Back to all available

Comprehensive machine learning and experimental verification reveal the mechanism of action of autophagy-related genes FIZ1 and FBXO21 in acute kidney injury

bioinformatics
cell-biology
genomics
internal-medicine
nephrology

Abstract

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious disease with a high incidence and easy induction. The search for innovative biomarkers and treatment methods is of great significance for improving the prognosis of patients. Autophagy is closely related to the occurrence and development of AKI. This study aims to explore the role of autophagy-related genes (ARGs) as potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets in AKI.

Methods: In this study, the gene microarray data of the GEO dataset were used to explore the molecular profile of AKI, and three machine learning algorithms were used to screen autophagy-related feature genes. To further validate the reliability of the screening results, we constructed a cisplatin-induced AKI rat model to validate potential biomarkers of machine learning screening.

Results: Machine learning analysis identified 17 differentially expressed ARGs and selected the core genes FIZ1 and FBXO21, with AUC values both exceeding 0.7 (95% CI [0.706, 0.899]). Immune analysis revealed that the number of Mast cells resting significantly decreased in AKI samples compared to normal samples ( P < 0.05 ). Electron microscopy observations of the cisplatin-induced AKI rat model indicated thickening of the basement membrane, fusion of foot processes, and swelling and rupture of mitochondria in the model group, suggesting a correlation between AKI and mitochondrial autophagy; Western blot results indicated a significant increase in the expression of FIZ1 and a significant decrease in FBXO21 in the AKI group ( P < 0.01 ). The results of IHC staining were also consistent with those of Western blot results.

Conclusion: This study highlights the significant role of ARGs in AKI and identifies FIZ1 and FBXO21 as promising biomarkers with high diagnostic potential, offering new insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying AKI.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].