Luciano da Silva Selistre1,2,3,4, Dener L Rech2, Vandréa de Souza1,2,4, Jean Iwaz5,6,7, Sandrine Lemoine1,5,8, Laurence Dubourg1,2,5,9. 1. Service de Néphrologie, Dialyse, Hypertension et Exploration Fonctionnelle Rénale, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France. 2. Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências da Saúde Universidade de Caxias do Sul, Caxias do Sul, Brazil. 3. CAPES Foundation, Ministry of Education of Brazil, Brasilia. 4. Núcleo de Apoio à Pesquisa-COEDI, Hospital Geral de Caxias do Sul, Caxias do Sul, Brasil. 5. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France. 6. Service de Biostatistique-Bioinformatique, Pôle Santé Publique, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France. 7. CNRS, UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Évolutive, Équipe Biostatistique-Santé, Villeurbanne, France. 8. Laboratoire CarMeN, Institution National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale 1060Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France. 9. Laboratoire de Biologie Tissulaire et Ingénierie Thérapeutique (UMR 5305 CNRS/Université Claude Bernard, Lyon 1), Lyon, France.
Abstract
Importance: Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is useful in many clinical conditions. However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of GFR-estimating equations in older adults at various degrees of kidney impairment. Objective: To determine the performance of plasma-creatinine-based equations Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Lund-Malmö Revised, (LMR), full age spectrum (FAS), and Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) 1 in older adults across a broad spectrum of GFRs. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center cross-sectional study performed in France including 2247 participants aged 65 to 90 years who underwent inulin GFR measurements from July 1, 2003, to July 30, 2017, for suspected or established renal dysfunction, for renal risk, before kidney donation, or after kidney transplant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measure was GRF measured by inulin clearance. Equation performance criteria considered bias (difference between estimated and measured GFR), precision (interquartile range of the median difference), and accuracy P30 (percentage of estimated GFRs lying between [measured GFR - 30% of measured GFR] and [measured GFR + 30% of measured GFR]). Results: The mean (SD) age of the 2247 participants was 71.5 (5) years and 1192 (53.0%) were male. The difference in median (95% CI) bias was significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (-4.0 [-4.0 to -3.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; P < .001]) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (-2.0 [-3.5 to -2.5] mL/min/1.73 m2, P < .001) but not significant between CKD-EPI vs BIS 1 (0.0 [-1.5 to 0.5], P = .07, Mood test). In patients aged 65 to 74 years with measured GFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2, the difference in median P30 (95% CI) was not significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (P = .08) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (P = .48) but significant vs BIS 1 (P = .004, McNemar test). In subjects 75 years and older, with measured GFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, LMR and BIS 1 were more accurate than CKD-EPI and FAS (P30 = 74.5 [70.0-79.5] and 73.0 [68.0-78.0] vs 69.0 [64.5-74.0] and 69.0 [65.5-72.0]). In all patients, despite small statistical differences, the performance of CKD-EPI equation was not clinically different from that of LMR, FAS, or BIS 1. Conclusions and Relevance: In a referral group of patients 65 years and older who had GFR estimated using CDK-EPI, LMR, BIS 1, and FAS equations, a comparison with renal inulin clearance found that none of the equations had a superior diagnostic performance. Each had limitations regarding accuracy.
