Project description:Rationale & objectiveUse of cystatin C in addition to creatinine to estimate glomerular filtration rate (estimated glomerular filtration rate based on cystatin C [eGFRcys] and estimated glomerular filtration rate based on creatinine [eGFRcr], respectively) is increasing. When eGFRcr and eGFRcys are discordant, it is not known which is more accurate, leading to uncertainty in clinical decision making.Study designCross-sectional analysis.Setting & participantsFour thousand fifty participants with measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) from 12 studies in North America and Europe.ExposuresSerum creatinine and serum cystatin C.OutcomesPerformance of creatinine-based and cystatin C-based glomerular filtration rate estimating equations compared to mGFR.Analytical approachWe evaluated the accuracy of eGFRcr, eGFRcys, and the combination (eGFRcr-cys) compared to mGFR according to the magnitude of the difference between eGFRcr and eGFRcys (eGFRdiff). We used CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate. eGFRdiff was defined as eGFRcys minus eGFRcr and categorized as less than -15, -15 to <15, and ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2 (negative, concordant, and positive groups, respectively). We compared bias (median of mGFR minus eGFR) and the percentage of eGFR within 30% of mGFR.ResultsThirty percent of participants had discordant eGFRdiff (21.0% and 9.6% negative and positive eGFRdiffs, respectively). In the concordant eGFRdiff group, all equations displayed similar accuracy. In the negative eGFRdiff groups, eGFRcr had a large overestimation of mGFR (-13.4 [-14.5 to -12.2] mL/min/1.73 m2) and eGFRcys had a large underestimation (9.9 [9.1-11.2] mL/min/1.73m2), with opposite results in the positive eGFRdiff group. In both negative and positive eGFRdiff groups, eGFRcr-cys was more accurate than either eGFRcr or eGFRcys. These results were largely consistent across age, sex, race, and body mass index.LimitationsFew participants with major comorbid conditions.ConclusionsDiscordant eGFRcr and eGFRcys are common. eGFR using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C provides the most accurate estimates among persons with discordant eGFRcr or eGFRcys.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveLarge differences between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) based on cystatin C (eGFRcys) and creatinine (eGFRcr) occur commonly. A comprehensive evaluation of factors that contribute to these differences is needed to guide the interpretation of discrepant eGFR values.Study designCohort study.Setting & participants468,969 participants in the UK Biobank.ExposuresCandidate sociodemographic, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, medication usage, and physical and laboratory predictors.OutcomeseGFRdiff, defined as eGFRcys minus eGFRcr, categorized into 3 levels: lower eGFRcys (eGFRdiff, less than -15 mL/min/1.73 m2), concordant eGFRcys and eGFRcr (eGFRdiff, -15 to < 15 mL/min/1.73 m2), and lower eGFRcr (eGFRdiff, ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2).Analytical approachMultinomial logistic regression models were constructed to identify predictors of lower eGFRcys or lower eGFRcr. We developed 2 prediction models comprising 375,175 participants: (1) a clinical model using clinically available variables and (2) an enriched model additionally including lifestyle variables. The models were internally validated in an additional 93,794 participants.ResultsMean ± standard deviation of eGFRcys was 88 ± 16 mL/min/1.73 m2, and eGFRcr was 95 ± 13 mL/min/1.73 m2; 25% and 5% of participants were in the lower eGFRcys and lower eGFRcr groups, respectively. In the multivariable enriched model, strong predictors of lower eGFRcys were older age, male sex, South Asian ethnicity, current smoker (vs never smoker), history of thyroid dysfunction, chronic inflammatory disease, steroid use, higher waist circumference and body fat, and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio >300 mg/g. Odds ratio estimates for these predictors were largely inverse of those in the lower eGFRcr group. The model's area under the curve was 0.75 in the validation set, with good calibration (1.00).LimitationsLimited generalizability.ConclusionsThis study highlights the multitude of demographic, lifestyle, and health characteristics that are associated with large eGFRdiff. The clinical model may identify individuals who are likely to have discrepant eGFR values and thus should be prioritized for cystatin C testing.

Project description:BackgroundHigher serum cystatin C level is associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal white women, but there is a paucity of data for men. Whether estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) based on cystatin C (eGFRcys) is superior in predicting hip fracture risk to eGFR based on creatinine (eGFRcr) or the combination (eGFR(cr-cys)) also is uncertain.Study designNested case-cohort.Setting & participantsParticipants enrolled in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study (5,994 men aged ≥ 65 years from 6 US centers) including a random subcohort of 1,602 men and 168 men with incident hip fractures (51 of whom were in the subcohort).PredictoreGFR(cys), eGFR(cr), and eGFR(cr-cys) computed using the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) equations and expressed in categories of <60, 60-74, and ≥ 75 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (referent group).OutcomeIncident hip fracture ascertained by participant contacts every 4 months and confirmed with radiographic reports.ResultsMedian eGFR(cys) was 72.9 (IQR, 60.5-85.7) mL/min/1.73 m(2). In unadjusted models, all measures of eGFR were associated with increased hip fracture risk. However, after adjustment for age, race, site, and body mass index, the association of lower eGFR(cys) (but not lower eGFR(cr) or lower eGFR(cr-cys)) with higher hip fracture risk remained: for <60 versus ≥ 75 mL/min/1.73 m(2), HRs were 1.96 [95% CI, 1.25-3.09], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.52-1.37], and 1.08 [95% CI, 0.66-1.77] for eGFR(cys), eGFR(cr), and eGFR(cr-cys), respectively. Similarly, after adjustment for age, race, site, and body mass index, eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) defined by eGFR(cys), but not eGFR(cr) or eGFR(cr-cys), was associated with higher hip fracture risk. The association between eGFR(cys) and hip fracture was not explained by levels of calciotropic hormones or inflammatory markers, but the relationship was attenuated and no longer reached significance (for <60 vs ≥ 75 mL/min/1.73 m(2): HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.88-2.34) after consideration of additional clinical risk factors and bone mineral density.LimitationsFindings not generalizable to other populations; residual confounding may exist.ConclusionsOlder community-dwelling men with lower eGFR(cys) have an increased risk of hip fracture that is explained in large part by greater burden of risk factors among men with lower eGFR(cys). In contrast, lower eGFR(cr) or lower eGFR(cr-cys) was not associated with a higher age-adjusted hip fracture risk.

