Chronic kidney disease (CKD) perturbs the crosstalk with others organs, with the interaction between the kidneys and the heart having been studied most intensively. However, a growing body of data indicates that there is an association between kidney dysfunction and disorders of the central nervous system. In epidemiological studies, CKD is associated with a high prevalence of neurological complications, such as cerebrovascular disorders, movement disorders, cognitive impairment and depression. Along with traditional cardiovascular risk factors (such as diabetes, inflammation, hypertension and dyslipidaemia), non-traditional risk factors related to kidney damage (such as uraemic toxins) may predispose patients with CKD to neurological disorders. There is increasing evidence to show that uraemic toxins, for example indoxyl sulphate, have a neurotoxic effect. A better understanding of factors responsible for the elevated prevalence of neurological disorders among patients with CKD might facilitate the development of novel treatments. Here, we review (i) the potential clinical impact of CKD on cerebrovascular and neurological complications, (ii) the mechanisms underlying the uraemic toxins’ putative action (based on pre-clinical and clinical research) and (iii) the potential impact of these findings on patient care.

Neurocognitive disorders are frequent among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Identifying and characterizing cognitive impairment (CI) can help to assess the ability of adherence to CKD risk reduction strategy, identify potentially reversible causes of cognitive decline, modify pharmacotherapy, educate the patient and caregiver and provide appropriate patient and caregiver support. Numerous factors are associated with the development and progression of CI in CKD patients and various conditions can influence the results of cognitive assessment in these patients. Here we review clinical warning signs that should lead to cognitive screening; conditions frequent in CKD at risk to interfere with cognitive testing or performance, including specificities of cognitive assessment in dialysis patients or after kidney transplantation; and available tests for screening and observed cognitive patterns in CKD patients.

Dialysis confers the highest risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) death among comorbidities predisposing to severe COVID-19. However, reports of COVID-19-associated mortality frequently refer to mortality during the initial hospitalization or first month after diagnosis. In a prospective, observational study, we analysed the long-term (1-year follow-up) serological and clinical outcomes of 56 haemodialysis (HD) patients who were infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the first pandemic wave. COVID-19 was diagnosed by a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test (n = 37) or by the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (n = 19). After >1 year of follow-up, 35.7% of HD patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 during the first pandemic wave had died, 6 (11%) during the initial admission and 14 (25%) in the following months, mainly within the first 3 months after diagnosis. Overall, 30% of patients died from vascular causes and 40% from respiratory causes. In adjusted analysis, a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test for diagnosis {hazard ratio [HR] 5.18 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.30–20.65], P = 0.020}, higher baseline C-reactive protein levels [HR 1.10 (IQR 1.03–1.16), P = 0.002] and lower haemoglobin levels [HR 0.62 (IQR 0.45–0.86), P = 0.005] were associated with higher 1-year mortality. Mortality in the 144 patients who did not have COVID-19 was 21 (14.6%) over 12 months [HR of death for COVID-19 patients 3.00 (IQR 1.62–5.53), log-rank P = 0.00023]. Over the first year, the percentage of patients having anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) decreased from 36/49 (73.4%) initially to 27/44 (61.3%) at 6 months and 14/36 (38.8%) at 12 months. The high mortality of HD patients with COVID-19 is not limited to the initial hospitalization. Defining COVID-19 deaths as those occurring within 3 months of a COVID-19 diagnosis may better represent the burden of COVID-19. In HD patients, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG response was suboptimal and short-lived.

Lack of awareness of a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients and physicians is a major contributor to fueling the CKD pandemic by also making it invisible to researchers and health authorities. This is an urgent matter to tackle if dire predictions of future CKD burden are to be addressed. CKD is set to become the fifth-leading global cause of death by 2040 and the second-leading cause of death before the end of the century in some countries with long life expectancy. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illustrated this invisibility: only after the summer of 2020 did it become clear that CKD was a major driver of COVID-19 mortality, both in terms of prevalence as a risk factor and of the risk conferred for lethal COVID-19. However, by that time the damage was done: news outlets and scientific publications continued to list diabetes and hypertension, but not CKD, as major risk factors for severe COVID-19. In a shocking recent example from Sweden, CKD was found to be diagnosed in just 23% of 57 880 persons who fulfilled diagnostic criteria for CKD. In the very same large cohort, diabetes or cancer were diagnosed in 29% of persons, hypertension in 82%, cardiovascular disease in 39% and heart failure in 28%. Thus, from the point of view of physicians, patients and health authorities, CKD was the least common comorbidity in persons with CKD, ranking sixth, after other better-known conditions. One of the consequences of this lack of awareness was that nephrotoxic medications were more commonly prescribed in patients with CKD who did not have a diagnosis of CKD. Low awareness of CKD may also fuel concepts such as the high prevalence of hypertensive nephropathy when CKD is diagnosed after the better-known condition of hypertension.

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common genetic nephropathy, and tolvaptan is the only therapy available. However, tolvaptan slows but does not stop disease progression, is marred by polyuria, and most patients worldwide lack access. This and recent preclinical research findings on the glucose-dependency of cyst-lining cells have renewed interest in the dietary management of ADPKD. We now review the current dietary recommendations for ADPKD patients according to clinical guidelines, the evidence base for those, and the potential impact of preclinical studies addressing the impact of diet on ADPKD progression. The clinical efficacy of tolvaptan has put the focus on water intake and solute ingestion as modifiable factors that may impact tolvaptan tolerance and ADPKD progression. By contrast, dietary modifications suggested to ADPKD patients, such as avoiding caffeine, are not well supported and their impact is unknown. Recent studies have identified a chronic shift in energy production from mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation to aerobic glycolysis (Warburg effect) as a contributor to cyst growth, rendering cyst cells exquisitely sensitive to glucose availability. Therefore, low calorie or ketogenic diets have delayed preclinical ADPKD progression. Additional preclinical data warn of potential negative impact of excess dietary phosphate or oxalate in ADPKD progression.

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) is a 36-amino-acid peptide member of a family also including peptide YY and pancreatic polypeptide, which are all ligands to Gi/Go coupled receptors. NPY regulates several fundamental biologic functions including appetite/satiety, sex and reproduction, learning and memory, cardiovascular and renal function and immune functions. The mesenteric circulation is a major source of NPY in the blood in man and this peptide is considered a key regulator of gut–brain cross talk. A progressive increase in circulating NPY accompanies the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) toward kidney failure and NPY robustly predicts cardiovascular events in this population. Furthermore, NPY is suspected as a possible player in accelerated cognitive function decline and dementia in patients with CKD and in dialysis patients. In theory, interfering with the NPY system has relevant potential for the treatment of diverse diseases from cardiovascular and renal diseases to diseases of the central nervous system. Pharmaceutical formulations for effective drug delivery and cost, as well as the complexity of diseases potentially addressable by NPY/NPY antagonists, have been a problem until now. This in part explains the slow progress of knowledge about the NPY system in the clinical arena. There is now renewed research interest in the NPY system in psychopharmacology and in pharmacology in general and new studies and a new breed of clinical trials may eventually bring the expected benefits in human health with drugs interfering with this system.