to assess the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Anti-EPOR antibodies were found in 17 patients (4.5%). LVMI was greater (median of 135 g/m2 vs. 115 g/m2, p = 0.042), and the prevalence of LVEF < 50% was higher (35.3% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.032) in patients with anti-EPOR antibodies than in those without. Multivariable linear regression and logistic regression analysis (after adjusting for known risk factors of heart failure) revealed that anti-EPOR antibodies were independently associated with LVMI (coefficient 16.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0–35.0%, p = 0.043) and LVEF <50% (odds ratio 3.20; 95% CI 1.05–9.73, p = 0.041). Thus, anti-EPOR antibody positivity was associated with left ventricular dysfunction in patients undergoing HD.

1. Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a poor prognostic factor in patients on hemodialysis (HD) [1,2]. Heart failure and left ventricular hypertrophy in patients on HD, which have prevalences of 43% [3] and about 80% [4,5], respectively, are major CVD complications and risk factors for cardiovascular mortality [2,6,7]. Factors associated with heart failure and left ventricular hypertrophy in patients on HD include older age, diabetes mellitus (DM), a history of coronary artery disease, hypertension, impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and anemia [8,9]. Therefore, early detection and treatment of these factors are essential for improving the CVD prognosis.
In patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), including those undergoing HD, erythropoietin (EPO)-producing cells are dysfunctional, and anemia is caused by a decrease in the production of endogenous EPO. EPO-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been used to treat anemia in these patients and have also been reported to improve cardiac function [10]. In particular, ESA administration reduced left ventricular myocardial mass [11,12,13] and increased LVEF [14] in addition to improving anemia. Furthermore, animal studies in mice have shown that when EPO receptors (EPORs) are functional in cardiomyocytes, myocardial mass and cardiac function are maintained, while when EPORs are missing or not functional in cardiomyocytes, left ventricular hypertrophy develops and LVEF decreases despite increasing levels of EPO [15]. Thus, the cardioprotective function of ESA is suggested to be caused, in part, by the direct action of EPO binding to EPOR in heart tissue along with improvement in anemia [15,16].
Recently, we detected autoantibodies to EPOR that can induce anemia by inhibiting EPO–EPOR interaction on erythroid progenitor cells [17]. Thereafter, we also showed that these antibodies were associated with poor kidney outcomes in patients with CKD, including lupus nephritis [18], DM [19,20], and anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis [21]. However, the association of these antibodies with cardiac function in patients with CKD or on HD remains unknown.
Here, we hypothesized that anti-EPOR antibodies are involved in the pathogenesis of cardiac dysfunction in patients with CKD. To clarify this hypothesis, the present study aimed to investigate the relationship between anti-EPOR antibodies and cardiac function in patients on HD.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Patients

This multicenter cross-sectional observational study included 489 patients on maintenance HD recruited from February 2018 to August 2020 at six dialysis centers: Kanazawa University Hospital (Kanazawa, Japan), Mizuho Hospital (Kahoku, Japan), Moriyama Koshino Clinic (Kanazawa, Japan), Shonan Kamakura General Hospital (Kanagawa, Japan), Shonan Fujisawa Tokushukai Hospital (Kanagawa, Japan), and Tokyo Nishi Tokushukai Hospital (Tokyo, Japan). After excluding patients who did not provide informed consent (85 patients), we enrolled the remaining 404 patients on HD (Figure 1). We collected data on comorbidities and clinical characteristics from electronic medical records and evaluated cardiac function using echocardiography. We excluded patients who did not undergo echocardiography (24 patients), as well as those who had a hematological disorder or a malignant tumor. Finally, 377 patients were enrolled as study participants.

2.2. Evaluation of Clinical Characteristics

We obtained information about baseline patient characteristics and medication use (renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors) from electronic medical records. Age, sex, dialysis duration, and comorbidities (hypertension (HT), dyslipidemia, DM, ischemic heart disease (IHD), stroke, and peripheral artery disease (PAD)) at baseline were collected. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated by body weight (kg) divided by height squared (m2). Before dialysis, both systolic and diastolic blood pressures were measured, and blood samples were collected. The following laboratory values were also collected: white blood cell count (WBC), hemoglobin (Hb), albumin, triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-cho), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-cho), C-reactive protein (CRP), and β2-microglobulin levels. The erythropoietin resistance index (ERI) was calculated using the following equation [22]: ERI = EPO dose/week/dry weight (kg) ×Hb (g/dL). The EPO dose was calculated by converting the weekly epoetin-α dose. If darbepoetin-α or continuous erythropoietin receptor activators were used as ESAs, these EPO doses were multiplied by 200 to convert them to doses of epoetin-α in units [22].

