TY - JOUR
T1 - Performance of creatinine-based GFR estimating equations in solid-organ transplant recipients
AU - Shaffi, Kamran
AU - Uhlig, Katrin
AU - Perrone, Ronald D.
AU - Ruthazer, Robin
AU - Rule, Andrew
AU - Lieske, John C.
AU - Navis, Gerjan
AU - Poggio, Emilio D.
AU - Inker, Lesley A.
AU - Levey, Andrew S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Support: This study was funded through National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases grants T32 DK007777 and U01 DK053869 . Ms Ruthazer, who provided statistical support, was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, grant UL1 TR000073.
PY - 2014/6
Y1 - 2014/6
N2 - Background Accurate assessment of kidney function is important for the management of solid-organ transplant recipients. In other clinical populations, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) most commonly is estimated using the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) creatinine or the 4-variable MDRD (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) Study equation. The accuracy of these equations compared with other GFR estimating equations in transplant recipients has not been carefully studied. Study Design Diagnostic test study. Setting & Participants Solid-organ transplant recipients longer than 6 months posttransplantation from 5 clinical populations (N = 3,622, including recipients of kidney [53%], liver [35%], and other or multiple organs [12%]). Index Test Estimated GFR (eGFR) using creatinine-based GFR estimating equations identified from a systematic review of the literature. Performance of the CKD-EPI creatinine and the MDRD Study equations was compared with alternative equations. Reference Test Measured GFR (mGFR) from urinary clearance of iothalamate or plasma clearance of iohexol. Measurements Error (difference between mGFR and eGFR) expressed as P30 (proportion of absolute percent error < 30%) and mean absolute error. Results We identified 26 GFR estimating equations. Mean mGFR was 55.1 ± 22.7 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m 2. P30 and mean absolute error for the CKD-EPI and the MDRD Study equations were 78.9% (99.6% CI, 76.9%-80.8%) for both and 10.6 (99.6% CI, 10.1-11.1) versus 11.0 (99.6% CI, 10.5-11.5) mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively; these equations were more accurate than any of the alternative equations (P < 0.001 for all pairwise comparisons for both measures). They performed better than or as well as the alternative equations in most subgroups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, including type of transplanted organ. Limitations Study population included few nonwhites and people with solid-organ transplants other than liver and kidneys. Conclusions The CKD-EPI creatinine and the MDRD Study equations perform better than the alternative creatinine-based estimating equations in solid-organ transplant recipients. They can be used for clinical management.
AB - Background Accurate assessment of kidney function is important for the management of solid-organ transplant recipients. In other clinical populations, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) most commonly is estimated using the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) creatinine or the 4-variable MDRD (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) Study equation. The accuracy of these equations compared with other GFR estimating equations in transplant recipients has not been carefully studied. Study Design Diagnostic test study. Setting & Participants Solid-organ transplant recipients longer than 6 months posttransplantation from 5 clinical populations (N = 3,622, including recipients of kidney [53%], liver [35%], and other or multiple organs [12%]). Index Test Estimated GFR (eGFR) using creatinine-based GFR estimating equations identified from a systematic review of the literature. Performance of the CKD-EPI creatinine and the MDRD Study equations was compared with alternative equations. Reference Test Measured GFR (mGFR) from urinary clearance of iothalamate or plasma clearance of iohexol. Measurements Error (difference between mGFR and eGFR) expressed as P30 (proportion of absolute percent error < 30%) and mean absolute error. Results We identified 26 GFR estimating equations. Mean mGFR was 55.1 ± 22.7 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m 2. P30 and mean absolute error for the CKD-EPI and the MDRD Study equations were 78.9% (99.6% CI, 76.9%-80.8%) for both and 10.6 (99.6% CI, 10.1-11.1) versus 11.0 (99.6% CI, 10.5-11.5) mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively; these equations were more accurate than any of the alternative equations (P < 0.001 for all pairwise comparisons for both measures). They performed better than or as well as the alternative equations in most subgroups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, including type of transplanted organ. Limitations Study population included few nonwhites and people with solid-organ transplants other than liver and kidneys. Conclusions The CKD-EPI creatinine and the MDRD Study equations perform better than the alternative creatinine-based estimating equations in solid-organ transplant recipients. They can be used for clinical management.
KW - Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation
KW - creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation
KW - kidney transplantation
KW - renal function
KW - solid-organ transplant recipient
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901501447&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901501447&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.01.436
DO - 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.01.436
M3 - Article
C2 - 24703720
AN - SCOPUS:84901501447
SN - 0272-6386
VL - 63
SP - 1007
EP - 1018
JO - American Journal of Kidney Diseases
JF - American Journal of Kidney Diseases
IS - 6
ER -