BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of proteinuria is important in the diagnosis and management of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The reference standard test, 24-hour urinary protein excretion, is inconvenient and vulnerable to collection errors. Spot urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) is a convenient alternative and is in widespread use. However, day-to-day variability in PCR measurements has not been evaluated. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of day-to-day variability in spot urine PCR measurement. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Clinically stable outpatients with CKD (n = 145) attending a university hospital CKD clinic in Australia between July 2007 and April 2010. INDEX TEST: Spot urine PCR. OUTCOMES: Spot PCR variability was assessed and repeatability limits were determined using fractional polynomials. MEASUREMENTS: Spot PCRs were measured from urine samples collected at 9:00 am on consecutive days and 24-hour urinary protein excretion was collected concurrently. RESULTS: Paired results were analyzed from 145 patients: median age, 56 years; 59% men; and median 24-hour urinary protein excretion, 0.7 (range, 0.06-35.7) g/d. Day-to-day variability was substantial and increased in absolute terms, but decreased in relative terms with increasing baseline PCR. For patients with a low baseline PCR (20 mg/mmol [177 mg/g]), a change greater than ±160% (repeatability limits, 0-52 mg/mmol [0-460 mg/g]) is required to indicate a real change in proteinuria status with 95% certainty, whereas for those with a high baseline PCR (200 mg/mmol [1,768 mg/g]), a change of ±50% (decrease to <100 mg/mmol [<884 mg/g] or increase to >300 mg/mmol [>2,652 mg/g]) represents significant change. LIMITATIONS: These study results need to be replicated in other ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in PCR observed in patients with CKD, ranging from complete resolution to doubling of PCR values, could be due to inherent biological variation and may not indicate a change in disease status. This should be borne in mind when using PCR in the diagnosis and management of CKD.
BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of proteinuria is important in the diagnosis and management of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The reference standard test, 24-hour urinary protein excretion, is inconvenient and vulnerable to collection errors. Spot urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) is a convenient alternative and is in widespread use. However, day-to-day variability in PCR measurements has not been evaluated. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of day-to-day variability in spot urine PCR measurement. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Clinically stable outpatients with CKD (n = 145) attending a university hospital CKD clinic in Australia between July 2007 and April 2010. INDEX TEST: Spot urine PCR. OUTCOMES: Spot PCR variability was assessed and repeatability limits were determined using fractional polynomials. MEASUREMENTS: Spot PCRs were measured from urine samples collected at 9:00 am on consecutive days and 24-hour urinary protein excretion was collected concurrently. RESULTS: Paired results were analyzed from 145 patients: median age, 56 years; 59% men; and median 24-hour urinary protein excretion, 0.7 (range, 0.06-35.7) g/d. Day-to-day variability was substantial and increased in absolute terms, but decreased in relative terms with increasing baseline PCR. For patients with a low baseline PCR (20 mg/mmol [177 mg/g]), a change greater than ±160% (repeatability limits, 0-52 mg/mmol [0-460 mg/g]) is required to indicate a real change in proteinuria status with 95% certainty, whereas for those with a high baseline PCR (200 mg/mmol [1,768 mg/g]), a change of ±50% (decrease to <100 mg/mmol [<884 mg/g] or increase to >300 mg/mmol [>2,652 mg/g]) represents significant change. LIMITATIONS: These study results need to be replicated in other ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in PCR observed in patients with CKD, ranging from complete resolution to doubling of PCR values, could be due to inherent biological variation and may not indicate a change in disease status. This should be borne in mind when using PCR in the diagnosis and management of CKD.
Authors: Petter Bjornstad; Edward Nehus; Todd Jenkins; Mark Mitsnefes; Marva Moxey-Mims; John B Dixon; Thomas H Inge Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Frank B Cortazar; David E Leaf; Charles T Owens; Karen Laliberte; William F Pendergraft; John L Niles Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Ganesh Shidham; Isabelle Ayoub; Dan Birmingham; Paul Hebert; Brad Rovin; Betty Diamond; David Wofsy; Lee Hebert Journal: Kidney Int Rep Date: 2018-04-27
Authors: Christine Barrett; Lisa C Willcocks; Rachel B Jones; Ruth M Tarzi; Robert B Henderson; Gengqian Cai; Sophie I Gisbert; Alexandra S Belson; Caroline O Savage Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Jessica M Sontrop; Amit X Garg; Lihua Li; Kerri Gallo; Virginia Schumann; Jennifer Winick-Ng; William F Clark; Matthew A Weir Journal: Can J Kidney Health Dis Date: 2016-02-01