2.3. Measurement of Anti-EPOR Antibodies

Serum levels of anti-EPOR antibodies were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, as previously described [17]. Briefly, polyvinyl 96-well microplates (Nunc International, Tokyo, Japan) were coated with recombinant human EPOR protein (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA) diluted in 0.2 M sodium bicarbonate buffer and incubated at 4 °C for 24 h. The remaining free binding sites were blocked with 1% bovine serum albumin at 4 °C. After the plates were washed with Tween 20-Tris buffered saline, serum samples were added in duplicate at 1:1000 dilution to 1% bovine serum albumin in phosphate-buffered saline for 20 h at 4 °C. The plates were washed with the same buffer and incubated with goat anti-human IgG conjugated with horseradish peroxidase (Millipore, Temecula, CA, USA) at a dilution of 1:5000 for 1.5 h at room temperature. The substrate, tetramethylbenzidine (KPL, Gaithersburg, MD, USA), was added, and the reaction was stopped by adding 2N sulfuric acid. The optical density (OD) at 450 nm was determined by an automated plate reader. Anti-EPOR antibodies were considered positive when the OD450 ratio between patient serum and normal control serum was greater than 1.5 [23].

2.4. Echocardiography

Standard echocardiography recordings were performed on midweek non-dialysis days by two expert echocardiographers and/or doctors at the participating institutions. We assessed LVMI and LVEF as cardiac function markers. LVMI was calculated by dividing the left ventricular mass by the body surface area. The left ventricular mass was calculated from the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), end-systolic diameter (LVESD) as well as the posterior wall diameter (PWd), and interventricular septum diameter (IVSd) from the parasternal long axis position using the formula by Devereux [24] with the recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography [25]: left ventricular mass = 0.8 × 1.04 × [(LVEDD + IVSd + PWd)3-LVEDD3] + 0.6. LVEF was calculated from the ratio of the left ventricular stroke volume (SV) to the left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and SV was obtained by subtracting the left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) from LVEDV [26]; LVEF = (LVEDV − LVESV) × 100 (%)/LVEDV.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The patients were divided into two groups: those who had anti-EPOR antibodies and those who did not, and those with or without LVEF < 50%. Nominal variables were expressed as percentages. After using the Shapiro–Wilk test for normality distribution, data for continuous variables were expressed as means ± standard deviations (SD) for normally distributed data or medians (interquartile ranges: IQR) for non-normally distributed data. To compare the two groups, we used Fisher’s exact test for nominal variables, Student’s t-test for continuous variables with a normal distribution, and Mann–Whitney’s U-test for a non-normal distribution. Multivariable linear regression for log-LVMI and logistic regression analyses for LVEF <50% were also performed to determine whether the presence of anti-EPOR antibodies was independently associated with each left ventricular function parameter, adjusting for age, sex, IHD, DM, RAS inhibitor use, BMI, systolic blood pressure, Hb, dyslipidemia Alb, CRP, and dialysis duration as known risk factors of cardiac dysfunction in this population [9,27,28]. The levels of LVMI as the dependent variable in multivariable linear regression were natural log-transformed as log-LVMI to provide normality in the regression residuals. Beta coefficients in the linear regression analysis for log-LVMI were back-transformed to indicate the percent increase in LVMI with one unit increase in the corresponding covariate. Stata ver.15 (Stata Corp LLC, College Station, TX, USA) was used for all statistical analyses. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Patient Characteristics

Table 1 shows the patient characteristics of the 377 enrolled patients. The median age was 70 years, the proportion of males was 70.8%, 51.7% had DM, 26.3% had IHD, and the median dialysis duration time was 60 months (IQR 27–124 months). Anti-EPOR antibodies were detected in 17 patients (4.5%). Of these, antibodies were observed in 10 of 195 patients (5.1%) with DM and 7 of 182 patients (3.8%) without DM. The causes of renal failure in patients with anti-EPOR antibodies were diabetic kidney disease in eight cases (47%), nephrosclerosis in two (11.8%), chronic glomerulonephritis in three (17.6%), polycystic kidney disease in one (5.9%), gouty kidney in one (5.9%), Alport syndrome in one (5.9%), and unknown in one (5.9%).

3.2. Clinical Characteristics of Patients with and without Anti-EPOR Antibodies

The demographic and clinical findings of patients with and without anti-EPOR antibodies are shown in Table 1. Patients with anti-EPOR antibodies had significantly lower levels of Hb (median (IQR) of 10.5 (9.6–11.0) g/dL vs. 11.1 (10.2–12.0) g/dL, p = 0.009), higher levels of CRP (0.33 (0.12–1.83) mg/dL vs. 0.15 (0.047–0.53) mg/dL, p = 0.028), higher levels of ERI (13.00 (5.38–21.65) vs. 5.75 (2.30–11.57), p = 0.026), and higher doses of ESA (7500 (2500–12,000) units/weekly vs. 4000 (1250–7500) units/weekly, p = 0.049) than those without antibodies. In the assessment of cardiac function, the anti-EPOR antibody-positive group had significantly higher levels of LVMI (135 (116–170) g/m2 vs. 115 (95–141) g/m2, p = 0.044, Figure 2A) and a higher proportion of patients with LVEF <50% (35.3% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.032) compared to those in the antibody-negative group (Figure 2B).

