Dataset Information

Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Performance of Creatinine- and Cystatin C-Based Estimating Equations Relative to Exogenously Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate in HIV-Positive and HIV-Negative Persons.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Reliable estimates of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are important in the clinical management of HIV-positive patients. Data on the performance of widely used estimating equations (eGFR) relative to exogenously measured GFR are sparse in this population.

Methods

We evaluated cross-sectional and longitudinal accuracy and bias of eGFR, based on creatinine and cystatin C, relative to disappearance of infused iohexol from plasma (iGFR) in a cohort of participants followed annually for up to 7 years.

Results

A total of 222 HIV-positive and 139 HIV-negative participants contributed 1240 visits with valid iGFR and eGFR measures. Estimated GFR based on both creatinine and cystatin C performed the best. Estimated GFR based on creatinine alone overestimated iGFR by 9 mL·min·1.73 m on average and was significantly less accurate in HIV-positive than HIV-negative individuals. The performance of equations based on either creatinine alone or cystatin C alone were significantly affected by participant factors (eg, non-suppressed HIV RNA, nadir CD4 count, hepatitis C virus coinfection). The average iGFR slope was -4% per year in HIV-positive participants. In both HIV-positive and HIV-negative participants, eGFR slope measures were generally unbiased but inaccurate, with only 60%-74% of observations falling within ±5% points of iGFR slope.

Conclusions

Both creatinine and cystatin C have limitations as GFR indices in HIV-positive individuals. Estimated GFR based on both creatinine and cystatin C performed best in our study and may be preferred in HIV-positive persons with kidney disease or comorbidities that place them at high risk for kidney disease.

SUBMITTER: Lucas GM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8301492 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Estimates of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) that are based on serum creatinine are routinely used; however, they are imprecise, potentially leading to the overdiagnosis of chronic kidney disease. Cystatin C is an alternative filtration marker for estimating GFR.Using cross-sectional analyses, we developed estimating equations based on cystatin C alone and in combination with creatinine in diverse populations totaling 5352 participants from 13 studies. These equations were then validated in 1119 participants from 5 different studies in which GFR had been measured. Cystatin and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials.Mean measured GFRs were 68 and 70 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area in the development and validation data sets, respectively. In the validation data set, the creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations that used creatinine or cystatin C alone. Bias was similar among the three equations, with a median difference between measured and estimated GFR of 3.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the combined equation, as compared with 3.7 and 3.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the creatinine equation and the cystatin C equation (P=0.07 and P=0.05), respectively. Precision was improved with the combined equation (interquartile range of the difference, 13.4 vs. 15.4 and 16.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), respectively [P=0.001 and P<0.001]), and the results were more accurate (percentage of estimates that were >30% of measured GFR, 8.5 vs. 12.8 and 14.1, respectively [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). In participants whose estimated GFR based on creatinine was 45 to 74 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), the combined equation improved the classification of measured GFR as either less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) or greater than or equal to 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) (net reclassification index, 19.4% [P<0.001]) and correctly reclassified 16.9% of those with an estimated GFR of 45 to 59 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) as having a GFR of 60 ml or higher per minute per 1.73 m(2).The combined creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations based on either of these markers alone and may be useful as a confirmatory test for chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline recommends use of a cystatin C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to confirm creatinine-based eGFR between 45 and 59 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). Prior studies have demonstrated that comorbidities such as solid-organ transplant strongly influence the relationship between measured GFR, creatinine, and cystatin C. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of cystatin C-based eGFR equations compared with creatinine-based eGFR and measured GFR across different clinical presentations. METHODS:We compared the performance of the CKD-EPI 2009 creatinine-based estimated GFR equation (eGFRCr) and the newer CKD-EPI 2012 cystatin C-based equations (eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys) with measured GFR (iothalamate renal clearance) across defined patient populations. Patients (n = 1652) were categorized as transplant recipients (n = 568 kidney; n = 319 other organ), known chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (n = 618), or potential kidney donors (n = 147). RESULTS:eGFRCr-Cys showed the most consistent performance across different clinical populations. Among potential kidney donors without CKD [stage 2 or higher; eGFR >60 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1)], eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys demonstrated significantly less bias than eGFRCr; however, all 3 equations substantially underestimated GFR when eGFR was <60 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). Among transplant recipients with CKD stage 3B or greater [eGFR <45 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1)], eGFRCys was significantly more biased than eGFRCr. No clear differences in eGFR bias between equations were observed among known CKD patients regardless of eGFR range or in any patient group with a GFR between 45 and 59 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). CONCLUSIONS:The performance of eGFR equations depends on patient characteristics that are readily apparent on presentation. Among the 3 CKD-EPI equations, eGFRCr-Cys performed most consistently across the studied patient populations.

