BACKGROUND: Cystatin C is a promising new biomarker to determine the estimated glomerular filtration. However, the Siemens' cystatin C assay (Siemens), used in many longitudinal studies, has had limited clinical applicability because it requires a specific, dedicated instrument. Other companies, including Gentian and Roche, have developed cystatin C assays that can be used with most routine clinical chemistry analyzers. METHODS: We compared the agreement of Gentian and Roche with Siemens assays in 948 participants at the baseline visit of the Heart and Soul Study, a cohort of participants with established coronary artery disease who were followed for an average of 8 years. We then compared associations of all 3 cystatin C measures and eGFR-Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The Gentian assay had higher correlation with Siemens (r = 0.96) than did Roche (r = 0.93, P < 0.001). After cross-tabulating quartiles of each cystatin C measure, agreements (κ statistic) were higher for Siemens and Gentian (0.73, 95% CI 0.72-0.75) than for Roche and Siemens (0.64, 0.63-0.66) or for Roche and Gentian (0.69, 0.65-0.71). These differences in agreement had minimal impact on associations with clinical outcomes; the hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality comparing the high vs low quartiles were 3.2 (95% CI 2.1-4.8) for Siemens, 3.1 (CI 2.1-4.7) for Gentian, 3.1 (CI 2.1-4.7) for Roche, and 1.6 (CI 1.1-2.3) for eGFR-MDRD, after multivariate adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, agreement with the Siemens' assay was modestly higher for the Gentian compared with the Roche assay, although all 3 methods for cystatin C measurement had similar utility as predictors of clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND:Cystatin C is a promising new biomarker to determine the estimated glomerular filtration. However, the Siemens' cystatin C assay (Siemens), used in many longitudinal studies, has had limited clinical applicability because it requires a specific, dedicated instrument. Other companies, including Gentian and Roche, have developed cystatin C assays that can be used with most routine clinical chemistry analyzers. METHODS: We compared the agreement of Gentian and Roche with Siemens assays in 948 participants at the baseline visit of the Heart and Soul Study, a cohort of participants with established coronary artery disease who were followed for an average of 8 years. We then compared associations of all 3 cystatin C measures and eGFR-Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The Gentian assay had higher correlation with Siemens (r = 0.96) than did Roche (r = 0.93, P < 0.001). After cross-tabulating quartiles of each cystatin C measure, agreements (κ statistic) were higher for Siemens and Gentian (0.73, 95% CI 0.72-0.75) than for Roche and Siemens (0.64, 0.63-0.66) or for Roche and Gentian (0.69, 0.65-0.71). These differences in agreement had minimal impact on associations with clinical outcomes; the hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality comparing the high vs low quartiles were 3.2 (95% CI 2.1-4.8) for Siemens, 3.1 (CI 2.1-4.7) for Gentian, 3.1 (CI 2.1-4.7) for Roche, and 1.6 (CI 1.1-2.3) for eGFR-MDRD, after multivariate adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, agreement with the Siemens' assay was modestly higher for the Gentian compared with the Roche assay, although all 3 methods for cystatin C measurement had similar utility as predictors of clinical outcomes.
Authors: Michael Zappitelli; Jason H Greenberg; Steven G Coca; Catherine D Krawczeski; Simon Li; Heather R Thiessen-Philbrook; Michael R Bennett; Prasad Devarajan; Chirag R Parikh Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: A Rogier van der Velde; Wouter C Meijers; Jennifer E Ho; Frank P Brouwers; Michiel Rienstra; Stephan J L Bakker; Anneke C Muller Kobold; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Wiek H van Gilst; Pim van der Harst; Rudolf A de Boer Journal: Heart Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Carmen A Peralta; Anne Lee; Michelle C Odden; Lenny Lopez; Adina Zeki Al Hazzouri; John Neuhaus; Mary N Haan Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-12-18 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Simon D S Fraser; Grant Aitken; Maarten W Taal; Jennifer S Mindell; Graham Moon; Julie Day; Donal O'Donoghue; Paul J Roderick Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Johanna T Gustafsson; Julia F Simard; Iva Gunnarsson; Kerstin Elvin; Ingrid E Lundberg; Lars-Olof Hansson; Anders Larsson; Elisabet Svenungsson Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2012 Impact factor: 5.156