3.3. Clinical Characteristics of Patients with and without LVEF < 50%

The demographic and clinical findings of patients with and without LVEF < 50% are shown in Table 2. LVEF < 50% was observed in 62 patients (16.4%). LVEF < 50% was associated with a significantly higher proportion of anti-EPOR antibody positivity (9.7% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.044), male sex (85.5% vs. 67.9%, p = 0.006), DM (64.5% vs. 49.2%, p = 0.036), and IHD (51.6% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.001) compared to LVEF ≥ 50%. In addition, higher levels of CRP (0.22 (0.084–0.63) mg/dL vs. 0.14 (0.04–0.54) mg/dL, p = 0.016) and lower levels of HDL cholesterol (41 (34–46) mg/dL vs. 45 (35–60) mg/dL, p = 0.016) were observed in patients with LVEF < 50% compared with those without. Patients with LVEF < 50% had higher LVMI (141 (125–169) g/m2 vs. 112 (92–1235) g/m2, p < 0.001) than patients with LVEF ≥ 50%.

3.4. Association between the Presence of Anti-EPOR Antibodies and LVMI

In addition to the univariable analysis, multivariate linear regression analysis for log-LVMI showed that anti-EPOR antibodies were significantly associated with LVMI (back-transformed beta coefficient 16.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7–35.2%, p = 0.043) as well as male sex and CRP levels (Table 3).

3.5. Association between the Presence of Anti-EPOR Antibodies and Reduced LVEF

We further performed multivariable logistic regression analysis with the same covariates as those used in model 1 of the multivariable linear regression analysis for LVMI. The presence of anti-EPOR antibodies, as well as male sex and IHD, was independently associated with reduced LVEF (odds ratio 3.20; 95% CI 1.05–9.73, p = 0.041) (Table 4).

4. Discussion

This multicenter cross-sectional observational study investigated the association between anti-EPOR antibodies and cardiac function in patients with CKD on maintenance HD. We found that positivity for anti-EPOR antibodies was independently associated with LVMI and reduced LVEF even after adjustment for known risk factors, including IHD, HT, and DM.
The proportion of patients positive for anti-EPOR antibodies in this study was 4.5%, which is smaller than found in patients with CKD in previous studies that included some causes of CKD with lupus nephritis [18], DM [19,20], ANCA vasculitis [21], and maintenance HD [23]. In particular, of these studies, Hara et al. showed that the proportion of anti-EPOR antibodies in patients on maintenance HD with ESA administration was 10.2% [23]. The difference in the proportion of anti-EPOR antibodies may be explained, in part, by the difference in the indication for the reason for hemodialysis and the fact that patients were enrolled regardless of using ESAs and their levels of hemoglobin.
Patients with anti-EPOR antibodies were treated with the administration of more doses of ESAs, while they had a lower concentration of hemoglobin than those without anti-EPOR antibodies in this study. These characteristics of ESA hyporesponsiveness in positive patients with anti-EPOR antibodies are consistent with the results of a previous study by Hara et al. [23]. Immunoglobulin G fractions from patients with anti-EPOR antibodies have been reported to inhibit the proliferation of a cultured erythroid cell line by blocking the EPO-EPOR binding pathway in in vitro experiments [17]. Whether anti-EPOR antibodies are associated with the development or progression of ESA hyporesponsive anemia in patients on dialysis needs to be investigated by further longitudinal studies.
The present study shows that male sex, IHD, and CRP levels were associated with LVMI or EF < 50%. The clinical factors of male sex and IHD as covariates are consistent with factors of left ventricular dysfunction in previous studies [8,9,29,30], as well as DM, hypertension, and hypoalbuminemia. On the other hand, our result showing that CRP was negatively associated with LVMI differs from previous reports. Besides the classical risk factors related to left ventricular dysfunction, as mentioned above, various risk factors, such as volume overload, CKD–Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD), and Malnutrition–Inflammation–Atherosclerosis (MIA) syndrome, are known to be involved in the pathogenesis of cardiac dysfunction in patients on HD [31]. Collectively, the relationship between LVMI and inflammatory conditions in patients on HD needs to be further investigated using other inflammatory markers as well.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study showing that anti-EPOR antibodies are independently associated with LVMI and decreased LVEF. The following mechanisms might explain this association: First, anti-EPOR antibodies may inhibit the action of EPO binding to EPOR in cardiac tissues as well as bone marrow erythroid precursors. EPORs have been reported to be expressed not only on immature erythrocyte membranes but also on cardiomyocytes [15,32,33], and ESA administration has been shown to protect cardiac function through EPORs on cardiomyocytes after a cardiac injury [33]. In experimental mouse models in which EPOR is lacking in non-hematopoietic cells, left ventricular myocardial stress was found to lead to significantly greater left ventricular mass and less cardiac contractility than those in control mice, concomitant with decreased signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) signaling required for cardioprotection [15]. Second, the effect of the anti-inflammatory action of erythropoietin [34,35] might be blocked by anti-EPOR antibodies. The inflammatory milieu has been reported to cause the downregulation of EPOR [36], hyporesponsiveness of ESA [37], and increase in fibroblast growth factor 23 [36], which induced myocardial hypertrophy [38,39] and diastolic dysfunction [40]. Recently, patients on HD with high levels of ERI have been reported to be associated with cardiovascular events and mortality [37,41,42] in addition to chronic inflammation [37]. In our study, the anti-EPOR antibody-positive group had significantly higher CRP levels and higher ERI compared to the antibody-negative group. These studies and our data suggest that anti-EPOR antibodies inhibit the binding of EPO to EPOR and then suppress the signaling for cardioprotection, resulting in left ventricular hypertrophy and a reduction in cardiac systolic contractility in patients on HD.
There are several limitations to this study. First, echocardiography was not performed by the same physician or technologist or using the same device. Second, this study is an observational study reporting only data on associations from a small number of anti-EPO antibody-positive patients, so causative conclusions could not be drawn. In addition, owing to the nature of cross-sectional studies, the causal relationship between anti-EPOR antibodies and an increase in LVMI or reduced LVEF is unknown. Finally, the frequency of anti-EPOR antibody-positive patients and those with LVEF < 50% was small. As a result, known or possible covariates associated with cardiac dysfunction might not be fully included in the multivariable analysis. In addition, some of the statistical differences are a bit marginal though significant, and this may be attributed to the small number of patients in the specific group only.