Project description:In populations with high prevalences of diabetes and obesity, estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) by using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation may predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk better than by using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation.Longitudinal cohort study comparing the association of GFR estimated using either the CKD-EPI or MDRD Study equation with incident CVD outcomes.American Indians participating in the Strong Heart Study, a longitudinal population-based cohort with high prevalences of diabetes, CVD, and CKD.Estimated GFR (eGFR) predicted using the CKD-EPI and MDRD Study equations.Fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events, consisting of coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure.The association between eGFR and outcomes was explored in Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for traditional risk factors and albuminuria; the net reclassification index and integrated discrimination improvement were determined for the CKD-EPI versus MDRD Study equations.In 4,549 participants, diabetes was present in 45%; CVD, in 7%; and stages 3-5 CKD, in 10%. During a median of 15 years, there were 1,280 cases of incident CVD, 929 cases of incident coronary heart disease, 305 cases of incident stroke, and 381 cases of incident heart failure. Reduced eGFR (<90 mL/min/1.73 m2) was associated with adverse events in most models. Compared with the MDRD Study equation, the CKD-EPI equation correctly reclassified 17.0% of 2,151 participants without incident CVD to a lower risk (higher eGFR) category and 1.3% (n=28) were reclassified incorrectly to a higher risk (lower eGFR) category.Single measurements of eGFR and albuminuria at study visits.Although eGFR based on either equation had similar associations with incident CVD, coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure events, in those not having events, reclassification of participants to eGFR categories was superior using the CKD-EPI equation compared with the MDRD Study equation.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent equations for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) that use serum creatinine or cystatin C incorporate age, sex, and race to estimate measured GFR. However, race in eGFR equations is a social and not a biologic construct.MethodsWe developed new eGFR equations without race using data from two development data sets: 10 studies (8254 participants, 31.5% Black) for serum creatinine and 13 studies (5352 participants, 39.7% Black) for both serum creatinine and cystatin C. In a validation data set of 12 studies (4050 participants, 14.3% Black), we compared the accuracy of new eGFR equations to measured GFR. We projected the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and GFR stages in a sample of U.S. adults, using current and new equations.ResultsIn the validation data set, the current creatinine equation that uses age, sex, and race overestimated measured GFR in Blacks (median, 3.7 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 5.4) and to a lesser degree in non-Blacks (median, 0.5 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 0.0 to 0.9). When the adjustment for Black race was omitted from the current eGFR equation, measured GFR in Blacks was underestimated (median, 7.1 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 5.9 to 8.8). A new equation using age and sex and omitting race underestimated measured GFR in Blacks (median, 3.6 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 1.8 to 5.5) and overestimated measured GFR in non-Blacks (median, 3.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 3.4 to 4.4). For all equations, 85% or more of the eGFRs for Blacks and non-Blacks were within 30% of measured GFR. New creatinine-cystatin C equations without race were more accurate than new creatinine equations, with smaller differences between race groups. As compared with the current creatinine equation, the new creatinine equations, but not the new creatinine-cystatin C equations, increased population estimates of CKD prevalence among Blacks and yielded similar or lower prevalence among non-Blacks.ConclusionsNew eGFR equations that incorporate creatinine and cystatin C but omit race are more accurate and led to smaller differences between Black participants and non-Black participants than new equations without race with either creatinine or cystatin C alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Project description:Background and objectiveseGFR equations have been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients with variable performance. We assessed the performance of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations on the basis of creatinine, cystatin C, and both (eGFR creatinine-cystatin C) compared with measured GFR by iothalamate clearance and evaluated their non-GFR determinants and associations across 15 cardiovascular risk factors.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA cross-sectional cohort of 1139 kidney transplant recipients >1 year after transplant was analyzed. eGFR bias, precision, and accuracy (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR) were assessed. Interaction of each cardiovascular risk factor with eGFR relative to measured GFR was determined.ResultsMedian measured GFR was 55.0 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). eGFR creatinine overestimated measured GFR by 3.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%), and eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease underestimated measured GFR by 2.2% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%). eGFR cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -13.7% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 77.1%), and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -8.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 86.5%). Lower measured GFR associated with older age, women, obesity, longer time after transplant, lower HDL, lower hemoglobin, lower albumin, higher triglycerides, higher proteinuria, and an elevated cardiac troponin T level but did not associate with diabetes, smoking, cardiovascular events, pretransplant dialysis, or hemoglobin A1c. These risk factor associations differed for five risk factors with eGFR creatinine, six risk factors for eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease, ten risk factors for eGFR cystatin C, and four risk factors for eGFR creatinine-cystatin C.ConclusionsThus, eGFR creatinine and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C are preferred over eGFR cystatin C in kidney transplant recipients because they are less biased, more accurate, and more consistently reflect the same risk factor associations seen with measured GFR.

Dataset Information

The Difference Between Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated GFR and Incident Frailty: An Analysis of the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets