OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin is a chemotherapeutic agent which affects renal functions adversely. The best indicator of renal functions is glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement. Cystatin-C appears to be a good alternative to existing methods of measuring GFR. However, it is controversial whether Cystatin-C demonstrates GFR correctly for patients receiving chemotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between GFR values calculated by Cystatin-C based formulas, radionuclidic method (multiple blood sampling) and blood Cystatin-C values in patients with lung cancer, receiving cisplatin treatment in both pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with lung cancer who were going to receive cisplatin treatment were included in this study. However, the evaluation was performed with 20 patients since 16 of them could not complete the treatment. Blood Cystatin-C values, GFR values calculated via Cystatin-C based formulas, and radionuclidic method were investigated before and after the cisplatin treatment. RESULTS: After treatment significant decreases were detected in GFR values, obtained via radionuclidic measuring method. However, there was no significant difference in Cystatin-C values between pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. Also GFR values obtained by Cystatin-C based formulas were not significantly different in pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. There were meaningful correlations between radionuclidic method and Cystatin-C values and Cystatin-C based formulas before treatment. However, all correlations disappeared after the treatment. CONCLUSION: GFR values, calculated by Cystatin-C may not be reliable in following renal functions in patients receiving chemotherapy. When reliable monitoring of the renal functions is necessary radionuclidic method may be preferred in these patients.
OBJECTIVE:Cisplatin is a chemotherapeutic agent which affects renal functions adversely. The best indicator of renal functions is glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement. Cystatin-C appears to be a good alternative to existing methods of measuring GFR. However, it is controversial whether Cystatin-C demonstrates GFR correctly for patients receiving chemotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between GFR values calculated by Cystatin-C based formulas, radionuclidic method (multiple blood sampling) and blood Cystatin-C values in patients with lung cancer, receiving cisplatin treatment in both pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with lung cancer who were going to receive cisplatin treatment were included in this study. However, the evaluation was performed with 20 patients since 16 of them could not complete the treatment. Blood Cystatin-C values, GFR values calculated via Cystatin-C based formulas, and radionuclidic method were investigated before and after the cisplatin treatment. RESULTS: After treatment significant decreases were detected in GFR values, obtained via radionuclidic measuring method. However, there was no significant difference in Cystatin-C values between pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. Also GFR values obtained by Cystatin-C based formulas were not significantly different in pre-treatment and post-treatment periods. There were meaningful correlations between radionuclidic method and Cystatin-C values and Cystatin-C based formulas before treatment. However, all correlations disappeared after the treatment. CONCLUSION: GFR values, calculated by Cystatin-C may not be reliable in following renal functions in patients receiving chemotherapy. When reliable monitoring of the renal functions is necessary radionuclidic method may be preferred in these patients.