Hyperphosphatemia is a common complication in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), particularly in those requiring renal replacement therapy. The importance of controlling serum phosphate has long been recognized based on observational epidemiological studies that linked increased phosphate levels to adverse outcomes and higher mortality risk. Experimental data further supported the role of phosphate in the development of bone and cardiovascular diseases. Recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms involved in phosphate homeostasis have made it clear that the serum phosphate concentration depends on a complex interplay among the kidneys, intestinal tract, and bone, and is tightly regulated by a complex endocrine system. Moreover, the source of dietary phosphate and the use of phosphate-based additives in industrialized foods are additional factors that are of particular importance in CKD. Not surprisingly, the management of hyperphosphatemia is difficult, and, despite a multifaceted approach, it remains unsuccessful in many patients. An additional issue is the fact that the supposedly beneficial effect of phosphate lowering on hard clinical outcomes in interventional trials is a matter of ongoing debate. In this review, we discuss currently available treatment approaches for controlling hyperphosphatemia, including dietary phosphate restriction, reduction of intestinal phosphate absorption, phosphate removal by dialysis, and management of renal osteodystrophy, with particular focus on practical challenges and limitations, and on potential benefits and harms.

Diabetes complications and osteoporotic fractures are two of the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in older patients and share many features including genetic susceptibility, molecular mechanisms, and environmental factors. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compromises bone microarchitecture by inducing abnormal bone cell function and matrix structure, with increased osteoblast apoptosis, diminished osteoblast differentiation, and enhanced osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. The linkage between these two chronic diseases creates a possibility that certain antidiabetic therapies may affect bone quality. Both glycemic and bone homeostasis are under control of common regulatory factors. These factors include insulin, accumulation of advanced glycation end products, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, gastrointestinal hormones (such as the glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide and the glucagon-like peptides 1 and 2), and bone-derived hormone osteocalcin. This background allows individual pharmacological targets for antidiabetic therapies to affect the bone quality due to their indirect effects on bone cell differentiation and bone remodeling process. Moreover, it’s important to consider the fragility fractures as another diabetes complication and discuss more deeply about the requirement for adequate screening and preventive measures. This review aims to briefly explore the impact of T2DM on bone metabolic and mechanical proprieties and fracture risk.

Uremic toxins can induce endothelial dysfunction in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Indeed, the structure of the endothelial monolayer is damaged in CKD, and studies have shown that the uremic toxins contribute to the loss of cell–cell junctions, increasing permeability. Membrane proteins, such as transporters and receptors, can mediate the interaction between uremic toxins and endothelial cells. In these cells, uremic toxins induce oxidative stress and activation of signaling pathways, including the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB), and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. The activation of these pathways leads to overexpression of proinflammatory (e.g., monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, E-selectin) and prothrombotic (e.g., tissue factor) proteins. Uremic toxins also induce the formation of endothelial microparticles (EMPs), which can lead to the activation and dysfunction of other cells, and modulate the expression of microRNAs that have an important role in the regulation of cellular processes. The resulting endothelial dysfunction contributes to the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases, such as atherosclerosis and thrombotic events. Therefore, uremic toxins as well as the pathways they modulated may be potential targets for therapies in order to improve treatment for patients with CKD.

Diabetes complications and osteoporotic fractures are two of the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in older patients, and they share many features, including genetic susceptibility, molecular mechanisms, and environmental factors. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compromises bone microarchitecture by inducing abnormal bone cell function and matrix structure with increased osteoblast apoptosis, diminished osteoblast differentiation, and enhanced osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. The linkage between these two chronic diseases creates a possibility that certain antidiabetic therapies may affect bone function. The treatment of T2DM has been improved in the past two decades with the development of new therapeutic drugs. Each class has a pathophysiologic target related to the regulation of the energy metabolism and insulin secretion. However, both glycemic homeostasis and bone homeostasis are under the control of common regulatory factors. This background allows the individual pharmacological targets of antidiabetic therapies to affect bone quality due to their indirect effects on bone cell differentiation and the bone remodeling process. With a greater number of diabetic patients and antidiabetic agents being launched, it is critical to highlight the consequences of this disease and its pharmacological agents on bone health and fracture risk. Currently, there is little scientific knowledge approaching the impact of most anti-diabetic treatments on bone quality and fracture risk. Thus, this review aims to explore the pros and cons of the available pharmacologic treatments for T2DM on bone mineral density and risk fractures in humans.

Endothelial microparticles (EMPs) are vesicles derived from cell membranes, which contain outsourced phosphatidylserine and express adhesion molecules, such as cadherin, intercellular cell adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1), E-selectin, and integrins. EMPs are expressed under physiological conditions and continue circulating in the plasma. However, in pathologic conditions their levels increase, and they assume a pro-inflammatory and pro-coagulant role via interactions with monocytes; these effects are related to the development of atherosclerosis. Chronic kidney dysfunction (CKD) characterizes this dysfunctional scenario through the accumulation of uremic solutes in the circulating plasma, whose toxicity is related to the development of cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, this review aims to discuss the formation of EMPs and their biological effects in the uremic environment. Data from previous research demonstrate that uremic toxins are closely associated with the activation of inflammatory biomarkers, cardiovascular dysfunction processes, and the release of EMPs. The impact of a decrease in circulating EMPs in clinical studies has not yet been evaluated. Thus, whether MPs are biochemical markers and/or therapeutic targets has yet to be established.

Renal osteodystrophy (ROD) is a common complication of end-stage kidney disease that often starts early with loss of kidney function, and it is considered an integral part in management of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Adynamic bone (ADB) is characterized by suppressed bone formation, low cellularity, and thin osteoid seams. There is accumulating evidence supporting increasing prevalence of ADB, particularly in early CKD. Contemporarily, it is not very clear whether it represents a true disease, an adaptive mechanism to prevent bone resorption, or just a transitional stage. Several co-players are incriminated in its pathogenesis, such as age, diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, uremic milieu, and iatrogenic factors. In the present review, we will discuss the up-to-date knowledge of the ADB and focus on its impact on bone health, fracture risk, vascular calcification, and long-term survival. Moreover, we will emphasize the proper preventive and management strategies of ADB that are pivotal issues in managing patients with CKD. It is still unclear whether ADB is always a pathologic condition or whether it can represent an adaptive process to suppress bone resorption and further bone loss. In this article, we tried to discuss this hard topic based on the available limited information in patients with CKD. More studies are needed to be able to clearly address this frequent ROD finding.