5. Conclusions

Anti-EPOR antibody positivity was associated with left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic dysfunction in patients with CKD on HD. Whether the presence of anti-EPOR antibodies can cause cardiac dysfunction and subsequent cardiovascular mortality in similar populations needs to be further examined.

Author Contributions

Y.M. conceptualized and designed the study, and was involved in the interpretation of the results and preparation of the manuscript. A.H. performed the assays, collected data, and assisted in the conception, design, data analysis, writing manuscript. M.O. (Machiko Oka) and K.M. collected date and interpreted the data. M.O (Megumi Oshima) and T.T. advised and assisted in data analysis, interpreted the data. K.I., H.M., S.K. (Shinji Kitajima), Y.I., N.S., M.S. and Y.K. interpreted the data. T.O. and S.H. advised manuscript writing. S.K. (Shuzo Kobayashi) assisted conception and design, data, advisor for content of manuscript. T.W. initiated, organized, and designed the study, contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the data, and wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (JSPS KAKENHI) under Grant Number [JP16K09608].

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Kanazawa University (approval number: IRB no. 1590) and Shonan Kamakura General Hospital Ethical Committees (approval number: IRB no. TGE01213-024) and was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of the Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

Written informed consent has been obtained from all patients who participated in this study.

Data Availability Statement

Data used in this study are available on request to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Levin, A.; Foley, R.N. Cardiovascular disease in chronic renal insufficiency. Am. J. Kidney Diseases 2000, 36, S24–S30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Jankowski, J.; Floege, J.; Fliser, D.; Böhm, M.; Marx, N. Cardiovascular Disease in Chronic Kidney Disease. Circulation 2021, 143, 1157–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. The United States Renal Data System. 2020 USRDS Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of Kidney Disease in the United States; National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases: Bethesda, MD, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  4. Stewart, G.A.; Gansevoort, R.T.; Mark, P.B.; Rooney, E.; McDonagh, T.A.; Dargie, H.J.; Stuart, R.; Rodger, C.; Jardine, A.G. Electrocardiographic abnormalities and uremic cardiomyopathy. Kidney Int. 2005, 67, 217–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Park, M.; Hsu, C.Y.; Li, Y.; Mishra, R.K.; Keane, M.; Rosas, S.E.; Dries, D.; Xie, D.; Chen, J.; He, J.; et al. Associations between kidney function and subclinical cardiac abnormalities in CKD. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2012, 23, 1725–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bagshaw, S.M.; Cruz, D.N.; Aspromonte, N.; Daliento, L.; Ronco, F.; Sheinfeld, G.; Anker, S.D.; Anand, I.; Bellomo, R.; Berl, T.; et al. Epidemiology of cardio-renal syndromes: Workgroup statements from the 7th ADQI Consensus Conference. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2010, 25, 1406–1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nitta, K.; Goto, S.; Masakane, I.; Hanafusa, N.; Taniguchi, M.; Hasegawa, T.; Nakai, S.; Wada, A.; Hamano, T.; Hoshino, J.; et al. Annual dialysis data report for 2018, JSDT Renal Data Registry: Survey methods, facility data, incidence, prevalence, and mortality. Ren. Replace. Ther. 2020, 6, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Harnett, J.D.; Kent, G.M.; Barre, P.E.; Taylor, R.; Parfrey, P.S. Risk factors for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy in a prospectively followed cohort of dialysis patients. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 1994, 4, 1486–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Harnett, J.D.; Foley, R.N.; Kent, G.M.; Barre, P.E.; Murray, D.; Parfrey, P.S. Congestive heart failure in dialysis patients: Prevalence, incidence, prognosis and risk factors. Kidney Int. 1995, 47, 884–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jin, B.; Luo, X.; Lin, H.; Li, J.; Shi, H. A meta-analysis of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in anaemic patients with chronic heart failure. Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2010, 12, 249–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ayus, J.C.; Go, A.S.; Valderrabano, F.; Verde, E.; De Vinuesa, S.G.; Achinger, S.G.; Lorenzo, V.; Arieff, A.I.; Luao, J. Effects of erythropoietin on left ventricular hypertrophy in adults with severe chronic renal failure and hemoglobin <10 g/dL. Kidney Int. 2005, 68, 788–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Frank, H.; Heusser, K.; Höffken, B.; Huber, P.; Schmieder, R.E.; Schobel, H.P. Effect of erythropoietin on cardiovascular prognosis parameters in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int. 2004, 66, 832–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Cannella, G.; La Canna, G.; Sandrini, M.; Gaggiotti, M.; Nordio, G.; Movilli, E.; Mombelloni, S.; Visioli, O.; Maiorca, R. Reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy following recombinant human erythropoietin treatment of anaemic dialysed uraemic patients. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 1991, 6, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Silverberg, D.S.; Wexler, D.; Blum, M.; Keren, G.; Sheps, D.; Leibovitch, E.; Brosh, D.; Laniado, S.; Schwartz, D.; Yachnin, T.; et al. The use of subcutaneous erythropoietin and intravenous iron for the treatment of the anemia of severe, resistant congestive heart failure improves cardiac and renal function and functional cardiac class, and markedly reduces hospitalizations. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2000, 35, 1737–1744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Asaumi, Y.; Kagaya, Y.; Takeda, M.; Yamaguchi, N.; Tada, H.; Ito, K.; Ohta, J.; Shiroto, T.; Shirato, K.; Minegishi, N.; et al. Protective Role of Endogenous Erythropoietin System in Nonhematopoietic Cells Against Pressure Overload–Induced Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Mice. Circulation 2007, 115, 2022–2032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Wright, G.L.; Hanlon, P.; Amin, K.; Steenbergen, C.; Murphy, E.; Arcasoy, M.O. Erythropoietin receptor expression in adult rat cardiomyocytes is associated with an acute cardioprotective effect for recombinant erythropoietin during ischemia-reperfusion injury. FASEB J. 2004, 18, 1031–1033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hara, A.; Furuichi, K.; Higuchi, M.; Iwata, Y.; Sakai, N.; Kaneko, S.; Wada, T. Autoantibodies to erythropoietin receptor in patients with immune-mediated diseases: Relationship to anaemia with erythroid hypoplasia. Br. J. Haematol. 2013, 160, 244–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hara, A.; Furuichi, K.; Yamahana, J.; Yasuda, H.; Iwata, Y.; Sakai, N.; Shimizu, M.; Kaneko, S.; Wada, T. Effect of Autoantibodies to Erythropoietin Receptor in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus with Biopsy-proven Lupus Nephritis. J. Rheumatol. 2016, 43, 1328–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hara, A.; Furuichi, K.; Koshino, A.; Yasuda, H.; Tran, T.T.T.; Iwata, Y.; Sakai, N.; Shimizu, M.; Kaneko, S.; Nakamura, H.; et al. Clinical and Pathological Significance of Autoantibodies to Erythropoietin Receptor in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with CKD. Kidney Int. Rep. 2018, 3, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Oshima, M.; Hara, A.; Toyama, T.; Jun, M.; Pollock, C.; Jardine, M.; Harrap, S.; Poulter, N.; Cooper, M.E.; Woodward, M.; et al. Comparison of Circulating Biomarkers in Predicting Diabetic Kidney Disease Progression with Autoantibodies to Erythropoietin Receptor. Kidney Int. Rep. 2021, 6, 284–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tran, T.T.T.; Hara, A.; Kitagawa, K.; Kitajima, S.; Toyama, T.; Iwata, Y.; Sakai, N.; Shimizu, M.; Kaneko, S.; Furuichi, K.; et al. Relationship between autoantibodies to erythropoietin receptor and renal outcome in patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis. Biomarkers 2020, 25, 194–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hara, T.; Kimachi, M.; Akizawa, T.; Fukuhara, S.; Yamamoto, Y. Interdialytic Weight Gain Effects on Hemoglobin Concentration and Cardiovascular Events. Kidney Int. Rep. 2020, 5, 1670–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Hara, A.; Koshino, Y.; Kurokawa, Y.; Shinozaki, Y.; Miyake, T.; Kitajima, S.; Toyama, T.; Iwata, Y.; Sakai, N.; Shimizu, M.; et al. Relationship between anti-erythropoietin receptor autoantibodies and responsiveness to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients on hemodialysis: A multi-center cross-sectional study. Clin. Exp. Nephrol. 2020, 24, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Devereux, R.B.; Casale, P.N.; Hammond, I.W.; Savage, D.D.; Alderman, M.H.; Campo, E.; Alonso, D.R.; Laragh, J.H. Echocardiographic detection of pressure-overload left ventricular hypertrophy: Effect of criteria and patient population. J. Clin. Hypertens. 