Iohexol Plasma Clearance Measurement Protocol Standardization for Adults - a Consensus Paper of the European Kidney Function Consortium.

International consensus supports the development of standardized protocols for measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) to facilitate the integration of mGFR testing in both clinical and research settings. To this end, the European Kidney Function Consortium convened an international group of experts with relevant experience in mGFR. The working group performed an extensive literature search to inform the development of recommendations for mGFR determination using one-compartment plasma clearance models and iohexol as the exogenous filtration marker. Iohexol was selected as it is non-radio labeled, inexpensive, safe, can be assayed at a central laboratory, and the other commonly used non-radio labeled tracers have been (inulin) or are soon to be (iothalamate) discontinued. A plasma clearance model was selected over urine clearance as it requires no urine collection. A one-compartment was preferred to two compartments as it requires fewer samples. The recommendations are based on published evidence complemented by expert opinion. The consensus paper covers practical advice for patients and health professionals, preparation, administration and safety aspects of iohexol, laboratory analysis, blood sample collection and sampling times using both multiple and single sample protocols, description of the mGFR mathematical calculations as well as implementation strategies. Supplementary materials include patient and provider information sheets, standard operating procedures, a study protocol template, and support for mGFR calculation.

Association of Intra-individual Differences in Estimated GFR by Creatinine Versus Cystatin C With Incident Heart Failure.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is associated with heart failure (HF) risk. However, eGFR based on cystatin C (eGFRcys) and creatinine (eGFRcr) may differ substantially within an individual. The clinical implications of these differences for risk of HF among persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 4,512 adults with CKD and without prevalent HF who enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study. EXPOSURE: Difference in GFR estimates (eGFRdiff; ie, eGFRcys minus eGFRcr). OUTCOME: Incident HF hospitalization. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Fine-Gray proportional subhazards regression was used to investigate the associations of baseline, time-updated, and slope of eGFRdiff with incident HF. RESULTS: Of 4,512 participants, one-third had eGFRcys and eGFRcr values that differed by over 15 mL/min/1.73 m2. In multivariable-adjusted models, each 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 lower baseline eGFRdiff was associated with higher risk of incident HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20 [95% CI, 1.07-1.34]). In time-updated analyses, those with eGFRdiff less than -15 mL/min/1.73 m2 had higher risk of incident HF hospitalization (HR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.39-2.86]), and those with eGFRdiff ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2 had lower risk of incident HF hospitalization (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.91]) compared with participants with similar eGFRcys and eGFRcr. Participants with faster declines in eGFRcys relative to eGFRcr had higher risk of incident HF (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.19-1.85]) compared with those in whom eGFRcys and eGFRcr declined in parallel. LIMITATIONS: Entry into the CRIC Study was determined by eGFRcr, which constrained the range of baseline eGFRcr-but not eGFRcys-values. CONCLUSIONS: Among persons with CKD who have large differences between eGFRcys and eGFRcr, risk for incident HF is more strongly associated with eGFRcys. Diverging slopes between eGFRcys and eGFRcr over time are also independently associated with risk of incident HF.

