Search

The natriuretic peptides (NPs) ANP (atrial natriuretic peptide) and BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) mediate their widespread effects by activating the natriuretic peptide receptor-A (NPR-A), while C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP) acts via natriuretic peptide receptor-B (NPR-B). NPs are removed from the circulation by internalization via the natriuretic peptide clearance receptor natriuretic peptide receptor-C (NPR-C). In addition to their well-known functions, for instance on blood pressure, all three NPs confer significant cardioprotection and renoprotection. Since neither the NP-mediated renal functions nor the renal target cells of renoprotection are completely understood, we performed systematic localization studies of NP receptors using in situ hybridization (RNAscope) in mouse kidneys. NPR-A mRNA is highly expressed in glomeruli (mainly podocytes), renal arterioles, endothelial cells of peritubular capillaries, and PDGFR-receptor β positive (PDGFR-β) interstitial cells. No NPR-A mRNA was detected by RNAscope in the tubular system. In contrast, NPR-B expression is highest in proximal tubules. NPR-C is located in glomeruli (mainly podocytes), in endothelial cells and PDGFR-β positive cells. To test for a possible regulation of NPRs in kidney diseases, their distribution was studied in adenine nephropathy. Signal intensity of NPR-A and NPR-B mRNA was reduced while their spatial distribution was unaltered compared with healthy kidneys. In contrast, NPR-C mRNA signal was markedly enhanced in cell clusters of myofibroblasts in fibrotic areas of adenine kidneys. In conclusion, the primary renal targets of ANP and BNP are glomerular, vascular, and interstitial cells but not the tubular compartment, while the CNP receptor NPR-B is highly expressed in proximal tubules. Further studies are needed to clarify the function and interplay of this specific receptor expression pattern.

BACKGROUND: The endocytic reabsorption of proteins in the proximal tubule requires a complex machinery and defects can lead to tubular proteinuria. The precise mechanisms of endocytosis and processing of receptors and cargo are incompletely understood. EHD1 belongs to a family of proteins presumably involved in the scission of intracellular vesicles and in ciliogenesis. However, the relevance of EHD1 in human tissues, in particular in the kidney, was unknown.METHODS: Genetic techniques were used in patients with tubular proteinuria and deafness to identify the disease-causing gene. Diagnostic and functional studies were performed in patients and disease models to investigate the pathophysiology.RESULTS: We identified six individuals (5-33 years) with proteinuria and a high-frequency hearing deficit associated with the homozygous missense variant c.1192C>T (p.R398W) in EHD1. Proteinuria (0.7-2.1 g/d) consisted predominantly of low molecular weight proteins, reflecting impaired renal proximal tubular endocytosis of filtered proteins. Ehd1 knockout and Ehd1R398W/R398W knockin mice also showed a high-frequency hearing deficit and impaired receptor-mediated endocytosis in proximal tubules, and a zebrafish model showed impaired ability to reabsorb low molecular weight dextran. Interestingly, ciliogenesis appeared unaffected in patients and mouse models. In silico structural analysis predicted a destabilizing effect of the R398W variant and possible inference with nucleotide binding leading to impaired EHD1 oligomerization and membrane remodeling ability.CONCLUSIONS: A homozygous missense variant of EHD1 causes a previously unrecognized autosomal recessive disorder characterized by sensorineural deafness and tubular proteinuria. Recessive EHD1 variants should be considered in individuals with hearing impairment, especially if tubular proteinuria is noted.