Study record

Elevated Serum Nardilysin Is Inversely Associated with Cardiovascular Disease in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Sączek A, Batko K, Banaszkiewicz M et al. · Kidney Blood Press Res · 2026

Human obs.Endogenous MOTS-c measuredEvidence tier B

What this study reported

Measured higher serum nardilysin and MOTS-c in kidney transplant recipients than in age-matched controls over a median follow-up of about 29 months. Reported no significant associations between MOTS-c and cardiometabolic features, and a non-significant trend toward lower allograft loss risk with higher MOTS-c, while nardilysin was inversely associated with prevalent cardiovascular disease.

Limitations

MOTS-c was a secondary marker alongside nardilysin; single-centre observational design with a small control group and few outcome events; residual confounding likely.

Study record

Annotated fields for this study
Study modelHuman observational
Substance studiedEndogenous MOTS-c measuredNaturally occurring MOTS-c was measured; nothing was given.
Specieshuman
System studiedKidney transplant recipients and age-matched controls; serum nardilysin and MOTS-c by ELISA
Populationkidney transplant recipients and age-matched control patients
DesignObservational cohort with follow-up
Sample size as reported150 patients (118 kidney transplant recipients, 32 controls)
Control groupage-matched non-transplant patients
Route (data field only)Not reported
Endpoints measuredserum MOTS-c; serum nardilysin; prevalent cardiovascular disease; renal allograft loss; all-cause mortality and eGFR decline
Pathways measuredOther
Research areasKidney · Cardiovascular · Metabolic
Evidence tierB — Other human study
Publication typesJournal Article

Appraisal

Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.

Relevance to MOTS-c
Indirect
Model applicability
Human
Sample size
Adequate
Controls
Limited
Outcome validity
Clinical outcome
Support for its own conclusion
Moderate

Provenance

  • Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
  • Annotated from the published abstract.
  • Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
  • Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.