Assessment of GFR in Patients with Cancer: A Statement from the American Society of Onco-Nephrology.

Accurate assessment of GFR is crucial to guiding drug eligibility, dosing of systemic therapy, and minimizing the risks of both undertreatment and toxicity in patients with cancer. Up to 32% of patients with cancer have baseline CKD, and both malignancy and treatment may cause kidney injury and subsequent CKD. To date, there has been lack of guidance to standardize approaches to GFR estimation in the cancer population. In this two-part statement from the American Society of Onco-Nephrology, we present key messages for estimation of GFR in patients with cancer, including the choice of GFR estimating equation, use of race and body surface area adjustment, and anticancer drug dose-adjustment in the setting of CKD. These key messages are based on a systematic review of studies assessing GFR estimating equations using serum creatinine and cystatin C in patients with cancer, against a measured GFR comparator. The preponderance of current data involving validated GFR estimating equations involves the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations, with 2508 patients in whom CKD-EPI using serum creatinine and cystatin C was assessed (eight studies) and 15,349 in whom CKD-EPI with serum creatinine was assessed (22 studies). The former may have improved performance metrics and be less susceptible to shortfalls of eGFR using serum creatinine alone. Since included studies were moderate quality or lower, the American Society of Onco-Nephrology Position Committee rated the certainty of evidence as low. Additional studies are needed to assess the accuracy of other validated eGFR equations in patients with cancer. Given the importance of accurate and timely eGFR assessment, we advocate for the use of validated GFR estimating equations incorporating both serum creatinine and cystatin C in patients with cancer. Measurement of GFR via exogenous filtration markers should be considered in patients with cancer for whom eGFR results in borderline eligibility for therapies or clinical trials.

Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Diseases: An Interim Report From the NKF-ASN Task Force.

For almost 2 decades, equations that use serum creatinine, age, sex, and race to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) have included "race" as Black or non-Black. Given considerable evidence of disparities in health and health care delivery in African American communities, some regard keeping a race term in GFR equations as a practice that differentially influences access to care and kidney transplantation. Others assert that race captures important non-GFR determinants of serum creatinine and its removal from the calculation may perpetuate other disparities. The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a task force in 2020 to reassess the inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. This interim report details the process, initial assessment of evidence, and values defined regarding the use of race to estimate GFR. We organized activities in phases: (1) clarify the problem and examine evidence, (2) evaluate different approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) make recommendations. In phase 1, we constructed statements about the evidence and defined values regarding equity and disparities; race and racism; GFR measurement, estimation, and equation performance; laboratory standardization; and patient perspectives. We also identified several approaches to estimate GFR and a set of attributes to evaluate these approaches. Building on evidence and values, the attributes of alternative approaches to estimate GFR will be evaluated in the next phases and recommendations will be made.

Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Diseases: An Interim Report from the NKF-ASN Task Force.

For almost two decades, equations that use serum creatinine, age, sex, and race to eGFR have included "race" as Black or non-Black. Given considerable evidence of disparities in health and healthcare delivery in African American communities, some regard keeping a race term in GFR equations as a practice that differentially influences access to care and kidney transplantation. Others assert that race captures important non GFR determinants of serum creatinine and its removal from the calculation may perpetuate other disparities. The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a task force in 2020 to reassess the inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. This interim report details the process, initial assessment of evidence, and values defined regarding the use of race to estimate GFR. We organized activities in phases: (1) clarify the problem and examine evidence, (2) evaluate different approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) make recommendations. In phase one, we constructed statements about the evidence and defined values regarding equity and disparities; race and racism; GFR measurement, estimation, and equation performance; laboratory standardization; and patient perspectives. We also identified several approaches to estimate GFR and a set of attributes to evaluate these approaches. Building on evidence and values, the attributes of alternative approaches to estimate GFR will be evaluated in the next phases and recommendations will be made.

Kidney Disease, Race, and GFR Estimation.

Assessment of GFR is central to clinical practice, research, and public health. Current Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines recommend measurement of serum creatinine to estimate GFR as the initial step in GFR evaluation. Serum creatinine is influenced by creatinine metabolism as well as GFR; hence, all equations to estimate GFR from serum creatinine include surrogates for muscle mass, such as age, sex, race, height, or weight. The guideline-recommended equation in adults (the 2009 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration creatinine equation) includes a term for race (specified as black versus nonblack), which improves the accuracy of GFR estimation by accounting for differences in non-GFR determinants of serum creatinine by race in the study populations used to develop the equation. In that study, blacks had a 16% higher average measured GFR compared with nonblacks with the same age, sex, and serum creatinine. The reasons for this difference are only partly understood, and the use of race in GFR estimation has limitations. Some have proposed eliminating the race coefficient, but this would induce a systematic underestimation of measured GFR in blacks, with potential unintended consequences at the individual and population levels. We propose a more cautious approach that maintains and improves accuracy of GFR estimates and avoids disadvantaging any racial group. We suggest full disclosure of use of race in GFR estimation, accommodation of those who decline to identify their race, and shared decision making between health care providers and patients. We also suggest mindful use of cystatin C as a confirmatory test as well as clearance measurements. It would be preferable to avoid specification of race in GFR estimation if there was a superior, evidence-based substitute. The goal of future research should be to develop more accurate methods for GFR estimation that do not require use of race or other demographic characteristics.