Project description:BackgroundWe recently published and validated the new serum creatinine (Scr)-based full-age-spectrum equation (FAS crea ) for estimating the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) for healthy and kidney-diseased subjects of all ages. The equation was based on the concept of normalized Scr and shows equivalent to superior prediction performance to the currently recommended equations for children, adolescents, adults and older adults.MethodsBased on an evaluation of the serum cystatin C (ScysC) distribution, we defined normalization constants for ScysC ( Q cysC = 0.82 mg/L for ages <70 years and Q cysC = 0.95 mg/L for ages ≥70 years). By replacing Scr/ Q crea in the FAS crea equation with ScysC/ Q cysC , or with the average of both normalized biomarkers, we obtained new ScysC-based (FAS cysC ) and combined Scr-/ScysC-based FAS equations (FAS combi ). To validate the new FAS cysC and FAS combi we collected data on measured GFR, Scr, ScysC, age, gender, height and weight from 11 different cohorts including n = 6132 unique white subjects (368 children, aged ≤18 years, 4295 adults and 1469 older adults, aged ≥70 years).ResultsIn children and adolescents, the new FAS cysC equation showed significantly better performance [percentage of patients within 30% of mGFR (P30) = 86.1%] than the Caucasian Asian Paediatric Adult Cohort equation (P30 = 76.6%; P < 0.0001), or the ScysC-based Schwartz equation (P30 = 68.8%; P < 0.0001) and the FAS combi equation outperformed all equations with P30 = 92.1% (P < 0.0001). In adults, the FAS cysC equation (P30 = 82.6%) performed equally as well as the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI cysC ) (P30 = 80.4%) and the FAS combi equation (P30 = 89.9%) was also equal to the combined CKD-EPI equation (P30 = 88.2%). In older adults, FAS cysC was superior (P30 = 88.2%) to CKD-EPI cysC (P30 = 84.4%; P < 0.0001) and the FAS combi equation (P30 = 91.2%) showed significantly higher performance than the combined CKD-EPI equation (P30 = 85.6%) (P < 0.0001).ConclusionThe FAS equation is not only applicable to all ages, but also for all recommended renal biomarkers and their combinations.

Project description:Accurate estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for diagnosis and risk stratification in chronic kidney disease and for selection of living donors. Ethnic differences have required correction factors in the originally developed creatinine-based GFR estimation equations for populations around the world. Existing equations have not been validated in the vegetarian Indian population. We examined the performance of creatinine and cystatin-based GFR estimating equations in Indians.GFR was measured by urinary clearance of inulin. Serum creatinine was measured using IDMS-traceable Jaffe's and enzymatic assays, and cystatin C by colloidal gold immunoassay. Dietary protein intake was calculated by measuring urinary nitrogen appearance. Bias, precision and accuracy were calculated for the eGFR equations.A total of 130 participants (63 healthy kidney donors and 67 with CKD) were studied. About 50% were vegetarians, and the remainder ate meat 3.8 times every month. The average creatinine excretion were 14.7 mg/kg/day (95% CI: 13.5 to 15.9 mg/kg/day) and 12.4 mg/kg/day (95% CI: 11.2 to 13.6 mg/kg/day) in males and females, respectively. The average daily protein intake was 46.1 g/day (95% CI: 43.2 to 48.8 g/day). The mean mGFR in the study population was 51.66?±?31.68 ml/min/1.73m2. All creatinine-based eGFR equations overestimated GFR (p?<?0.01 for each creatinine based eGFR equation). However, eGFR by CKD-EPICys was not significantly different from mGFR (p?=?0.38). The CKD-EPICys exhibited lowest bias [mean bias: -3.53?±?14.70 ml/min/1.73m2 (95% CI: -0.608 to -0.98)] and highest accuracy (P30: 74.6%). The GFR in the healthy population was 79.44 ± 20.19 (range: 41.90-134.50) ml/min/1.73m2.Existing creatinine-based GFR estimating equations overestimate GFR in Indians. An appropriately powered study is needed to develop either a correction factor or a new equation for accurate assessment of kidney function in the Indian population.

Project description:ImportanceEstimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is useful in many clinical conditions. However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of GFR-estimating equations in older adults at various degrees of kidney impairment.ObjectiveTo determine the performance of plasma-creatinine-based equations Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Lund-Malmö Revised, (LMR), full age spectrum (FAS), and Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) 1 in older adults across a broad spectrum of GFRs.Design, setting, and participantsSingle-center cross-sectional study performed in France including 2247 participants aged 65 to 90 years who underwent inulin GFR measurements from July 1, 2003, to July 30, 2017, for suspected or established renal dysfunction, for renal risk, before kidney donation, or after kidney transplant.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome measure was GRF measured by inulin clearance. Equation performance criteria considered bias (difference between estimated and measured GFR), precision (interquartile range of the median difference), and accuracy P30 (percentage of estimated GFRs lying between [measured GFR - 30% of measured GFR] and [measured GFR + 30% of measured GFR]).ResultsThe mean (SD) age of the 2247 participants was 71.5 (5) years and 1192 (53.0%) were male. The difference in median (95% CI) bias was significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (-4.0 [-4.0 to -3.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; P?<?.001]) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (-2.0 [-3.5 to -2.5] mL/min/1.73 m2, P?<?.001) but not significant between CKD-EPI vs BIS 1 (0.0 [-1.5 to 0.5], P?=?.07, Mood test). In patients aged 65 to 74 years with measured GFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2, the difference in median P30 (95% CI) was not significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (P?=?.08) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (P?=?.48) but significant vs BIS 1 (P?=?.004, McNemar test). In subjects 75 years and older, with measured GFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, LMR and BIS 1 were more accurate than CKD-EPI and FAS (P30?=?74.5 [70.0-79.5] and 73.0 [68.0-78.0] vs 69.0 [64.5-74.0] and 69.0 [65.5-72.0]). In all patients, despite small statistical differences, the performance of CKD-EPI equation was not clinically different from that of LMR, FAS, or BIS 1.Conclusions and relevanceIn a referral group of patients 65 years and older who had GFR estimated using CDK-EPI, LMR, BIS 1, and FAS equations, a comparison with renal inulin clearance found that none of the equations had a superior diagnostic performance. Each had limitations regarding accuracy.