Glomerular filtration rate estimation using cystatin C alone or combined with creatinine as a confirmatory test

Li Fan, Lesley A. Inker, Jerome Rossert, Marc Froissart, Peter Rossing, Michael Mauer, Andrew S. Levey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) are more accurate than equations using either alone (eGFRcr or eGFRcys). New guidelines suggest measuring cystatin C as a confirmatory test when eGFRcr may be inaccurate, but do not specify demographic or clinical conditions in which eGFRcys or eGFRcr-cys are more accurate than eGFRcr nor which estimate to use in such circumstances. Methods. We compared the performance of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations in 1119 subjects in the CKD-EPI cystatin C external validation dataset. Subgroups were defined by eGFRcr, age, sex, diabetes status and body mass index (BMI). The reference test was GFR measured using urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers. Cystatin C and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials. Accuracy was defined as the absolute difference in eGFR compared with mGFR. Results. The mean mGFR was 70 ± 41 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m2. eGFRcys was more accurate than eGFRcr at lower BMI and less accurate at higher BMI, especially at higher levels of eGFRcr. There were small differences in accuracy in people according to the diabetes status. eGFRcr-cys was as accurate or more accurate than eGFRcr or eGFRcys in these and all other subgroups. Conclusions. eGFRcr-cys, but not eGFRcys, is more accurate than eGFRcr in most subgroups we studied, suggesting preferential use of eGFRcr-cys when serum cystatin C is measured as a confirmatory test to obtain more accurate eGFR. Further studies are necessary to evaluate diagnostic strategies for using eGFRcys and eGFRcr-cys.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1195-1203
Number of pages9
JournalNephrology Dialysis Transplantation
Volume29
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014

Fingerprint

Cystatin C
Glomerular Filtration Rate
Creatinine
Body Mass Index
Chronic Renal Insufficiency
Epidemiology
Demography
Guidelines
Serum

Keywords

  • CKD-EPI
  • cystatin C
  • diagnostic test accuracy
  • estimated GFR

Cite this

Glomerular filtration rate estimation using cystatin C alone or combined with creatinine as a confirmatory test. / Fan, Li; Inker, Lesley A.; Rossert, Jerome; Froissart, Marc; Rossing, Peter; Mauer, Michael; Levey, Andrew S.

In: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol. 29, No. 6, 01.01.2014, p. 1195-1203.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fan, Li ; Inker, Lesley A. ; Rossert, Jerome ; Froissart, Marc ; Rossing, Peter ; Mauer, Michael ; Levey, Andrew S. / Glomerular filtration rate estimation using cystatin C alone or combined with creatinine as a confirmatory test. In: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation. 2014 ; Vol. 29, No. 6. pp. 1195-1203.
@article{a9d78da5f8814ddbb902d56fd5f6e5b3,
title = "Glomerular filtration rate estimation using cystatin C alone or combined with creatinine as a confirmatory test",
abstract = "Background. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) are more accurate than equations using either alone (eGFRcr or eGFRcys). New guidelines suggest measuring cystatin C as a confirmatory test when eGFRcr may be inaccurate, but do not specify demographic or clinical conditions in which eGFRcys or eGFRcr-cys are more accurate than eGFRcr nor which estimate to use in such circumstances. Methods. We compared the performance of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations in 1119 subjects in the CKD-EPI cystatin C external validation dataset. Subgroups were defined by eGFRcr, age, sex, diabetes status and body mass index (BMI). The reference test was GFR measured using urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers. Cystatin C and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials. Accuracy was defined as the absolute difference in eGFR compared with mGFR. Results. The mean mGFR was 70 ± 41 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m2. eGFRcys was more accurate than eGFRcr at lower BMI and less accurate at higher BMI, especially at higher levels of eGFRcr. There were small differences in accuracy in people according to the diabetes status. eGFRcr-cys was as accurate or more accurate than eGFRcr or eGFRcys in these and all other subgroups. Conclusions. eGFRcr-cys, but not eGFRcys, is more accurate than eGFRcr in most subgroups we studied, suggesting preferential use of eGFRcr-cys when serum cystatin C is measured as a confirmatory test to obtain more accurate eGFR. Further studies are necessary to evaluate diagnostic strategies for using eGFRcys and eGFRcr-cys.",
keywords = "CKD-EPI, cystatin C, diagnostic test accuracy, estimated GFR",
author = "Li Fan and Inker, {Lesley A.} and Jerome Rossert and Marc Froissart and Peter Rossing and Michael Mauer and Levey, {Andrew S.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/ndt/gft509",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "1195--1203",
journal = "Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation",
issn = "0931-0509",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Glomerular filtration rate estimation using cystatin C alone or combined with creatinine as a confirmatory test

