BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare random urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) with timed urine albumin excretion rate (AER) in patients with type 1 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A total of 1186 participants in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study provided spot urine specimens concurrent with 4-hour timed urine collections. ACR and AER were compared using Bland-Altman plots, cross-classification of albuminuria status and its change over time, and within-person variability. RESULTS: Despite moderate correlation (r=0.62), ACR levels (mg/g) were lower than AER levels (mg/24 hr). This difference was greatest for men. Gender-specific estimated AER (eAER) values were empirically derived from ACR. Comparing the eAER with measured AER, agreement of prevalent microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria classification was fair to moderate, and classification of change in albuminuria status over time was different. Intraclass correlations were 0.697 for ACR and 0.803 for AER. Effects of DCCT intensive versus conventional diabetes therapy on urine albumin excretion or classification of albuminuria were similar using the eAER versus measured AER, as were the effects of the previous glycosylated hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic differences exist between urine ACR and AER, related to gender and other determinants of muscle mass. Use of ACR (or eAER) versus AER yields differences in classification of prevalent albuminuria states and changes in albuminuria states over time. These findings support the use of consistent ascertainment methods over time and further efforts to standardize and optimally interpret measurement of urine albumin excretion.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare random urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) with timed urine albumin excretion rate (AER) in patients with type 1 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A total of 1186 participants in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study provided spot urine specimens concurrent with 4-hour timed urine collections. ACR and AER were compared using Bland-Altman plots, cross-classification of albuminuria status and its change over time, and within-person variability. RESULTS: Despite moderate correlation (r=0.62), ACR levels (mg/g) were lower than AER levels (mg/24 hr). This difference was greatest for men. Gender-specific estimated AER (eAER) values were empirically derived from ACR. Comparing the eAER with measured AER, agreement of prevalent microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria classification was fair to moderate, and classification of change in albuminuria status over time was different. Intraclass correlations were 0.697 for ACR and 0.803 for AER. Effects of DCCT intensive versus conventional diabetes therapy on urine albumin excretion or classification of albuminuria were similar using the eAER versus measured AER, as were the effects of the previous glycosylated hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic differences exist between urine ACR and AER, related to gender and other determinants of muscle mass. Use of ACR (or eAER) versus AER yields differences in classification of prevalent albuminuria states and changes in albuminuria states over time. These findings support the use of consistent ascertainment methods over time and further efforts to standardize and optimally interpret measurement of urine albumin excretion.
Authors: Elsbeth C Witte; Hiddo J Lambers Heerspink; Dick de Zeeuw; Stephan J L Bakker; Paul E de Jong; Ronald Gansevoort Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Bruce A Perkins; Ionut Bebu; Ian H de Boer; Mark Molitch; William Tamborlane; Gayle Lorenzi; William Herman; Neil H White; Rodica Pop-Busui; Andrew D Paterson; Trevor Orchard; Catherine Cowie; John M Lachin Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Dean P Hainsworth; Ionut Bebu; Lloyd P Aiello; William Sivitz; Rose Gubitosi-Klug; John Malone; Neil H White; Ronald Danis; Amisha Wallia; Xiaoyu Gao; Andrew J Barkmeier; Arup Das; Shriji Patel; Thomas W Gardner; John M Lachin Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Rose A Gubitosi-Klug; Barbara H Braffett; Susan Hitt; Valerie Arends; Diane Uschner; Kimberly Jones; Lisa Diminick; Amy B Karger; Andrew D Paterson; Delnaz Roshandel; Santica Marcovina; John M Lachin; Michael Steffes; Jerry P Palmer Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Ian H de Boer; Xiaoyu Gao; Patricia A Cleary; Ionut Bebu; John M Lachin; Mark E Molitch; Trevor Orchard; Andrew D Paterson; Bruce A Perkins; Michael W Steffes; Bernard Zinman Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Marinella Ruospo; Valeria M Saglimbene; Suetonia C Palmer; Salvatore De Cosmo; Antonio Pacilli; Olga Lamacchia; Mauro Cignarelli; Paola Fioretto; Mariacristina Vecchio; Jonathan C Craig; Giovanni Fm Strippoli Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-08
Authors: Katharine L Cheung; Neil A Zakai; Aaron R Folsom; Manjula Kurella Tamura; Carmen A Peralta; Suzanne E Judd; Peter W Callas; Mary Cushman Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Dean P Hainsworth; Xiaoyu Gao; Ionut Bebu; Arup Das; Lisa Olmos de Koo; Andrew J Barkmeier; William Tamborlane; John M Lachin; Lloyd Paul Aiello Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2020-09-14 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ionut Bebu; Barbara H Braffett; Trevor J Orchard; Gayle M Lorenzi; David M Nathan; William H Herman; John M Lachin Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2020-12-10 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Barbara H Braffett; Rose A Gubitosi-Klug; James W Albers; Eva L Feldman; Catherine L Martin; Neil H White; Trevor J Orchard; Maria Lopes-Virella; John M Lachin; Rodica Pop-Busui Journal: Diabetes Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 9.461