1987, 3, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  25. Schiller, N.B.; Shah, P.M.; Crawford, M.; DeMaria, A.; Devereux, R.; Feigenbaum, H.; Gutgesell, H.; Reichek, N.; Sahn, D.; Schnittger, I.; et al. Recommendations for quantitation of the left ventricle by two-dimensional echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography Committee on Standards, Subcommittee on Quantitation of Two-Dimensional Echocardiograms. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 1989, 2, 358–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ie, E.H.; Zietse, R. Evaluation of cardiac function in the dialysis patient--a primer for the non-expert. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2006, 21, 1474–1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Foley, R.N.; Curtis, B.M.; Randell, E.W.; Parfrey, P.S. Left ventricular hypertrophy in new hemodialysis patients without symptomatic cardiac disease. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2010, 5, 805–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rutherford, E.; Ireland, S.; Mangion, K.; Stewart, G.A.; MacGregor, M.S.; Roditi, G.; Woodward, R.; Gandy, S.J.; Houston, J.G.; Jardine, A.G.; et al. A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effect of Allopurinol on Left Ventricular Mass Index in Hemodialysis Patients. Kidney Int. Rep. 2021, 6, 146–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cannella, G.; Paoletti, E.; Delfino, R.; Peloso, G.; Rolla, D.; Molinari, S. Prolonged therapy with ACE inhibitors induces a regression of left ventricular hypertrophy of dialyzed uremic patients independently from hypotensive effects. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 1997, 30, 659–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Longenecker, J.C.; Coresh, J.; Powe, N.R.; Levey, A.S.; Fink, N.E.; Martin, A.; Klag, M.J. Traditional cardiovascular disease risk factors in dialysis patients compared with the general population: The CHOICE Study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2002, 13, 1918–1927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. House, A.A.; Wanner, C.; Sarnak, M.J.; Pina, I.L.; McIntyre, C.W.; Komenda, P.; Kasiske, B.L.; Deswal, A.; deFilippi, C.R.; Cleland, J.G.F.; et al. Heart failure in chronic kidney disease: Conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. 2019, 95, 1304–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Suresh, S.; Wright, E.C.; Wright, D.G.; Abbott, K.C.; Noguchi, C.T. Erythropoietin treatment and the risk of hip fractures in hemodialysis patients. J. Bone Miner. Res. 2021, 36, 1211–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Zafiriou, M.P.; Noack, C.; Unsöld, B.; Didie, M.; Pavlova, E.; Fischer, H.J.; Reichardt, H.M.; Bergmann, M.W.; El-Armouche, A.; Zimmermann, W.-H.; et al. Erythropoietin Responsive Cardiomyogenic Cells Contribute to Heart Repair Post Myocardial Infarction. Stem Cells 2014, 32, 2480–2491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Peng, B.; Kong, G.; Yang, C.; Ming, Y. Erythropoietin and its derivatives: From tissue protection to immune regulation. Cell Death Dis. 2020, 11, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Silva, I.; Alipio, C.; Pinto, R.; Mateus, V. Potential anti-inflammatory effect of erythropoietin in non-clinical studies in vivo: A systematic review. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2021, 139, 111558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Agoro, R.; Park, M.Y.; Henaff, C.L.; Jankauskas, S.; Gaias, A.; Chen, G.; Mohammadi, M.; Sitara, D. C-FGF23 peptide alleviates hypoferremia during acute inflammation. Haematologica 2021, 106, 391–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fukuma, S.; Yamaguchi, T.; Hashimoto, S.; Nakai, S.; Iseki, K.; Tsubakihara, Y.; Fukuhara, S. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent responsiveness and mortality in hemodialysis patients: Results from a cohort study from the dialysis registry in Japan. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2012, 59, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nitta, K. Fibroblast growth factor 23 and cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic kidney disease. Ren. Replace. Ther. 2018, 4, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Matsui, I.; Oka, T.; Kusunoki, Y.; Mori, D.; Hashimoto, N.; Matsumoto, A.; Shimada, K.; Yamaguchi, S.; Kubota, K.; Yonemoto, S.; et al. Cardiac hypertrophy elevates serum levels of fibroblast growth factor 23. Kidney Int. 2018, 94, 60–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sharma, S.; Hanudel, M.R.; Ix, J.H.; Salusky, I.B.; Ganz, T.; Nguyen, K.