Jon J Snyder1, Robert N Foley, Allan J Collins. 1. Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. jsnyder@usrds.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimates of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the United States using the continuous National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data set 1999-2004 indicate that 13.1% of the population (26.3 million people based on the 2000 census) has CKD stages 1 to 4. STUDY DESIGN: We performed sensitivity analyses to highlight assumptions underlying these estimates and illustrate their robustness to varying assumptions. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: NHANES 1999-2004 was a nationally representative cross-sectional continuous survey of the civilian noninstitutionalized US population. Our sample included participants 20 years and older. REFERENCE TEST: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) defined from the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation; albuminuria defined as persistence of urinary albumin-creatinine ratio greater than 30 mg/g. INDEX TESTS: We compared prevalence estimates using the MDRD Study equation with 2 other GFR estimating equations (equation 5 by Rule et al from the Mayo Clinic Donors study; Cockcroft-Gault equation adjusted for body surface area and corrected for the bias in the MDRD Study sample), and sex-specific cutoff values to define albuminuria. RESULTS: We found CKD stages 1 to 4 prevalence estimates ranging from 11.7% to 24.9%, a more than 2-fold difference resulting in population estimates of 25.8 million to 54.0 million people using 2006 population estimates. Considering only stages 3 and 4, which are not affected by the choice of cutoff values to define albuminuria, prevalence estimates ranged from 6.3% to 18.6%, resulting in population estimates of 13.7 million to 40.3 million people, a nearly 3-fold difference. LIMITATIONS: NHANES 1999-2004 is a cross-sectional survey and allows for GFR and albumin-creatinine ratio estimates at 1 point in time. NHANES does not account for seniors in long-term care facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Although CKD prevalence is high regardless of varying modeling assumptions, different assumptions yield large differences in prevalence estimates.
BACKGROUND: Estimates of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the United States using the continuous National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data set 1999-2004 indicate that 13.1% of the population (26.3 million people based on the 2000 census) has CKD stages 1 to 4. STUDY DESIGN: We performed sensitivity analyses to highlight assumptions underlying these estimates and illustrate their robustness to varying assumptions. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: NHANES 1999-2004 was a nationally representative cross-sectional continuous survey of the civilian noninstitutionalized US population. Our sample included participants 20 years and older. REFERENCE TEST: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) defined from the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation; albuminuria defined as persistence of urinary albumin-creatinine ratio greater than 30 mg/g. INDEX TESTS: We compared prevalence estimates using the MDRD Study equation with 2 other GFR estimating equations (equation 5 by Rule et al from the Mayo Clinic Donors study; Cockcroft-Gault equation adjusted for body surface area and corrected for the bias in the MDRD Study sample), and sex-specific cutoff values to define albuminuria. RESULTS: We found CKD stages 1 to 4 prevalence estimates ranging from 11.7% to 24.9%, a more than 2-fold difference resulting in population estimates of 25.8 million to 54.0 million people using 2006 population estimates. Considering only stages 3 and 4, which are not affected by the choice of cutoff values to define albuminuria, prevalence estimates ranged from 6.3% to 18.6%, resulting in population estimates of 13.7 million to 40.3 million people, a nearly 3-fold difference. LIMITATIONS: NHANES 1999-2004 is a cross-sectional survey and allows for GFR and albumin-creatinine ratio estimates at 1 point in time. NHANES does not account for seniors in long-term care facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Although CKD prevalence is high regardless of varying modeling assumptions, different assumptions yield large differences in prevalence estimates.
Authors: Garabed Eknoyan; Thomas Hostetter; George L Bakris; Lee Hebert; Andrew S Levey; Hans-Henrik Parving; Michael W Steffes; Robert Toto Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: David R Jacobs; Maureen A Murtaugh; Michael Steffes; Xinhua Yu; Jeffrey Roseman; Frederick C Goetz Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2002-06-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: J Björk; S-E Bäck; G Sterner; J Carlson; V Lindstrom; O Bakoush; P Simonsson; A Grubb; U Nyman Journal: Scand J Clin Lab Invest Date: 2007 Impact factor: 1.713
Authors: Andrew D Rule; Hiie M Gussak; Gregory R Pond; Erik J Bergstralh; Mark D Stegall; Fernando G Cosio; Timothy S Larson Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Véronique L Roger; Alan S Go; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Emelia J Benjamin; Jarett D Berry; William B Borden; Dawn M Bravata; Shifan Dai; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; Virginia J Howard; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Diane M Makuc; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Claudia S Moy; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Elsayed Z Soliman; Paul D Sorlie; Nona Sotoodehnia; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Nathan D Wong; Daniel Woo; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Véronique L Roger; Alan S Go; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Robert J Adams; Jarett D Berry; Todd M Brown; Mercedes R Carnethon; Shifan Dai; Giovanni de Simone; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Kurt J Greenlund; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; P Michael Ho; Virginia J Howard; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Diane M Makuc; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Mary M McDermott; James B Meigs; Claudia S Moy; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Wayne D Rosamond; Paul D Sorlie; Randall S Stafford; Tanya N Turan; Melanie B Turner; Nathan D Wong; Judith Wylie-Rosett Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alan S Go; Dariush Mozaffarian; Véronique L Roger; Emelia J Benjamin; Jarett D Berry; Michael J Blaha; Shifan Dai; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Sheila Franco; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; Virginia J Howard; Mark D Huffman; Suzanne E Judd; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Rachel H Mackey; David J Magid; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Darren K McGuire; Emile R Mohler; Claudia S Moy; Michael E Mussolino; Robert W Neumar; Graham Nichol; Dilip K Pandey; Nina P Paynter; Matthew J Reeves; Paul D Sorlie; Joel Stein; Amytis Towfighi; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Nathan D Wong; Daniel Woo; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alan S Go; Dariush Mozaffarian; Véronique L Roger; Emelia J Benjamin; Jarett D Berry; William B Borden; Dawn M Bravata; Shifan Dai; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Sheila Franco; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; Virginia J Howard; Mark D Huffman; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; David Magid; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Darren K McGuire; Emile R Mohler; Claudia S Moy; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Pamela J Schreiner; Paul D Sorlie; Joel Stein; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Nathan D Wong; Daniel Woo; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gabriela Campanholle; Giovanni Ligresti; Sina A Gharib; Jeremy S Duffield Journal: Am J Physiol Cell Physiol Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 4.249