Josef Coresh1, Lesley A Inker2, Yingying Sang1, Jingsha Chen1, Tariq Shafi1, Wendy S Post1, Michael G Shlipak3, Lisa Ford4, Kelli Goodman4, Regis Perichon4, Tom Greene5, Andrew S Levey2. 1. Departments of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of General Internal Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 4. Metabolon, Inc., Morrisville, NC, USA. 5. Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) using estimated glomerular filtration rate creatinine (eGFRcr) is central to clinical practice but has limitations. We tested the hypothesis that serum metabolomic profiling can identify novel markers that in combination can provide more accurate GFR estimates. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 200 African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK) and 265 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) participants with measured GFR (mGFR). Untargeted gas chromatography/dual mass spectrometry- and liquid chromatography/dual mass spectrometry-based quantification was followed by the development of targeted assays for 15 metabolites. On the log scale, GFR was estimated from single- and multiple-metabolite panels and compared with eGFR using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology equations with creatinine and/or cystatin C using established metrics, including the proportion of errors >30% of mGFR (1-P30), before and after bias correction. RESULTS: Of untargeted metabolites in the AASK and MESA, 283 of 780 (36%) and 387 of 1447 (27%), respectively, were significantly correlated (P ≤ 0.001) with mGFR. A targeted metabolite panel eGFR developed in the AASK and validated in the MESA was more accurate (1-P30 3.7 and 1.9%, respectively) than eGFRcr [11.2 and 18.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both)] and estimating GFR using cystatin C (eGFRcys) [10.6% (P = 0.02) and 9.1% (P < 0.05), respectively] but was not consistently better than eGFR using both creatinine and cystatin C [3.7% (P > 0.05) and 9.1% (P < 0.05), respectively]. A panel excluding creatinine and demographics still performed well [1-P30 6.4% (P = 0.11) and 3.4% (P < 0.001) in the AASK and MESA] versus eGFRcr. CONCLUSIONS: Multimetabolite panels can enable accurate GFR estimation. Metabolomic equations, preferably excluding creatinine and demographic characteristics, should be tested for robustness and generalizability as a potential confirmatory test when eGFRcr is unreliable.
BACKGROUND: Estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) using estimated glomerular filtration rate creatinine (eGFRcr) is central to clinical practice but has limitations. We tested the hypothesis that serum metabolomic profiling can identify novel markers that in combination can provide more accurate GFR estimates. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 200 African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK) and 265 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) participants with measured GFR (mGFR). Untargeted gas chromatography/dual mass spectrometry- and liquid chromatography/dual mass spectrometry-based quantification was followed by the development of targeted assays for 15 metabolites. On the log scale, GFR was estimated from single- and multiple-metabolite panels and compared with eGFR using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology equations with creatinine and/or cystatin C using established metrics, including the proportion of errors >30% of mGFR (1-P30), before and after bias correction. RESULTS: Of untargeted metabolites in the AASK and MESA, 283 of 780 (36%) and 387 of 1447 (27%), respectively, were significantly correlated (P ≤ 0.001) with mGFR. A targeted metabolite panel eGFR developed in the AASK and validated in the MESA was more accurate (1-P30 3.7 and 1.9%, respectively) than eGFRcr [11.2 and 18.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both)] and estimating GFR using cystatin C (eGFRcys) [10.6% (P = 0.02) and 9.1% (P < 0.05), respectively] but was not consistently better than eGFR using both creatinine and cystatin C [3.7% (P > 0.05) and 9.1% (P < 0.05), respectively]. A panel excluding creatinine and demographics still performed well [1-P30 6.4% (P = 0.11) and 3.4% (P < 0.001) in the AASK and MESA] versus eGFRcr. CONCLUSIONS:Multimetabolite panels can enable accurate GFR estimation. Metabolomic equations, preferably excluding creatinine and demographic characteristics, should be tested for robustness and generalizability as a potential confirmatory test when eGFRcr is unreliable.