Assessment of Glomerular Filtration Rate and End-Stage Kidney Disease Risk in Living Kidney Donor Candidates: A Paradigm for Evaluation, Selection, and Counseling.

Living donor kidney transplantation is the preferred treatment option for ESRD. However, recent data suggest a small increase in the long-term risk of kidney failure in living kidney donors when compared to healthy nondonors. These data have led to a need for reconsideration of how donor candidates are evaluated and selected for donation. A Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) work group completed a comprehensive clinical practice guideline for evaluation of living kidney donor candidates in 2017, based on systematic evidence review, de novo evidence generation, and expert opinion. Central to the evaluation framework is assessment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), which is used to screen for kidney disease and aid the prediction of long-term kidney failure risk after donation. Accurate estimation of the level of GFR and risk of kidney failure, and communication of estimated risks, can support evidence-based donor selection and shared decision-making. In this review, we discuss approaches to optimal GFR estimation in the donor evaluation process, long-term risk projection, and risk communication to donor candidates, integrating recommendations from the new KDIGO guideline, other recent literature, and experience from our own research and practice. We conclude by highlighting topics for further research in this important area of transplant medicine.

Effects of Race and Sex on Measured GFR: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Kidney failure disproportionately affects older blacks versus whites. The reasons are unknown and may be related to lower measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and higher levels of albuminuria in community-based population samples. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of a substudy of a prospective cohort. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Ancillary study following Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) visit 5. PREDICTOR: Age, sex, and race. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Measured GFR using plasma clearance of iohexol and urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR). RESULTS: GFR was measured in 294 participants. Mean age was 71±9 (SD) years, 47% were black, 48% were women, mean GFR was 73±19mL/min/1.73m2, and median ACR was 10.0 (IQR, 5.8-20.9) mg/g. Measured GFR was on average 1.02 (95% CI, 0.79-1.24) mL/min/1.73m2 lower per year older. Mean GFR indexed for body surface area was not different between blacks versus whites (mean difference, 2.94 [95% CI, -1.37 to 7.26] mL/min/1.73m2), but was lower in women than men (mean difference, -9.34 [95% CI, -13.53 to -5.15] mL/min/1.73m2); this difference persisted and remained significant after adjustment for demographics, clinical characteristics, and measures of body size. The difference between men and women, but not between blacks and whites, was substantially greater when GFR was not indexed for body surface area. ACR was higher in older versus younger participants (mean difference, 3.2% [95% CI, 1.5%-4.8%] per year), but geometric mean ratio of ACR did not differ between blacks versus whites (mean difference, 19.7%; 95% CI, -39.1% to 6.1%) or between men versus women (mean difference, -4.4%; 95% CI, -27.7% to 26.3%). LIMITATIONS: This is a study of survivors. People who agreed to participate were younger than those who refused. CONCLUSIONS: In this first community-based study that included blacks and whites, no differences in measured GFR between races were found, suggesting that other factors must account for the disproportionately higher burden of kidney failure in older blacks versus whites.

Multinational Assessment of Accuracy of Equations for Predicting Risk of Kidney Failure: A Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Identifying patients at risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression may facilitate more optimal nephrology care. Kidney failure risk equations, including such factors as age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and calcium and phosphate concentrations, were previously developed and validated in 2 Canadian cohorts. Validation in other regions and in CKD populations not under the care of a nephrologist is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the risk equations across different geographic regions and patient populations through individual participant data meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Thirty-one cohorts, including 721,357 participants with CKD stages 3 to 5 in more than 30 countries spanning 4 continents, were studied. These cohorts collected data from 1982 through 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Cohorts participating in the CKD Prognosis Consortium with data on end-stage renal disease. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were obtained and statistical analyses were performed between July 2012 and June 2015. Using the risk factors from the original risk equations, cohort-specific hazard ratios were estimated and combined using random-effects meta-analysis to form new pooled kidney failure risk equations. Original and pooled kidney failure risk equation performance was compared, and the need for regional calibration factors was assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kidney failure (treatment by dialysis or kidney transplant). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4 years of 721,357 participants with CKD, 23,829 cases kidney failure were observed. The original risk equations achieved excellent discrimination (ability to differentiate those who developed kidney failure from those who did not) across all cohorts (overall C statistic, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92 at 2 years; C statistic at 5 years, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.90); discrimination in subgroups by age, race, and diabetes status was similar. There was no improvement with the pooled equations. Calibration (the difference between observed and predicted risk) was adequate in North American cohorts, but the original risk equations overestimated risk in some non-North American cohorts. Addition of a calibration factor that lowered the baseline risk by 32.9% at 2 years and 16.5% at 5 years improved the calibration in 12 of 15 and 10 of 13 non-North American cohorts at 2 and 5 years, respectively (P = .04 and P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Kidney failure risk equations developed in a Canadian population showed high discrimination and adequate calibration when validated in 31 multinational cohorts. However, in some regions the addition of a calibration factor may be necessary.

GFR decline as an end point for clinical trials in CKD: a scientific workshop sponsored by the National Kidney Foundation and the US Food and Drug Administration.

The US Food and Drug Administration currently accepts halving of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), assessed as doubling of serum creatinine level, as a surrogate end point for the development of kidney failure in clinical trials of kidney disease progression. A doubling of serum creatinine level generally is a late event in chronic kidney disease (CKD); thus, there is great interest in considering alternative end points for clinical trials to shorten their duration, reduce sample size, and extend their conduct to patients with earlier stages of CKD. However, the relationship between lesser declines in GFR and the subsequent development of kidney failure has not been well characterized. The National Kidney Foundation and Food and Drug Administration sponsored a scientific workshop to critically examine available data to determine whether alternative GFR-based end points have sufficiently strong relationships with important clinical outcomes of CKD to be used in clinical trials. Based on a series of meta-analyses of cohorts and clinical trials and simulations of trial designs and analytic methods, the workshop concluded that a confirmed decline in estimated GFR of 30% over 2 to 3 years may be an acceptable surrogate end point in some circumstances, but the pattern of treatment effects on GFR must be examined, specifically acute effects on estimated GFR. An estimated GFR decline of 40% may be more broadly acceptable than a 30% decline across a wider range of baseline GFRs and patterns of treatment effects on GFR. However, there are other circumstances in which these end points could lead to a reduction in statistical power or erroneous conclusions regarding benefits or harms of interventions. We encourage careful consideration of these alternative end points in the design of future clinical trials.

Awareness of kidney disease and relationship to end-stage renal disease and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Often, patients with chronic kidney disease are reported to be unaware of it. We prospectively evaluated the association between awareness of kidney disease to end-stage renal disease and mortality. METHODS: We utilized 2000-2009 data from the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Early Evaluation Program. Mortality was determined by cross reference to the Social Security Administration Death Master File and development of end stage by cross reference with the United States Renal Data System. RESULTS: Of 109,285 participants, 28,244 (26%) had chronic kidney disease defined by albuminuria or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2). Only 9% (n=2660) reported being aware of kidney disease. Compared with those who were not aware, participants aware of chronic kidney disease had lower eGFR (49 vs 62 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) and a higher prevalence of albuminuria (52% vs. 46%), diabetes (47% vs 42%), cardiovascular disease (43% vs 28%), and cancer (23% vs 14%). Over 8.5 years of follow-up, aware participants compared with those unaware had a lower rate of survival for end stage (83% and 96%) and mortality (78% vs 81%), P <.001. After adjustment for demographics, socioeconomic factors, comorbidity, and severity of kidney disease, aware participants continued to demonstrate an increased risk for end-stage renal disease (hazard ratio 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.75; P <.0123) and mortality (hazard ratio 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.52; P <.0077) relative to unaware participants with chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients identified as having chronic kidney disease at a health screening, only a small proportion had been made aware of their diagnosis previously by clinicians. This subgroup was at a disproportionately high risk for mortality and end-stage renal disease.

Prognostic assessment of estimated glomerular filtration rate by the new Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation in comparison with the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reporting of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation is recommended for detection of chronic kidney disease and prediction of cardiovascular (CV) risk. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation is a newly developed and validated formula for eGFR that is more accurate at normal or near-normal eGFR. We aimed to assess the incremental prognostic accuracy of eGFR(CKD-EPI) versus eGFR(MDRD) in subjects at increased risk for CV disease. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the VALIANT trial that enrolled 14,527 patients with acute myocardial infarction with signs and symptoms of heart failure and/or left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The eGFR(MDRD) and eGFR(CKD-EPI) were computed using age, gender, race, and baseline creatinine level. Patients were categorized according to their eGFR using each equation. To assess the incremental prognostic value of eGFR(CKD-EPI), the net reclassification improvement was calculated for the composite end point of CV death, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart failure, or stroke. RESULTS: Twenty-four percent of the subjects were reclassified into a different eGFR category using eGFR(CKD-EPI). The composite end point occurred in 33% of the subjects in this cohort. Based on eGFR(CKD-EPI), subjects reclassified into a higher eGFR experienced fewer events than those reclassified into a lower eGFR (21% vs 43%). In unadjusted analyses, the composite end point risk in subjects with eGFR between 75 and 90 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) was comparable with the referent group (eGFR between 90 and 105) using eGFR(MDRD) (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% CI 0.9-1.2) but was significantly higher using eGFR(CKD-EPI) (hazard ratio 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4). The net reclassification improvement for eGFR(CKD-EPI) over eGFR(MDRD) was 8.7%. CONCLUSION: The CKD-EPI equation provides more accurate risk stratification than the MDRD Study equation in patients at high risk for CV disease, including identification of increased risk at mildly decreased eGFR.