AU - Fan, Li

AU - Inker, Lesley A.

AU - Rossert, Jerome

AU - Froissart, Marc

AU - Rossing, Peter

AU - Mauer, Michael

AU - Levey, Andrew S.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Background. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) are more accurate than equations using either alone (eGFRcr or eGFRcys). New guidelines suggest measuring cystatin C as a confirmatory test when eGFRcr may be inaccurate, but do not specify demographic or clinical conditions in which eGFRcys or eGFRcr-cys are more accurate than eGFRcr nor which estimate to use in such circumstances. Methods. We compared the performance of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations in 1119 subjects in the CKD-EPI cystatin C external validation dataset. Subgroups were defined by eGFRcr, age, sex, diabetes status and body mass index (BMI). The reference test was GFR measured using urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers. Cystatin C and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials. Accuracy was defined as the absolute difference in eGFR compared with mGFR. Results. The mean mGFR was 70 ± 41 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m2. eGFRcys was more accurate than eGFRcr at lower BMI and less accurate at higher BMI, especially at higher levels of eGFRcr. There were small differences in accuracy in people according to the diabetes status. eGFRcr-cys was as accurate or more accurate than eGFRcr or eGFRcys in these and all other subgroups. Conclusions. eGFRcr-cys, but not eGFRcys, is more accurate than eGFRcr in most subgroups we studied, suggesting preferential use of eGFRcr-cys when serum cystatin C is measured as a confirmatory test to obtain more accurate eGFR. Further studies are necessary to evaluate diagnostic strategies for using eGFRcys and eGFRcr-cys.

AB - Background. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) are more accurate than equations using either alone (eGFRcr or eGFRcys). New guidelines suggest measuring cystatin C as a confirmatory test when eGFRcr may be inaccurate, but do not specify demographic or clinical conditions in which eGFRcys or eGFRcr-cys are more accurate than eGFRcr nor which estimate to use in such circumstances. Methods. We compared the performance of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations in 1119 subjects in the CKD-EPI cystatin C external validation dataset. Subgroups were defined by eGFRcr, age, sex, diabetes status and body mass index (BMI). The reference test was GFR measured using urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers. Cystatin C and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials. Accuracy was defined as the absolute difference in eGFR compared with mGFR. Results. The mean mGFR was 70 ± 41 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m2. eGFRcys was more accurate than eGFRcr at lower BMI and less accurate at higher BMI, especially at higher levels of eGFRcr. There were small differences in accuracy in people according to the diabetes status. eGFRcr-cys was as accurate or more accurate than eGFRcr or eGFRcys in these and all other subgroups. Conclusions. eGFRcr-cys, but not eGFRcys, is more accurate than eGFRcr in most subgroups we studied, suggesting preferential use of eGFRcr-cys when serum cystatin C is measured as a confirmatory test to obtain more accurate eGFR. Further studies are necessary to evaluate diagnostic strategies for using eGFRcys and eGFRcr-cys.

KW - CKD-EPI

KW - cystatin C

KW - diagnostic test accuracy

KW - estimated GFR

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901790213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901790213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/ndt/gft509

DO - 10.1093/ndt/gft509

M3 - Article

C2 - 24449101

AN - SCOPUS:84901790213

VL - 29

SP - 1195

EP - 1203

JO - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

JF - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

SN - 0931-0509

IS - 6

ER -