Dataset Information

Prediction of Kidney Drug Clearance: A Comparison of Tubular Secretory Clearance and Glomerular Filtration Rate.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although proximal tubular secretion is the primary mechanism of kidney drug elimination, current kidney drug dosing strategies are on the basis of eGFR.

Methods

In a dedicated pharmacokinetic study to compare GFR with tubular secretory clearance for predicting kidney drug elimination, we evaluated stable outpatients with eGFRs ranging from 21 to 140 ml/min per 1.73 m². After administering single doses of furosemide and famciclovir (metabolized to penciclovir), we calculated their kidney clearances on the basis of sequential plasma and timed urine measurements. Concomitantly, we quantified eight endogenous secretory solutes in plasma and urine using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and measured GFR by iohexol clearance (iGFR). We computed a summary secretion score as the scaled average of the secretory solute clearances.

Results

Median iGFR of the 54 participants was 73 ml/min per 1.73 m². The kidney furosemide clearance correlated with iGFR (r=0.84) and the summary secretion score (r=0.86). The mean proportionate error (MPE) between iGFR-predicted and measured furosemide clearance was 30.0%. The lowest MPE was observed for the summary secretion score (24.1%); MPEs for individual secretory solutes ranged from 27.3% to 48.0%. These predictive errors were statistically indistinguishable. Penciclovir kidney clearance was correlated with iGFR (r=0.83) and with the summary secretion score (r=0.91), with similar predictive accuracy of iGFR and secretory clearances. Combining iGFR with the summary secretion score yielded only modest improvements in the prediction of the kidney clearance of furosemide and penciclovir.

Conclusions

Secretory solute clearance measurements can predict kidney drug clearances. However, tight linkage between GFR and proximal tubular secretory clearance in stable outpatients provides some reassurance that GFR, even when estimated, is a useful surrogate for predicting secretory drug clearances in such patients.

SUBMITTER: Chen Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8054886 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEndogenous molecules that provide an unbiased and a precise evaluation of kidney function are still necessary. We explored the potential of clearance of d-serine, a rare enantiomer of serine and a biomarker of kidney function, as a measure of glomerular filtration rate (GFR).MethodsThis was a cross-sectional observational study of 200 living kidney transplant donors and recipients enrolled between July 2019 and December 2020 in a single Japanese center, for whom GFR was measured by clearance of inulin (C-in). Clearance of d-serine (C-dSer) was calculated based on blood and urine levels of d-serine, as measured by two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography. Analytical performance was assessed by calculating biases. Utilizing data from 129 participants, we developed equations for C-in based on C-dSer and C-cre using a linear regression model, and the performance was validated in 68 participants.FindingsThe means of C-in and C-dSer were 66.7 and 55.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 of body surface area, respectively, in the entire cohort. C-dSer underestimated C-in with a proportional bias of 22.0% (95% confidence interval, 14.2-29.8%) and a constant bias of -1.24 (-5.78-3.31), whereas the proportional bias was minor to that of C-cre (34.6% [31.1-38.2%] and 2.47 (-1.18-6.13) for proportional and constant bias, respectively). Combination of C-dSer and C-cre measured C-in with an equation of 0.391 × C-dSer + 0.418 × C-cre + 3.852, which reduced the proportional bias (6.5% [-0.2-13.1%] and -4.30 [-8.87-0.28] for proportional and constant bias, respectively). In the validation dataset, this equation performed well with median absolute residual of 3.5 [2.3-4.8], and high ratio of agreement (ratios of 30% and 15% different from C-in [P30 and P15] of 98.5 [91.4-100] and 89.7 [80.0-95.2], respectively).InterpretationThe smaller proportional bias compared to that of C-cre is an advantage of C-dSer as a measure of C-in. Combinational measurement of d-serine and creatinine, two endogenous molecules, has the potential to serve as a measure of GFR with precision and minor biases and can support important clinical decisions.FundingJapan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS, grant number 17H04188), Japan Agency of Medical Research and Development (AMED, JP20gm5010001), Osaka Kidney Bank (OKF19-0010), Shiseido Co., Ltd and KAGAMI Inc.

Project description:BACKGROUND:High glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is often used as a surrogate for single-nephron hyperfiltration. Our objective was to determine the definition for high GFR that best reflects clinical and structural characteristics of hyperfiltration. METHODS:We studied living kidney donors at the Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic. Potential donors underwent evaluations that included measured GFR (mGFR) by iothalamate clearance and estimated GFR (eGFR) by the serum creatinine-based Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. High GFR was defined by the 95th percentile for each method (mGFR or eGFR) using either overall or age-specific thresholds. High mGFR was defined as both corrected and uncorrected for body surface area. The association of high GFR by each definition with clinical characteristics and radiologic findings (kidney volume) was assessed. In the subset that donated, the association of high GFR with kidney biopsy findings (nephron number and glomerular volume) and single-nephron GFR was assessed. RESULTS:We studied 3317 potential donors, including 2125 actual donors. The overall 95th percentile for corrected mGFR was 134?mL/min/1.73 m2 and for eGFR was 118?mL/min/1.73 m2. The age-based threshold for uncorrected mGFR was 198?mL/min - 0.943×Age, for corrected mGFR it was 164?mL/min/1.73 m2 - 0.730×Age and for eGFR it was 146?mL/min/1.73 m2 - 0.813×Age. High age-based uncorrected mGFR had the strongest associations with higher single-nephron GFR, larger glomerular volume, larger kidney volume, male gender, higher body mass index and higher 24-h urine albumin, but also had the strongest association with high nephron number. A high age-height-gender-based uncorrected mGFR definition performed almost as well but had a weaker association with nephron number and did not associate with male gender. CONCLUSIONS:High age-based uncorrected mGFR showed the most consistent associations reflective of hyperfiltration. However, high age-based uncorrected mGFR has limited clinical utility because it does not distinguish between hyperfiltration and high nephron number.