A Unifying Approach for GFR Estimation: Recommendations of the NKF-ASN Task Force on Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: In response to a national call for re-evaluation of the use of race in clinical algorithms, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a Task Force to reassess inclusion of race in the estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. PROCESS & DELIBERATIONS: The Task Force organized its activities over 10 months in phases to (1) clarify the problem and evidence regarding GFR estimating equations in the United States (described previously in an interim report), and, in this final report, (2) evaluate approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) provide recommendations. We identified 26 approaches for the estimation of GFR that did or did not consider race and narrowed our focus, by consensus, to 5 of those approaches. We holistically evaluated each approach considering 6 attributes: assay availability and standardization; implementation; population diversity in equation development; performance compared with measured GFR; consequences to clinical care, population tracking, and research; and patient centeredness. To arrive at a unifying approach to estimate GFR, we integrated information and evidence from many sources in assessing strengths and weaknesses in attributes for each approach, recognizing the number of Black and non-Black adults affected. RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) For US adults (>85% of whom have normal kidney function), we recommend immediate implementation of the CKD-EPI creatinine equation refit without the race variable in all laboratories in the United States because it does not include race in the calculation and reporting, included diversity in its development, is immediately available to all laboratories in the United States, and has acceptable performance characteristics and potential consequences that do not disproportionately affect any one group of individuals. (2) We recommend national efforts to facilitate increased, routine, and timely use of cystatin C, especially to confirm estimated GFR in adults who are at risk for or have chronic kidney disease, because combining filtration markers (creatinine and cystatin C) is more accurate and would support better clinical decisions than either marker alone. If ongoing evidence supports acceptable performance, the CKD-EPI eGFR-cystatin C (eGFRcys) and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys_R) refit without the race variables should be adopted to provide another first-line test, in addition to confirmatory testing. (3) Research on GFR estimation with new endogenous filtration markers and on interventions to eliminate race and ethnic disparities should be encouraged and funded. An investment in science is needed for newer approaches that generate accurate, unbiased, and precise GFR measurement and estimation without the inclusion of race, and that promote health equity and do not generate disparate care. IMPLEMENTATION: This unified approach, without specification of race, should be adopted across the United States. High-priority and multistakeholder efforts should implement this solution.

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.

Measurement and Estimation of GFR for Use in Clinical Practice: Core Curriculum 2021.

Assessment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is fundamental to clinical practice, public health, and research. The kidney has several critical functions; GFR is used as an overall assessment of these kidney functions. GFR is used to diagnose, stage, and manage chronic kidney disease (CKD); ascertain the prognosis for chronic kidney disease-related events and mortality; and determine drug dosages. GFR is the rate at which the glomerulus filters plasma to produce an ultrafiltrate and can be assessed from clearance or serum levels of filtration markers. Clearance measurements using exogenous filtration markers are difficult to perform in routine clinical practice, so GFR is more commonly estimated through equations based on serum concentrations of endogenous filtration markers, most commonly creatinine. These GFR estimates are reasonably accurate, but optimal care for patients may require a confirmatory test for a more accurate GFR assessment. Confirmatory tests currently available include cystatin C-based equations, urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers, or urinary clearance of creatinine. Appreciation of the concept of GFR and methods for optimal assessment in routine practice or special circumstances, and their strengths and limitations, are critical in making judicious use of the available tools.

A New Panel-Estimated GFR, Including ß2-Microglobulin and ß-Trace Protein and Not Including Race, Developed in a Diverse Population.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation based on creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) is more accurate than estimated GFR (eGFR) based on creatinine or cystatin C alone (eGFRcr or eGFRcys, respectively), but the inclusion of creatinine in eGFRcr-cys requires specification of a person's race. ß2-Microglobulin (B2M) and ß-trace protein (BTP) are alternative filtration markers that appear to be less influenced by race than creatinine is. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Development in a pooled population of 7 studies with 5,017 participants with and without chronic kidney disease. External validation in a pooled population of 7 other studies with 2,245 participants. TESTS COMPARED: Panel eGFR using B2M and BTP in addition to cystatin C (3-marker panel) or creatinine and cystatin C (4-marker panel) with and without age and sex or race. OUTCOMES: GFR measured as the urinary clearance of iothalamate, plasma clearance of iohexol, or plasma clearance of [51Cr]EDTA. RESULTS: Mean measured GFRs were 58.1 and 83.2 mL/min/1.73 m2, and the proportions of Black participants were 38.6% and 24.0%, in the development and validation populations, respectively. In development, addition of age and sex improved the performance of all equations compared with equations without age and sex, but addition of race did not further improve the performance. In validation, the 4-marker panels were more accurate than the 3-marker panels (P < 0.001). The 3-marker panel without race was more accurate than eGFRcys (percentage of estimates greater than 30% different from measured GFR [1 - P30] of 15.6% vs 17.4%; P = 0.01), and the 4-marker panel without race was as accurate as eGFRcr-cys (1 - P30 of 8.6% vs 9.4%; P = 0.2). Results were generally consistent across subgroups. LIMITATIONS: No representation of participants with severe comorbid illness and from geographic areas outside of North America and Europe. CONCLUSIONS: The 4-marker panel eGFR is as accurate as eGFRcr-cys without requiring specification of race. A more accurate race-free eGFR could be an important advance.

