BACKGROUND: Change in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for clinical decision making. GFR estimates from serum creatinine level provide an unbiased but imprecise estimate of GFR at single time points. However, the accuracy of estimated GFR over time is not well known. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: 4 clinical trials with longitudinal measurements of GFR and serum creatinine on the same day, including individuals with and without kidney disease with a wide range of kidney function, diverse racial backgrounds, and varied clinical characteristics. INDEX TEST: GFR estimated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. REFERENCE TEST: GFR measured using urinary clearance of (125)I-iothalamate. RESULTS: Data included 19,735 GFR measurements in 3,531 participants during a mean follow-up of 2.6 years. Mean values at baseline for measured and estimated GFR and error (measured GFR - estimated GFR) were 73.1 (95% CI, 71.6 to 74.5), 72.7 (95% CI, 71.5 to 74.0), and 0.14 (95% CI, -0.35 to 0.63) mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. Mean rates of change in measured and estimated GFR and error were -2.3 (95% CI, -2.4 to -2.1), -2.2 (95% CI, -2.4 to -2.1), and -0.09 (95% CI, -0.24 to 0.05) mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.2, respectively). Variability (ie, standard deviation) among participants in rate of change in measured GFR, estimated GFR, and error was 4.3, 3.4, and 3.3 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year, respectively. Only 15% of participants had a rate of change in error >3 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year, and only 2% had a rate of change in error >5% per year. LIMITATIONS: Participants' characteristics were not available over time. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of GFR estimates did not change over time. Clinicians should interpret changes in estimated GFR over time as reflecting changes in measured GFR rather than changes in errors in the GFR estimates in most individuals.
BACKGROUND: Change in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for clinical decision making. GFR estimates from serum creatinine level provide an unbiased but imprecise estimate of GFR at single time points. However, the accuracy of estimated GFR over time is not well known. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: 4 clinical trials with longitudinal measurements of GFR and serum creatinine on the same day, including individuals with and without kidney disease with a wide range of kidney function, diverse racial backgrounds, and varied clinical characteristics. INDEX TEST: GFR estimated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. REFERENCE TEST: GFR measured using urinary clearance of (125)I-iothalamate. RESULTS: Data included 19,735 GFR measurements in 3,531 participants during a mean follow-up of 2.6 years. Mean values at baseline for measured and estimated GFR and error (measured GFR - estimated GFR) were 73.1 (95% CI, 71.6 to 74.5), 72.7 (95% CI, 71.5 to 74.0), and 0.14 (95% CI, -0.35 to 0.63) mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. Mean rates of change in measured and estimated GFR and error were -2.3 (95% CI, -2.4 to -2.1), -2.2 (95% CI, -2.4 to -2.1), and -0.09 (95% CI, -0.24 to 0.05) mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.2, respectively). Variability (ie, standard deviation) among participants in rate of change in measured GFR, estimated GFR, and error was 4.3, 3.4, and 3.3 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year, respectively. Only 15% of participants had a rate of change in error >3 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year, and only 2% had a rate of change in error >5% per year. LIMITATIONS: Participants' characteristics were not available over time. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of GFR estimates did not change over time. Clinicians should interpret changes in estimated GFR over time as reflecting changes in measured GFR rather than changes in errors in the GFR estimates in most individuals.
Authors: Yuen-Ting Diana Kwong; Lesley A Stevens; Elizabeth Selvin; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Tom Greene; Frederick Van Lente; Andrew S Levey; Josef Coresh Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: R D Perrone; T I Steinman; G J Beck; C I Skibinski; H D Royal; M Lawlor; L G Hunsicker Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 1990-09 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: L Y Agodoa; L Appel; G L Bakris; G Beck; J Bourgoignie; J P Briggs; J Charleston; D Cheek; W Cleveland; J G Douglas; M Douglas; D Dowie; M Faulkner; A Gabriel; J Gassman; T Greene; Y Hall; L Hebert; L Hiremath; K Jamerson; C J Johnson; J Kopple; J Kusek; J Lash; J Lea; J B Lewis; M Lipkowitz; S Massry; J Middleton; E R Miller; K Norris; D O'Connor; A Ojo; R A Phillips; V Pogue; M Rahman; O S Randall; S Rostand; G Schulman; W Smith; D Thornley-Brown; C C Tisher; R D Toto; J T Wright; S Xu Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-06-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jennifer J Gassman; Tom Greene; Jackson T Wright; Lawrence Agodoa; George Bakris; Gerald J Beck; Janice Douglas; Ken Jamerson; Julia Lewis; Michael Kutner; Otelio S Randall; Shin-Ru Wang Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Tamara Isakova; Timothy E Craven; Julia J Scialla; Thomas L Nickolas; Adrian Schnall; Joshua Barzilay; Ann V Schwartz Journal: Bone Date: 2015-04-30 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Pranav S Garimella; Ronit Katz; Kushang V Patel; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Chirag R Parikh; Joachim H Ix; Linda F Fried; Anne B Newman; Michael G Shlipak; Tamara B Harris; Mark J Sarnak Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Elizabeth W Dehmer; Milind A Phadnis; Erica P Gunderson; Cora E Lewis; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Stephanie M Engel; Michele Jonsson Funk; Holly Kramer; Abhijit V Kshirsagar; Gerardo Heiss Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2017-11-08 Impact factor: 11.072