TY - JOUR
T1 - Creatinine-based and cystatin C-based GFR estimating equations and their non-GFR determinants in kidney transplant recipients
AU - Keddis, Mira T.
AU - Amer, Hatem
AU - Voskoboev, Nikolay
AU - Kremers, Walter K.
AU - Rule, Andrew D.
AU - Lieske, John C.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank Mary Karaus, Cynthia Rendler, and David Dvorak of the Mayo Validation Support Services and Erling Sundrehagen, director of Gentian, for their assistance and support with this study. This study was supported by National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases grant R01 DK090358.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Background and objectives eGFR equations have been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients with variable performance.We assessed the performance of the Modification ofDiet 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, & measurements A 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 factorwith eGFR relative tomeasured GFR was determined. Results Median measured GFR was 55.0 ml/min per 1.73 m2. 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 estimateswithin 30%ofmeasured GFR of 80.4%). eGFR cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by 213.7% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 77.1%), and eGFR creatinine-cystatinCunderestimatedmeasuredGFR by28.1% (percentage of estimates within 30%ofmeasured GFR of 86.5%). Lower measured GFR associatedwith 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 ofDiet in Renal Disease, ten risk factors for eGFR cystatin C, and four risk factors for eGFR creatinine-cystatin C. Conclusions Thus, 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.
AB - Background and objectives eGFR equations have been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients with variable performance.We assessed the performance of the Modification ofDiet 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, & measurements A 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 factorwith eGFR relative tomeasured GFR was determined. Results Median measured GFR was 55.0 ml/min per 1.73 m2. 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 estimateswithin 30%ofmeasured GFR of 80.4%). eGFR cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by 213.7% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 77.1%), and eGFR creatinine-cystatinCunderestimatedmeasuredGFR by28.1% (percentage of estimates within 30%ofmeasured GFR of 86.5%). Lower measured GFR associatedwith 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 ofDiet in Renal Disease, ten risk factors for eGFR cystatin C, and four risk factors for eGFR creatinine-cystatin C. Conclusions Thus, 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.
KW - Cardiovascular Diseases
KW - Creatinine
KW - Cystatin C
KW - Diabetes mellitus
KW - Glomerular filtration rate
KW - Iothalamic Acid
KW - Kidney transplantation
KW - Obesity
KW - Proteinuria
KW - Risk factors
KW - Smoking
KW - Triglycerides
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021714719&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021714719&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2215/CJN.11741115
DO - 10.2215/CJN.11741115
M3 - Article
C2 - 27340283
AN - SCOPUS:85021714719
SN - 1555-9041
VL - 11
SP - 1640
EP - 1649
JO - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
JF - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
IS - 9
ER -