-L. Elevated Fibroblast Growth Factor 23 Levels Are Associated with Greater Diastolic Dysfunction in ESRD. Kidney Int. Rep. 2019, 4, 1748–1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yajima, T.; Yajima, K.; Takahashi, H. Association of the erythropoiesis-stimulating agent resistance index and the geriatric nutritional risk index with cardiovascular mortality in maintenance hemodialysis patients. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kilpatrick, R.D.; Critchlow, C.W.; Fishbane, S.; Besarab, A.; Stehman-Breen, C.; Krishnan, M.; Bradbury, B.D. Greater epoetin alfa responsiveness is associated with improved survival in hemodialysis patients. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2008, 3, 1077–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Biomedicines 10 02092 g001 550
Figure 1. Patient selection flow chart.
Figure 1. Patient selection flow chart.
Biomedicines 10 02092 g001
Biomedicines 10 02092 g002 550
Figure 2. Cardiac function of patients with and without anti-EPOR antibodies. (A) Levels of left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and (B) prevalence of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). EPOR, erythropoietin receptor.
Figure 2. Cardiac function of patients with and without anti-EPOR antibodies. (A) Levels of left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and (B) prevalence of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). EPOR, erythropoietin receptor.
Biomedicines 10 02092 g002
Table
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of patients with and without anti-EPO receptor antibodies.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of patients with and without anti-EPO receptor antibodies.
Anti-EPOR Antibodies
Total (n = 377)Negative (n = 360)Positive (n = 17)p-Value
Age, y70 (60–77)70 (60–77)73 (67–79)0.22
Male, %267 (70.8)255 (70.8)12 (70.6)1.0
Dialysis duration, months60 (27–124)60 (27–125)48 (27–79)0.21
Comorbidity
DM, %195 (51.7)185 (51.4)10 (58.8)0.62
HT, %357 (94.7)340 (94.4)17 (100.0)1.00
Dyslipidemia, %351 (93.1)335 (93.1)16 (94.1)1.00
Vascular disease, %186 (49.3)179 (49.7)7 (41.2)0.62
IHD, %99 (26.3)93 (25.8)6 (35.3)0.4
stroke, %54 (14.3)54 (15.0)0 (0.0)0.15
PAD, %82 (21.8)79 (21.9)3 (17.6)1.0
BMI, kg/m221.3 (19.0–23.8)21.3 (19.1–23.9)21.5 (17.8–22.8)0.33
RAS inhibitor, %217 (57.6)209 (58.1)8 (47.1)0.45
SBP, mmHg144 ± 24144 ± 24142 ± 240.69
DBP, mmHg75 ± 1375 ± 1376 ± 150.70
Pulse pressure, mmHg69 ± 1869 ±1865 ± 130.42
WBC, /µL5400 (4300–6900)5400 (4325–6900)5700 (4300–6700)0.95
RBC, ×104/µL365 ± 53365 ± 53345 ± 5420.12
MCV, fL94.2 ± 7.194.2 ± 7.293.3 ± 5.10.75
Hb, g/dL11.0 (10.2–11.9)11.1 (10.2–12.0)10.5 (9.6–11.0)0.009
Albumin, g/dL3.5 (3.3–3.7)3.5 (3.3–3.7)3.3 (2.9–3.7)0.053
Triglyceride, mg/dL89 (64–123)90 (63–125)82 (72–116)0.85
LDL-Cho, mg/dL78 (63–97)78 (63–98)72 (57–80)0.12
HDL-Cho, mg/dL43 (35–58)43 (35–58)40 (34–49)0.42
CRP, mg/dL0.16 (0.049–0.54)0.15 (0.047–0.53)0.33 (0.12–1.83)0.028
β2-Microglobulin, µg/L27.5 ± 6.127.5 ± 6.125.7 ± 6.00.45
ERI6.10 (2.32–12.25)5.75 (2.30–11.57)13.00 (5.38–21.65)0.026
EPO dose4000 (1350–7500)4000 (1250–7500)7500 (2500–12,000)0.049
DM, diabetes mellitus; HT, hypertension; IHD, ischemic heart disease; PAD, peripheral artery disease; BMI, body mass index; DW, dry weight; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; WBC, white blood cells; Hb, hemoglobin; -Cho, cholesterol; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; CRP, C-reactive protein; ERI, erythropoietin resistance index; EPO dose, erythropoietin dose calculated by converting weekly epoetin-α dose.
Table
Table 2. Baseline characteristics of patients with and without LVEF < 50%.
Table 2. Baseline characteristics of patients with and without LVEF < 50%.
LVEF ≥ 50%LVEF < 50%p-Value
n = 315n = 62
Anti-EPOR antibody, %11 (3.5)6 (9.7)0.044
Age, y70 (60–78)69 (62–77)0.49
Male, %214 (67.9)53 (85.5)0.006
Dialysis duration, months63 (28–128)52 (22–111)0.078
Comorbidity
DM, %155 (49.2)40 (64.5)0.036
HT, %296 (94.3)60 (96.8)0.55
Dyslipidemia, %295 (93.7)56 (90.3)0.41
Vascular disease, %
IHD, %67 (21.3%)32 (51.6%)<0.001
stroke, %46 (14.6%)8 (12.9%)0.84
PAD, %68 (21.6%)14 (22.6%)0.87
BMI, kg/m221.4 (19.0–23.7)21.3 (19.0–24.7)0.6
RAS inhibitor, %151 (47.9)23 (37.1)0.13
SBP, mmHg144 ± 24144 ± 270.97
DBP, mmHg75 ± 1377 ± 150.26
Pulse pressure, mmHg69 ± 1867 ± 180.42
WBC, /µL5500 (4400–6800)4950 (3730–7100)0.36
RBC, ×104/µL361 ± 48383 ± 710.002
MCV, fL94.3 ± 7.093.3 ± 7.80.38
Hb, g/dL11.0 (10.2–11.8)11.3 (10.5–12.1)0.18
Albumin, g/dL3.5 (3.3–3.8)3.5 (3.1–3.7)0.057
Triglyceride, mg/dL86 (63–123)101 (72–125)0.14
LDL-Cho, mg/dL78 (63–98)76 (63–92)0.34
HDL-Cho, mg/dL45 (35–60)41 (34–46)0.016
