Few modulators have evolved that are dedicated to protecting against low phosphate
conditions.1,2 The consequences of insufficient phosphate can be severe,
and the lack of a system dedicated to maintaining an adequate phosphate level
suggests it is a relatively rare occurrence. When non-mineralized phosphate
does become low due to rapid bone mineralization, excess phosphatonin
secretion, kidney disease, an insufficient diet, or poor absorption, a number
of pathophysiological problems can occur. Chronic hypophosphatemia manifests
as bone pain, muscle weakness, and failure to mineralize. Acute hypophosphatemia
can develop during alkalosis, cytokine-induced hematopoiesis, or when intravenous
administration of glucose is utilized as the sole source of energy. In all
such cases, circulating phosphate enters cells to be consumed by cellular
glycolysis. This results in limited oxidative phosphorylation and a deficit
of 2,3 bisphosphoglycerate. The former dictates less ATP availability,
which reduces overall metabolic activity. The latter disrupts the hemoglobin
oxygen association/dissociation curve in erythrocytes. Thus, oxygen taken up
in the lung is not efficiently released in the tissues, resulting in a generalized
hypoxia.1 In light of these complications, it seems reasonable that
some mechanism for phosphate “retention” must exist.
Circulating phosphate can be increased at the level of absorption. Vitamin
D is believed to contribute to the appearance of phosphate transporters (NTP2b)
on the luminal surface of intestinal epithelium.3,4 Alternatively, phosphate
levels may be positively impacted by compounds at the level of renal reabsorption.
Phosphate is considered freely filterable.5 Thus, renal regulation must be
due to tubular absorption. Some factors that contribute to phosphate retention
have been identified. They include the pleiotropic hormones IGF-I, growth hormone,
thyroxine, and vitamin D.5 A fifth, and perhaps more kidney-specific hormone
has recently been reported. Termed stanniocalcin-1 (STC-1), after its orthology
to a fish hormone that shows anti-calcemic activity, it is a disulfide-linked
homodimeric phosphoprotein.6,7 Much is unclear about this hormone. It is found
in neurons, platelets/megakaryocytes, endothelial cells, and the nephron epithelium.8,9
It also has multiple targets including osteoblasts, neurons, and renal proximal
tubule cells.8,10,11
 |
| Figure 1. Elevated phosphate (Pi) stimulates the production of PTH that
can bind to its receptor and initiate the internalization of phosphate transporters (NPT2a). PTH-induced elevations
of extracellular Ca2+ may promote STC-1 production by renal collecting duct cells. In a paracrine fashion, it may
then partially buffer the effects of PTH, potentially acting on proximal tubule cells and stimulating NPT2a
transcription. This leads to phosphate uptake from glomerular filtrate. |
What may be most compelling is the ability of STC-1 to (modestly) promote active
phosphate uptake by renal proximal tubule cells.6,11,12 Given that it is apparently
produced by the distal-epithelial components of the renal tubule, its actions
could be paracrine
in response to hypophosphatemia. However, this does not appear to be the case.
Low levels of dietary phosphate actually decrease STC-1 mRNA, and circulating
levels of phosphate measured during active renal STC-1-mediated phosphate resorption
do not reach statistical significance. Thus, its physiological effects may
be subtle at best. Intriguingly, its true activity may actually involve conditions
of hyperphosphatemia (Figure 1). In this scenario, high phosphate levels promote
the release of parathyroid hormone (PTH). PTH is known to induce the internalization
of phosphate transporters (NPT2a), removing the vehicle for renal phosphate
uptake. It is also able to increase calcium levels, an element that promotes
STC-1 production. Once produced, STC-1 may begin to reverse (or modulate) the
effects of PTH-induced NPT2a degradation. While its effect may be minor, it
may buffer PTH-induced phosphate loss, and in a sense “promote resorption.” This
potential relationship with PTH is not unlike the reciprocal relationship
between insulin (glucose uptake) and glucagon (glucose release).12,13
References
- Bringhurst, F.R. & B.Z. Leder In Degroot (2006) L. J. & J.L. Jameson (eds): Endocrinology, 5th ed. Philadelphia, Elsevier, p. 1465.
- Prie, D. et al. (2005) Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens. 14:318.
- Goodman, W.G. (2005) Med. Clin. N. Am. 89:631.
- Berndt, T.J. et al. (2005) Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol. 289:F1170.
- Tenenhouse, H.S. (2005) Annu. Rev. Nutr. 25:197.
- Olsen, H.S. et al. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:1792.
- Jellinek, D.A. et al. (2000) Biochem. J. 350:453.
- Serlachius, M. et al. (2004) Peptides 25:1657.
- Ishibashi, K. & M. Imai (2002) Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol. 282:F367.
- Yoshiko, Y. & J.E. Aubin (2004) Peptides 25:1663.
- Wagner, G.F. et al. (1997) J. Bone Miner. Res. 12:165.
- Yahata, K. et al. (2003) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 310:128.
- Deol, H. et al. (2001) Kidney Int. 60:2142.
|