The Difference Between Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated GFR and Associations With Frailty and Adverse Outcomes: A Cohort Analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: In prior research and in practice, the difference between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculated from cystatin C level and eGFR calculated from creatinine level has not been assessed for clinical significance and relevance. We evaluated whether these differences contain important information about frailty. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 9,092 hypertensive SPRINT participants who had baseline measurements of serum creatinine, cystatin C, and frailty. EXPOSURE: eGFRs calculated using CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) equations (eGFRcys and eGFRcr), and eGFRDiff, calculated as eGFRcys-eGFRcr. OUTCOMES: A validated 35-item frailty index that included questionnaire data for general and physical health, limitations of activities, pain, depression, sleep, energy level, self-care, and smoking status, as well as medical history, cognitive assessment, and laboratory data. We defined frailty as frailty index score>0.21 (range, 0-1). The incidence of injurious falls, hospitalizations, cardiovascular events, and mortality was also recorded. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We used logistic regression to model the cross-sectional association of baseline eGFRDiff with frailty among all SPRINT participants. Adjusted proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of eGFRDiff with adverse outcomes and mortality. RESULTS: Mean age was 68±9 (SD) years, mean eGFRcys and eGFRcr were 73±23 and 72±20mL/min/1.73m2, and mean eGFRDiff was 0.5±15mL/min/1.73m2. In adjusted models, each 1-SD higher eGFRDiff was associated with 24% lower odds of prevalent frailty (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.81), as well as with lower incidence rate of injurious falls (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77-0.92), hospitalization (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88-0.95), cardiovascular events (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97), and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.63-0.82); P<0.01. LIMITATIONS: Gold-standard measure of kidney function and assessment of muscle mass were not available. CONCLUSIONS: The difference between eGFRcys and eGFRcr is associated with frailty and health status. Positive eGFRDiff is strongly associated with lower risks for longitudinal adverse outcomes and mortality, even after adjusting for chronic kidney disease stage and baseline frailty.

Biological Variability of Estimated GFR and Albuminuria in CKD.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Determining whether a change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or albuminuria is clinically significant requires knowledge of short-term within-person variability of the measurements, which few studies have addressed in the setting of chronic kidney disease. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with multiple collections over less than 4 weeks. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Clinically stable outpatients with chronic kidney disease (N=50; mean age, 56.8 years; median eGFR, 40mL/min/1.73m2; median urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR), 173mg/g). EXPOSURE: Repeat measurements from serially collected samples across 3 study visits. OUTCOMES: Measurements of urine albumin concentration (UAC), UACR, and plasma creatinine, cystatin C, ß2-microglobulin (B2M), and beta trace protein (BTP). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We calculated within-person coefficients of variation (CVw) values and corresponding reference change positive and negative (RCVpos and RCVneg) values using log-transformed measurements. RESULTS: Median CVw (RCVpos; RCVneg) values of filtration markers were 5.4% (+16%; -14%) for serum creatinine, 4.1% (+12%; -11%) for cystatin C, 7.4% (+23%; -18%) for BTP, and 5.6% (+17%; -14%) for B2M. Results for albuminuria were 33.2% (+145%; -59%) for first-morning UAC, 50.6% (+276%; -73%) for random spot UAC, 32.5% (+141%; -58%) for first-morning UACR, and 29.7% (124%; -55%) for random spot UACR. CVw values for filtration markers were comparable across the range of baseline eGFRs. CVw values for UAC and UACR were comparable across the range of baseline albuminuria values. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size limits the ability to detect differences in variability across markers. Participants were recruited and followed up in a clinical and not research setting, so some preanalytical factors could not be controlled. CONCLUSIONS: eGFR markers appear to have relatively low short-term within-person variability, whereas variability in albuminuria appears to be high, making it difficult to distinguish random variability from meaningful biologic changes.

Rethinking CKD Evaluation: Should We Be Quantifying Basal or Stimulated GFR to Maximize Precision and Sensitivity?

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an increasing clinical problem. Although clinical risk factors and biomarkers for the development and progression of CKD have been identified, there is no commercial surveillance technology to definitively diagnose and quantify the severity and progressive loss of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in CKD. This has limited the study of potential therapies to late stages of CKD when FDA-registerable events are more likely. Because patient outcomes, including the rate of CKD progression, correlate with disease severity and effective therapy may require early intervention, being able to diagnose and stratify patients by their level of decreased kidney function early on is key for translational progress. In addition, renal reserve, defined as the increase in GFR following stimulation, may improve the quantification of GFR based solely on basal levels. Various groups are developing and characterizing optical measurement techniques using new minimally invasive or noninvasive approaches for quantifying basal and stimulated kidney function. This development has the potential to allow widespread individualization of therapy at an earlier disease stage. Therefore, the purposes of this review are to suggest why quantifying stimulated GFR, by activating renal reserve, may be advantageous in patients and to review fluorescent technologies to deliver patient-specific GFR.

Discordance Between Iothalamate and Iohexol Urinary Clearances.

BACKGROUND: Iothalamate and iohexol are contrast agents that have supplanted inulin for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in clinical practice. Previous studies have noted possible differences in renal handling of these 2 agents, but clarity about the differences has been lacking. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 150 participants with a wide range of GFRs were studied in an outpatient clinical laboratory facility. INDEX TESTS: Simultaneous urinary clearances of iothalamate, iohexol, and creatinine. REFERENCE TEST: None. OUTCOME: Relative differences between the urinary clearances. Iohexol and iothalamate in plasma and urine were assayed concurrently by a novel liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay. RESULTS: Mean iohexol, iothalamate, and creatinine clearances were 52±28 (SD), 60±34, and 74±40 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. The proportional bias of iohexol to iothalamate urinary clearance was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88) and was proportional across the GFR range. The mean proportional bias of iohexol clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.27 (95% CI, 1.20-1.34), whereas that of iothalamate clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.09 (95% CI, 1.03-1.15). LIMITATIONS: Lack of reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a significant and consistent difference between urinary clearances of iothalamate and iohexol. Comparison of studies reporting renal clearance measurements using iohexol versus iothalamate must account for this observed bias.

GFR Estimation Using ß-Trace Protein and ß2-Microglobulin in CKD.

BACKGROUND: ß-Trace protein (BTP) and ß2-microglobulin (B2M) are novel glomerular filtration markers that have stronger associations with adverse outcomes than creatinine. Comparisons of BTP and B2M to creatinine and cystatin C are limited by the absence of rigorously developed glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations for the novel markers. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Pooled database of 3 populations with chronic kidney disease (CKD) with mean measured GFR of 48 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N=3,551; MDRD [Modification of Diet in Renal Disease] Study, AASK [African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension], and CRIC [Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort] Study). INDEX TESTS: GFR estimated using creatinine, cystatin C, BTP, or B2M level. REFERENCE TEST: GFR measured as the urinary clearance of iothalamate. RESULTS: For BTP and B2M, coefficients for age, sex, and race were smaller than for creatinine and were similar or smaller than for cystatin C. For B2M, coefficients for sex, age, and race were smaller than for creatinine and were similar (age and race) or smaller (sex) than for cystatin C. The final equations with BTP (BTP, age, and sex) or B2M (B2M alone) were less accurate than either the CKD-EPI (CKD Epidemiology Collaboration) creatinine or cystatin C equations. The combined BTP-B2M equation (BTP and B2M alone) had similar accuracy to the CKD-EPI creatinine or cystatin C equation. The average of the BTP-B2M equation and the CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C equation was not more accurate than the CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C equation. LIMITATIONS: No external validation population, study population was restricted to CKD, few participants older than 65 years, or nonblack nonwhite race. CONCLUSIONS: BTP and B2M are less influenced by age, sex, and race than creatinine and less influenced by race than cystatin C, but provide less accurate GFR estimates than the CKD-EPI creatinine and cystatin C equations. The CKD-EPI BTP and B2M equation provides a methodological advance for their study as filtration markers and in their associations with risk and adverse outcomes, but further study is required before clinical use.

Non-GFR Determinants of Low-Molecular-Weight Serum Protein Filtration Markers in CKD.

BACKGROUND: Unlike the case with creatinine, conditions affecting the non-glomerular filtration rate (GFR) determinants of low-molecular-weight serum proteins, ß-trace protein (BTP), ß2-microglobulin (B2M), and cystatin C, are not well characterized. STUDY DESIGN: Pooled cross-sectional analysis of 3 studies. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 3,156 persons with chronic kidney disease from the MDRD (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) Study, AASK (African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension), and CRIC (Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort) Study. PREDICTORS: Demographic and clinical factors hypothesized to be associated with non-GFR determinants of the filtration markers, selected from literature review and physiologic and clinical considerations. OUTCOMES: Serum creatinine, BTP, B2M, and cystatin C levels. RESULTS: In multivariable-adjusted errors-in-variables regression models that included adjustment for measured GFR (mGFR) and mGFR measurement error, creatinine level had stronger associations with male sex, black race, and higher urine creatinine excretion than the other filtration markers. BTP was associated less strongly with age, similar in direction with sex, and opposite in direction with race than creatinine level. Like cystatin C, B2M level was associated less strongly with age, sex, and race than creatinine level. BTP, B2M, and cystatin C levels were associated more strongly than creatinine level with other factors, including urine protein excretion and weight for BTP, smoking and urine protein excretion for B2M, and smoking for cystatin C. LIMITATIONS: Findings may not be generalizable to populations without chronic kidney disease, and residual confounding with GFR due to incomplete adjustment for GFR measurement error. CONCLUSIONS: Like creatinine, serum levels of low-molecular-weight proteins are affected by conditions other than GFR. Knowledge of these conditions can aid the interpretation of GFR estimates and risk using these markers and guide the use of these filtration markers in developing GFR estimating equations.

ß-Trace protein: a marker of GFR and other biological pathways.

ß-Trace protein (BTP), also known as lipocalin prostaglandin D2 synthase (L-PGDS; encoded by the PTGDS gene), is a low-molecular-weight glycoprotein and an emerging novel marker of glomerular filtration rate. BTP is an important constituent of cerebral spinal fluid and is found in much lower concentrations in blood. Its serum origin and renal handling remain poorly understood. Unlike serum creatinine, BTP is not physiologically inert. It possesses both ligand-binding and enzymatic properties. BTP catalyzes the conversion of prostaglandin H2 (PGH2) to PGD2. PGD2 is an eicosanoid involved in a variety of important physiologic processes, including platelet aggregation, vasodilation, inflammation, adipogenesis, and bone remodeling. Several studies now have documented BTP's strong association with glomerular filtration rate, end-stage renal disease, cardiovascular disease, and death in a variety of different patient populations. This review provides an overview of the biochemistry, physiology and metabolism, biological functions, and measurement of BTP; summarizes the evidence for BTP as a marker of both kidney function and cardiovascular disease; and then considers the interplay between its biological properties, serum concentration, and patient outcomes.

