The accuracy of cystatin C and commonly used creatinine-based methods for detecting moderate and mild chronic kidney disease in diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of measuring serum cystatin C levels for detecting various stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in diabetes is still unclear. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of 251 subjects, a reference glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured using (99c)Tc-DTPA plasma clearance (iGFR). Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent clinical and biochemical associations with serum cystatin C and iGFR levels. The diagnostic accuracy of cystatin C and commonly used creatinine-based methods of measuring renal function (serum creatinine, the MDRD four-variable and Cockcroft-Gault formulae) for detecting mild and moderate CKD was also compared. RESULTS: In the entire study population the same five variables, age, urinary albumin excretion rates, haemoglobin, history of macrovascular disease and triglyceride levels were independently associated with both cystatin C and iGFR levels. A serum cystatin C level cut-off > 82.1 nmol/l (1.10 mg/l) had the best test characteristics as a screening tool for detecting moderate CKD (< 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)) when compared with creatinine-based methods. At the upper threshold for mild CKD (< 90 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)), cystatin C also had greater diagnostic accuracy than creatinine, but had similar diagnostic accuracy when compared with creatinine-based formulae for predicting renal function. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the clinical and biochemical parameters associated with serum cystatin C levels are closely linked to those associated with GFR and highlights the potential usefulness of screening for moderate or mild CKD in subjects with diabetes by simply measuring serum cystatin C levels.

Estimating glomerular filtration rate in diabetes: a comparison of cystatin-C- and creatinine-based methods.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We compared the predictive performance of a GFR based on serum cystatin C levels with commonly used creatinine-based methods in subjects with diabetes. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of 251 consecutive clinic patients, the mean reference (plasma clearance of (99m)Tc-diethylene-triamine-penta-acetic acid) GFR (iGFR) was 88+/-2 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2). A regression equation describing the relationship between iGFR and 1/cystatin C levels was derived from a test population (n=125) to allow for the estimation of GFR by cystatin C (eGFR-cystatin C). The predictive performance of eGFR-cystatin C, the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease 4 variable formula (MDRD-4) and Cockcroft-Gault (C-G) formulas were then compared in a validation population (n=126). RESULTS: There was no difference in renal function (ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2)) as measured by iGFR (89.2+/-3.0), eGFR-cystatin C (86.8+/-2.5), MDRD-4 (87.0+/-2.8) or C-G (92.3+/-3.5). All three estimates of renal function had similar precision and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Estimates of GFR based solely on serum cystatin C levels had the same predictive potential when compared with the MDRD-4 and C-G formulas.