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: Shoshana H Ballew; Yan Chen; Natalie R Daya; Job G Godino; B Gwen Windham; Mara McAdams-DeMarco; Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin; Morgan E Grams Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Eugene P Rhee; Clary B Clish; Anahita Ghorbani; Martin G Larson; Sammy Elmariah; Elizabeth McCabe; Qiong Yang; Susan Cheng; Kerry Pierce; Amy Deik; Amanda L Souza; Laurie Farrell; Carly Domos; Robert W Yeh; Igor Palacios; Kenneth Rosenfield; Ramachandran S Vasan; Jose C Florez; Thomas J Wang; Caroline S Fox; Robert E Gerszten Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Bing Yu; Yan Zheng; Jennifer A Nettleton; Danny Alexander; Josef Coresh; Eric Boerwinkle Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-07-10 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Anna Köttgen; Nicole L Glazer; Abbas Dehghan; Shih-Jen Hwang; Ronit Katz; Man Li; Qiong Yang; Vilmundur Gudnason; Lenore J Launer; Tamara B Harris; Albert V Smith; Dan E Arking; Brad C Astor; Eric Boerwinkle; Georg B Ehret; Ingo Ruczinski; Robert B Scharpf; Yii-Der Ida Chen; Ian H de Boer; Talin Haritunians; Thomas Lumley; Mark Sarnak; David Siscovick; Emelia J Benjamin; Daniel Levy; Ashish Upadhyay; Yurii S Aulchenko; Albert Hofman; Fernando Rivadeneira; André G Uitterlinden; Cornelia M van Duijn; Daniel I Chasman; Guillaume Paré; Paul M Ridker; W H Linda Kao; Jacqueline C Witteman; Josef Coresh; Michael G Shlipak; Caroline S Fox Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2009-05-10 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Conall M O'Seaghdha; Adrienne Tin; Qiong Yang; Ronit Katz; Yongmei Liu; Tamara Harris; Brad Astor; Josef Coresh; Caroline S Fox; W H Linda Kao; Michael G Shlipak Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2013-08-07 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Monika A Niewczas; Tammy L Sirich; Anna V Mathew; Jan Skupien; Robert P Mohney; James H Warram; Adam Smiles; Xiaoping Huang; Walker Walker; Jaeman Byun; Edward D Karoly; Elizabeth M Kensicki; Gerard T Berry; Joseph V Bonventre; Subramaniam Pennathur; Timothy W Meyer; Andrzej S Krolewski Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2014-01-15 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Casey M Rebholz; Aditya Surapaneni; Andrew S Levey; Mark J Sarnak; Lesley A Inker; Lawrence J Appel; Josef Coresh; Morgan E Grams Journal: J Nutr Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Arthur M Lee; Jian Hu; Yunwen Xu; Alison G Abraham; Rui Xiao; Josef Coresh; Casey Rebholz; Jingsha Chen; Eugene P Rhee; Harold I Feldman; Vasan S Ramachandran; Paul L Kimmel; Bradley A Warady; Susan L Furth; Michelle R Denburg Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 14.978
Authors: Tiffany A Freed; Josef Coresh; Lesley A Inker; Douglas R Toal; Regis Perichon; Jingsha Chen; Kelli D Goodman; Qibo Zhang; Jessie K Conner; Deirdre M Hauser; Kate E T Vroom; Maria L Oyaski; Jacob E Wulff; Gudný Eiríksdóttir; Vilmundur Gudnason; Vicente E Torres; Lisa A Ford; Andrew S Levey Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2019-01-15 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Thomas J Velenosi; Benjamin K A Thomson; Nicholas C Tonial; Adrien A E RaoPeters; Megan A Mio; Gilles A Lajoie; Amit X Garg; Andrew A House; Bradley L Urquhart Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Silvia M Titan; Neil R Powe; Josef Coresh; Lesley A Inker Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Nan Chen; Hao Shi; Luxia Zhang; Li Zuo; Jingyuan Xie; Danshu Xie; Amy B Karger; Shiyuan Miao; Hong Ren; Wen Zhang; Weiming Wang; Yujing Pan; Wei Minji; Zhun Sui; Aghogho Okparavero; Andrew Simon; Juhi Chaudhari; John H Eckfeldt; Lesley A Inker; Andrew S Levey Journal: Kidney Med Date: 2020-01-31