CRP, mg/dL0.14 (0.04–0.52)0.215 (0.084–0.63)0.016
β2-microglobulin, µg/L27.9 (23.8–31.0)26.9 (22.6–32.1)0.64
ERI6.12 (2.45–12.15)5.91 (1.49–12.61)0.61
EPO dose4000 (2000–7500)4000 (1000–8000)0.82
LVMI, g/m2112 (92–1235)141 (125–169)<0.001
LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; DM, diabetes mellitus; HT, hypertension; IHD, ischemic heart disease; PAD, peripheral artery disease; BMI, body mass index; DW, dry weight; RAS, renin–angiotensin system; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; WBC, white blood cells; Hb, hemoglobin; -Cho, cholesterol; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; CRP, C-reactive protein; ERI, erythropoietin resistance index; EPO dose, erythropoietin dose calculated by converting weekly epoetin-α dose.
Table
Table 3. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analysis for logarithmically transformed LVMI.
Table 3. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analysis for logarithmically transformed LVMI.
UnivariableMultivariable Model 1Multivariable Model 2
Coefficient (95%CI)pCoefficient (95%CI)pCoefficient (95%CI)p
Presence of anti-EPOR antibody16.7% (0.6–35.4%)0.04115.9% (0.03–35.0%)0.04916.7% (0.7–35.2%)0.043
Age, y0.2% (–0.4–0.1%)0.169−0.2% (−0.5–0.1%)0.129−0.2% (−0.5–0.1%)0.126
Male9.4% (2.0–16.2%)0.0078.3% (12.0–15.0%)0.02110.2% (2.0–17.4%)0.012
Dialysis duration, months1.0% (1.0–1.0%)0.919--1.0% (1.0–1.0%)0.334
DM7.3% (1.0–13.9%)0.0186.0% (−1.0–12.7%)0.0746.2% (−1.0–12.7%)0.082
IHD6.2% (−1.0–12.7%)0.1144.9% (−2.0–12.7%)0.1785.1% (−2.0–12.7%)0.197
BMI, kg/m20.1% (−1.0–0. 1%)0.900−0.5% (−13–0.3%)0.255−0.3% (−10.5–0.6%)0.531
RAS inhibitor use6.2% (0–12.7%)0.055--4.1% (−2.0–10.5%)0.187
SBP, mmHg0.1% (0.0–0.2%)0.0320.1% (0.0–0.2%)0.0690.1% (−0.1–0.2%)0.094
Hb, g/dL0.2% (−0.2–2.5%)0.85--1.0% (−2.0–3.0%)0.607
Alb, d/dL−0.3% (−10.2–5.1%)0.487--−7.3% (–17.4–1.0%)0.090
Dyslipidemia−7.3% (−20.9–5.1%)0.251--−4.1% (–17.4–8.3%)0.475
CRP, mg/dL−1.5% (−3.7–0.7%)0.186--−3.0% (–5.1–−0.2%)0.035
Beta coefficients were back-transformed to indicate the percent increase in LVMI with one unit increase in the corresponding covariate. The presence of anti-EPOR antibody induced a 16.7% increase in LVMI. LVMI, left ventricular mass index; CI, confidence interval; EPOR, erythropoietin receptor; DM, diabetes mellitus; IHD, ischemic heart disease; BMI, body mass index; RAS, renin–aldosterone system; SBP, systolic blood pressure; Hb, hemoglobin; Alb, albumin; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; CRP, C-reactive protein.
Table
Table 4. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis for reduced ejection fraction (LVEF < 50%).
Table 4. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis for reduced ejection fraction (LVEF < 50%).
UnivariableMultivariable
CovariatesOR95% CIp-ValueOR95% CIp-Value
Presence of anti-EPOR antibody2.961.05–8.330.0403.201.05–9.730.041
Age, y0.990.97–1.010.4330.980.95–1.000.123
Male2.781.32–5.860.0072.321.06–5.050.035
BMI, kg/m21.040.97–1.120.2221.010.94–1.090.340
IHD3.952.24–6.96<0.0013.732.03–6.84<0.001
DM1.881.07–3.300.0291.460.79–2.700.225
SBP, mmHg1.000.99–1.010.9721.000.99–1.010.970
LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; EPOR, erythropoietin receptor; Hb, hemoglobin; IHD, ischemic heart disease; DM, diabetes mellitus; CRP, C-reactive protein; SBP, systolic blood.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mochida, Y.; Hara, A.; Oka, M.; Maesato, K.; Ishioka, K.; Moriya, H.; Oshima, M.; Toyama, T.; Kitajima, S.; Iwata, Y.; et al. Association between Anti-Erythropoietin Receptor Antibodies and Cardiac Function in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study. Biomedicines 2022, 10, 2092. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/biomedicines10092092

AMA Style

Mochida Y, Hara A, Oka M, Maesato K, Ishioka K, Moriya H, Oshima M, Toyama T, Kitajima S, Iwata Y, et al. Association between Anti-Erythropoietin Receptor Antibodies and Cardiac Function in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study. Biomedicines. 2022; 10(9):2092. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/biomedicines10092092

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mochida, Yasuhiro, Akinori Hara, Machiko Oka, Kyoko Maesato, Kunihiro Ishioka, Hidekazu Moriya, Megumi Oshima, Tadashi Toyama, Shinji Kitajima, Yasunori Iwata, and et al. 2022. "Association between Anti-Erythropoietin Receptor Antibodies and Cardiac Function in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study" Biomedicines 10, no. 9: 2092. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/biomedicines10092092

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop