COVID-19 in Patients with Glomerular Disease: Follow-Up Results from the IRoc-GN International Registry.

Background: The acute and long-term effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in individuals with GN are still unclear. To address this relevant issue, we created the International Registry of COVID-19 infection in GN. Methods: We collected serial information on kidney-related and -unrelated outcomes from 125 GN patients (63 hospitalized and 62 outpatients) and 83 non-GN hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and a median follow-up period of 6.4 (interquartile range 2.3-9.6) months after diagnosis. We used logistic regression for the analyses of clinical outcomes and linear mixed models for the longitudinal analyses of eGFR. All multiple regression models were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor use. Results: After adjustment for pre-COVID-19 eGFR and other confounders, mortality and AKI did not differ between GN patients and controls (adjusted odds ratio for AKI=1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 3.60; P=0.64). The main predictor of AKI was pre-COVID-19 eGFR (adjusted odds ratio per 1 SD unit decrease in eGFR=3.04; 95% CI, 1.76 to 5.28; P<0.001). GN patients developing AKI were less likely to recover pre-COVID-19 eGFR compared with controls (adjusted 6-month post-COVID-19 eGFR=0.41; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.56; times pre-COVID-19 eGFR). Shorter duration of GN diagnosis, higher pre-COVID-19 proteinuria, and diagnosis of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis or minimal change disease were associated with a lower post-COVID-19 eGFR. Conclusions: Pre-COVID-19 eGFR is the main risk factor for AKI regardless of GN diagnosis. However, GN patients are at higher risk of impaired eGFR recovery after COVID-19-associated AKI. These patients (especially those with high baseline proteinuria or a diagnosis of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis or minimal change disease) should be closely monitored not only during the acute phases of COVID-19 but also after its resolution.

Results from the IRoc-GN international registry of patients with COVID-19 and glomerular disease suggest close monitoring.

The effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on individuals with immune-mediated glomerulonephritis, who are often undergoing immunosuppressive treatments, are unknown. Therefore, we created the International Registry of COVID infection in glomerulonephritis (IRoc-GN) and identified 40 patients with glomerulonephritis and COVID-19 followed in centers in North America and Europe. Detailed information on glomerulonephritis diagnosis, kidney parameters, and baseline immunosuppression prior to infection were recorded, as well as clinical presentation, laboratory values, treatment, complications, and outcomes of COVID-19. This cohort was compared to 80 COVID-positive control cases from the general population without glomerulonephritis matched for the time of infection. The majority (70%) of the patients with glomerulonephritis and all the controls were hospitalized. Patients with glomerulonephritis had significantly higher mortality (15% vs. 5%, respectively) and acute kidney injury (39% vs. 14%) than controls, while the need for kidney replacement therapy was not statistically different between the two groups. Receiving immunosuppression or renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors at presentation did not increase the risk of death or acute kidney injury in the glomerulonephritis cohort. In the cohort with glomerulonephritis, lower serum albumin at presentation and shorter duration of glomerular disease were associated with greater risk of acute kidney injury and need for kidney replacement therapy. No differences in outcomes occurred between patients with primary glomerulonephritis versus glomerulonephritis associated with a systemic autoimmune disease (lupus or vasculitis). Thus, due to the higher mortality and risk of acute kidney injury than in the general population without glomerulonephritis, patients with glomerulonephritis and COVID-19 should be carefully monitored, especially when they present with low serum albumin levels.

EVALUATION OF THE ROYAL FREE HOSPITAL CIRRHOSIS GLOMERULAR FILTRATION RATE FORMULA IN HISPANIC PATIENTS WITH CIRRHOSIS: AN EXTERNAL VALIDATION.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) is the ideal method for adequate evaluation of kidney function. However, it is invasive, costly, and not widely accessible. Moreover, GFR estimation in patients with cirrhosis has been inaccurate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and validate the recently described Royal Free Hospital (RFH) formula in a Hispanic cohort of patients with LC and compare it with other formulas, including the CKD-EPI cystatin C equation. METHODS: GFR was measured through the renal clearance of Tc-99m DTPA; it was cross-sectionally evaluated and compared with GFRs that were estimated utilizing the following formulas: RFH, Cockcroft-Gault, 6-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease-6, CKD-EPI cystatin C, CKD-EPI Creatinine, and CKD-EPI Cystatin C-Creatinine. RESULTS: We included 76 patients (53% women). The mean measured GFR in the entire cohort was 64 ml/min/1.73m2; 54% of the patients had a GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 at the time of evaluation. The RFH formula and the CKD-EPI cystatin C formula showed the best performance, with a p30 of 62% and 59%, respectively. All formulas performed poorly when GFR was < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2. CONCLUSIONS: The RFH formula showed a better performance than the other formulas based on serum creatinine in a Hispanic population with LC. There was no difference in performance between the RFH formula and the CKD-EPI cystatin C formula.

LECT2 Amyloidosis in Kidney Transplantation: A Report of 5 Cases.

Leukocyte chemotactic factor 2 (LECT2) amyloidosis is a recently recognized entity that often affects the kidneys. Little information is available regarding kidney transplant outcomes in patients with LECT2 amyloidosis or who received kidney allografts containing LECT2 amyloid. We present clinical findings and allograft outcomes of 5 patients who received kidneys with donor-derived LECT2 amyloidosis. In all 5, LECT2 amyloidosis was discovered during protocol biopsies or in evaluation of suspected rejection. Less than 10% of kidney parenchyma was involved, with mostly interstitial and vascular deposits. Allograft function was not impaired and the amyloid deposits persisted for up to 8 years of follow-up. We conclude that kidneys with limited and localized LECT2 amyloid deposits that are otherwise suitable for transplantation need not be automatically discarded.

Evaluation of the royal free hospital cirrhosis glomerular filtration rate formula in hispanic patients with cirrhosis: an external validation

Abstract Background and Aims Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) is the ideal method for adequate evaluation of kidney function. However, it is invasive, costly, and not widely accessible. Moreover, GFR estimation in patients with cirrhosis has been inaccurate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and validate the recently described Royal Free Hospital (RFH) formula in a Hispanic cohort of patients with LC and compare it with other formulas, including the CKD-EPI cystatin C equation. Methods GFR was measured through the renal clearance of Tc-99m DTPA; it was cross-sectionally evaluated and compared with GFRs that were estimated utilizing the following formulas: RFH, Cockcroft-Gault, 6-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease-6, CKD-EPI cystatin C, CKD-EPI Creatinine, and CKD-EPI Cystatin C-Creatinine. Results We included 76 patients (53% women). The mean measured GFR in the entire cohort was 64 ml/min/1.73m2; 54% of the patients had a GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 at the time of evaluation. The RFH formula and the CKD-EPI cystatin C formula showed the best performance, with a p30 of 62% and 59%, respectively. All formulas performed poorly when GFR was < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2. Conclusions The RFH formula showed a better performance than the other formulas based on serum creatinine in a Hispanic population with LC. There was no difference in performance between the RFH formula and the CKD-EPI cystatin C formula.

Funcionamiento de las fórmulas MDRD-IDMS y CKD-EPI, en individuos mexicanos con función renal normal / Performance of MDRD-IDMS and CKD-EPI equations in Mexican individuals with normal renal function

Antecedentes: El funcionamiento de las fórmulas para la estimación de tasa de filtrado glomerular (TFG) CKD-EPI y MDRD en pacientes de origen hispano con función renal normal tiene pocos antecedentes y en México requiere validación. Material y métodos: Se incluyeron individuos mexicanos, adultos y previamente sanos. Se recabaron variables clínicas y se determinó el nivel de creatinina sérica para calcular las fórmulas CKD-EPI y MDRD-IDMS. Este resultado fue comparado con el estándar de referencia (TFG medida con Tc99DTPA). Se evaluaron otras variables clínicas que afectaran el funcionamiento de la fórmula CKD-EPI. Resultados: Se incluyeron 97 individuos voluntarios sanos, 55 varones y 42 mujeres; edad promedio 35 años (18 a 73). La creatinina media fue de 0,76 mg/dl (± 0,18). El funcionamiento de CKD-EPI fue significativamente mejor que el de MDRD-IDMS en todas las comparaciones (sesgo, correlación y exactitud). La diferencia entre los sesgos de las fórmulas fue 6,08 ml/min/1,73 m2 (IC 95 % 2,58 a 9,58) (p < 0,001). Las personas con índice de masa corporal (IMC) mayor de 25 kg/m2 presentaron un mejor funcionamiento que el grupo con menor IMC (diferencia de medias 7,39 ml/min/1,73 m2; IC 95 % 1,17 a 13,6; p < 0,02). Ambas fórmulas sobrestimaron la TFG. El IMC se asoció significativamente con el funcionamiento de la fórmula CKD-EPI (β 0,82; IC 95 % 0,085 a 1,56; p = 0,029). Conclusiones: En individuos adultos mexicanos sanos la fórmula CKD-EPI predice mejor la TFGm que la fórmula MDRD-IDMS. El IMC se asocia de manera significativa al funcionamiento de la fórmula CKD-EPI, siendo mejor en aquellos con IMC superior a 25 kg/m2. Ambas fórmulas sobrestiman la TFGm (AU)

Background: The performance of the CKD-EPI and MDRD formulae for estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in patients of Hispanic origin with normal renal function has been poorly explored and requires validation in Mexico. Material and method: We included previously healthy Mexican adults. We obtained clinical variables and determined serum creatinine to calculate the CKD-EPI and MDRD-IDMS formulae. These results were compared with the gold standard (GFR measured by Tc99DTPA). We evaluated other clinical variables that could affect the performance of the CKD-EPI formula. Results: A total of 97 healthy volunteers were included, 55 males and 42 females; the mean age was 35.8 years old (18 to 73). Mean creatinine was 0.76mg/dl (±0.18). CKD-EPI performance was significantly better than MDRD-IDMS in all comparisons (bias, correlation and accuracy). The bias difference between the formulae was 6.08ml/min/1.73m2 (95% CI 2.58 to 9.58) (p<.001). Individuals with a body mass index (BMI) above 25kg/m2 displayed a better performance than the group with a lower BMI (difference of means 7.39ml/min/1.73m2; 95% CI 1.17 to 13.6 p<.02). Both formulae overestimated the GFR. BMI was significantly associated with the performance of the CKD-EPI formula (β 0.82; 95% CI 0.085 to 1.56 p=.029). Conclusions: In healthy Mexican adults, the CKD-EPI formula is a better predictor of the mGFR than the MDRD-IDMS formula. BMI is significantly associated with the performance of the CKD-EPI formula and is better in those with a BMI greater than 25kg/m2. Both formulae overestimate mGFR (AU)

Performance of MDRD-IDMS and CKD-EPI equations in Mexican individuals with normal renal function.

BACKGROUND:  The performance of the CKD-EPI and MDRD formulae for estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in patients of Hispanic origin with normal renal function has been poorly explored and requires validation in Mexico.  MATERIAL AND METHOD:  We included previously healthy Mexican adults. We obtained clinical variables and determined serum creatinine to calculate the CKD-EPI and MDRD-IDMS formulae. These results were compared with the gold standard (GFR measured by Tc99DTPA). We evaluated other clinical variables that could affect the performance of the CKD-EPI formula.  RESULTS:  A total of 97 healthy volunteers were included, 55 males and 42 females; the mean age was 35.8 years old (18 to 73). Mean creatinine was 0.76mg/dl (±0.18). CKD-EPI performance was significantly better than MDRD-IDMS in all comparisons (bias, correlation and accuracy). The bias difference between the formulae was 6.08ml/min/1.73m2 (95% CI 2.58 to 9.58) (p<.001). Individuals with a body mass index (BMI) above 25kg/m2 displayed a better performance than the group with a lower BMI (difference of means 7.39ml/min/1.73m2; 95% CI 1.17 to 13.6 p<.02). Both formulae overestimated the GFR. BMI was significantly associated with the performance of the CKD-EPI formula (β 0.82; 95% CI 0.085 to 1.56 p=.029).  CONCLUSIONS:  In healthy Mexican adults, the CKD-EPI formula is a better predictor of the mGFR than the MDRD-IDMS formula. BMI is significantly associated with the performance of the CKD-EPI formula and is better in those with a BMI greater than 25kg/m2. Both formulae overestimate mGFR.