Importance: Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is useful in many clinical conditions. However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of GFR-estimating equations in older adults at various degrees of kidney impairment. Objective: To determine the performance of plasma-creatinine-based equations Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Lund-Malmö Revised, (LMR), full age spectrum (FAS), and Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) 1 in older adults across a broad spectrum of GFRs. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center cross-sectional study performed in France including 2247 participants aged 65 to 90 years who underwent inulin GFR measurements from July 1, 2003, to July 30, 2017, for suspected or established renal dysfunction, for renal risk, before kidney donation, or after kidney transplant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measure was GRF measured by inulin clearance. Equation performance criteria considered bias (difference between estimated and measured GFR), precision (interquartile range of the median difference), and accuracy P30 (percentage of estimated GFRs lying between [measured GFR - 30% of measured GFR] and [measured GFR + 30% of measured GFR]). Results: The mean (SD) age of the 2247 participants was 71.5 (5) years and 1192 (53.0%) were male. The difference in median (95% CI) bias was significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (-4.0 [-4.0 to -3.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; P < .001]) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (-2.0 [-3.5 to -2.5] mL/min/1.73 m2, P < .001) but not significant between CKD-EPI vs BIS 1 (0.0 [-1.5 to 0.5], P = .07, Mood test). In patients aged 65 to 74 years with measured GFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2, the difference in median P30 (95% CI) was not significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (P = .08) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (P = .48) but significant vs BIS 1 (P = .004, McNemar test). In subjects 75 years and older, with measured GFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, LMR and BIS 1 were more accurate than CKD-EPI and FAS (P30 = 74.5 [70.0-79.5] and 73.0 [68.0-78.0] vs 69.0 [64.5-74.0] and 69.0 [65.5-72.0]). In all patients, despite small statistical differences, the performance of CKD-EPI equation was not clinically different from that of LMR, FAS, or BIS 1. Conclusions and Relevance: In a referral group of patients 65 years and older who had GFR estimated using CDK-EPI, LMR, BIS 1, and FAS equations, a comparison with renal inulin clearance found that none of the equations had a superior diagnostic performance. Each had limitations regarding accuracy.
Authors: Li Fan; Andrew S Levey; Vilmundur Gudnason; Gudny Eiriksdottir; Margret B Andresdottir; Hrefna Gudmundsdottir; Olafur S Indridason; Runolfur Palsson; Gary Mitchell; Lesley A Inker Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Tom Greene; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Gerald J Beck; Marc Froissart; Lee L Hamm; Julia B Lewis; Michael Mauer; Gerjan J Navis; Michael W Steffes; Paul W Eggers; Josef Coresh; Andrew S Levey Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2010-06-16 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Stein I Hallan; Kunihiro Matsushita; Yingying Sang; Bakhtawar K Mahmoodi; Corri Black; Areef Ishani; Nanne Kleefstra; David Naimark; Paul Roderick; Marcello Tonelli; Jack F M Wetzels; Brad C Astor; Ron T Gansevoort; Adeera Levin; Chi-Pang Wen; Josef Coresh Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sabrina Garasto; Sergio Fusco; Francesco Corica; Maria Rosignuolo; Antonio Marino; Alberto Montesanto; Francesco De Rango; Marcello Maggio; Vincenzo Mari; Andrea Corsonello; Fabrizia Lattanzio Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Venceslau A Coelho; Giovani Gn Santos; Carla M Avesani; Cicero Italo L Bezerra; Luana Cristina A Silva; Julia C Lauar; Bengt Lindholm; Peter Stenvinkel; Wilson Jacob-Filho; Irene L Noronha; Roberto Zatz; Rosa M A Moysés; Rosilene M Elias Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Andrea Corsonello; Regina Roller-Wirnsberger; Gerhard Wirnsberger; Johan Ärnlöv; Axel C Carlsson; Lisanne Tap; Francesco Mattace-Raso; Francesc Formiga; Rafael Moreno-Gonzalez; Christian Weingart; Cornel Sieber; Tomasz Kostka; Agnieszka Guligowska; Pedro Gil; Sara Lainez Martinez; Rada Artzi-Medvedik; Itshak Melzer; Fabrizia Lattanzio Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Andrea Corsonello; Paolo Fabbietti; Francesc Formiga; Rafael Moreno-Gonzalez; Lisanne Tap; Francesco Mattace-Raso; Regina Roller-Wirnsberger; Gerhard Wirnsberger; Johan Ärnlöv; Axel C Carlsson; Christian Weingart; Ellen Freiberger; Tomasz Kostka; Agnieszka Guligowska; Pedro Gil; Sara Lainez Martinez; Itshak Melzer; Ilan Yehoshua; Fabrizia Lattanzio Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-10-02 Impact factor: 3.921