Cargando…

Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate from Serum Myo-Inositol, Valine, Creatinine and Cystatin C

Assessment of renal function relies on the estimation of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Existing eGFR equations, usually based on serum levels of creatinine and/or cystatin C, are not uniformly accurate across patient populations. In the present study, we expanded a recent proof-of-concept a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stämmler, Frank, Grassi, Marcello, Meeusen, Jeffrey W., Lieske, John C., Dasari, Surendra, Dubourg, Laurence, Lemoine, Sandrine, Ehrich, Jochen, Schiffer, Eric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34943527
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122291
Descripción
Sumario:Assessment of renal function relies on the estimation of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Existing eGFR equations, usually based on serum levels of creatinine and/or cystatin C, are not uniformly accurate across patient populations. In the present study, we expanded a recent proof-of-concept approach to optimize an eGFR equation targeting the adult population with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD), based on a nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) derived ‘metabolite constellation’ (GFR(NMR)). A total of 1855 serum samples were partitioned into development, internal validation and external validation datasets. The new GFR(NMR) equation used serum myo-inositol, valine, creatinine and cystatin C plus age and sex. GFR(NMR) had a lower bias to tracer measured GFR (mGFR) than existing eGFR equations, with a median bias (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 0.0 (−1.0; 1.0) mL/min/1.73 m(2) for GFR(NMR) vs. −6.0 (−7.0; −5.0) mL/min/1.73 m(2) for the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation that combines creatinine and cystatin C (CKD-EPI(2012)) (p < 0.0001). Accuracy (95% CI) within 15% of mGFR (1-P15) was 38.8% (34.3; 42.5) for GFR(NMR) vs. 47.3% (43.2; 51.5) for CKD-EPI(2012) (p < 0.010). Thus, GFR(NMR) holds promise as an alternative way to assess eGFR with superior accuracy in adult patients with and without CKD.