Change in novel filtration markers and risk of ESRD.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease progression is a risk factor for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A 57% decline in creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFRcr) is an established surrogate outcome for ESRD in clinical trials, and a 30% decrease recently has been proposed as a surrogate end point. However, it is unclear whether change in novel filtration marker levels provides additional information for ESRD risk to change in eGFRcr. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study participants from 4 US communities. PREDICTORS: Percent change in levels of filtration markers (eGFRcr, cystatin C-based eGFR [eGFRcys], the inverse of ß2-microglobulin concentration [1/B2M]) over a 6-year period. OUTCOME: Incident ESRD. MEASUREMENTS: Cox proportional hazards regression with adjustment for demographics, kidney disease risk factors, and first measurement of eGFRcr. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 13 years, there were 142 incident ESRD cases. In adjusted analysis, declines > 30% in eGFRcr, eGFRcys, and 1/B2M were associated significantly with ESRD compared with stable concentrations of filtration markers (HRs of 19.96 [95% CI, 11.73-33.96], 16.67 [95% CI, 10.27-27.06], and 22.53 [95% CI, 13.20-38.43], respectively). Using the average of declines in the 3 markers, >30% decline conferred higher ESRD risk than that for eGFRcr alone (HR, 31.97 [95% CI, 19.40-52.70; P=0.03] vs eGFRcr). LIMITATIONS: Measurement error could influence estimation of change in filtration marker levels. CONCLUSIONS: A >30% decline in kidney function assessed using novel filtration markers is associated strongly with ESRD, suggesting the potential utility of measuring change in cystatin C and B2M levels in settings in which improved outcome ascertainment is needed, such as clinical trials.

GFR estimation: from physiology to public health.

Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is essential for clinical practice, research, and public health. Appropriate interpretation of estimated GFR (eGFR) requires understanding the principles of physiology, laboratory medicine, epidemiology, and biostatistics used in the development and validation of GFR estimating equations. Equations developed in diverse populations are less biased at higher GFRs than equations developed in chronic kidney disease (CKD) populations and are more appropriate for general use. Equations that include multiple endogenous filtration markers are more precise than equations including a single filtration marker. The CKD-EPI (CKD Epidemiology Collaboration) equations are the most accurate GFR estimating equations that have been evaluated in large diverse populations and are applicable for general clinical use. The 2009 CKD-EPI creatinine equation is more accurate in estimating GFR and prognosis than the 2006 MDRD (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) Study equation and provides lower estimates of prevalence of decreased eGFR. It is useful as a "first test" for decreased eGFR and should replace the MDRD Study equation for routine reporting of serum creatinine-based eGFR by clinical laboratories. The 2012 CKD-EPI cystatin C equation is as accurate as the 2009 CKD-EPI creatinine equation in estimating GFR, does not require specification of race, and may be more accurate in patients with decreased muscle mass. The 2012 CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C equation is more accurate than the 2009 CKD-EPI creatinine and 2012 CKD-EPI cystatin C equations and is useful as a confirmatory test for decreased eGFR as determined by serum creatinine-based eGFR. Further improvement in GFR estimating equations will require development in more broadly representative populations, including diverse racial and ethnic groups, use of multiple filtration markers, and evaluation using statistical techniques to compare eGFR to "true GFR."

Alternative kidney filtration markers and the risk of major macrovascular and microvascular events, and all-cause mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes in the ADVANCE trial.

BACKGROUND: Creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is biased in the setting of obesity and other conditions. Alternative kidney filtration markers may be useful in adults with diabetes, but few studies examined the associations with risk of clinical outcomes. METHODS: In the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial, we evaluated whether baseline levels and change in eGFR based on creatinine (Cr), cystatin c (Cys), ß2 -microglobulin (B2M), eGFRCr-Cys , and the average of three estimates (eGFRCr-Cys-B2M ) assessed in 7217 participants at baseline and a random sample of 640 participants at the 1-year visit are associated with clinical outcomes. We examined associations with major macrovascular and microvascular events together and separately and all-cause mortality using Cox regression models, adjusting for established risk factors. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 5 years, 1313 major macrovascular (n = 748) and microvascular events (n = 637), and 743 deaths occurred. Lower levels of eGFR based on all filtration markers individually and combined were associated with 1.4 to 3.0 times higher risk of major macrovascular and microvascular events (combined and separately) and all-cause mortality. Per 30% decline in eGFRCys , eGFR Cr-Cys , and eGFRCr-Cys-B2M were associated with a >2-fold higher risk of all clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with type 2 diabetes, baseline levels of eGFR based on alternative filtration markers and per 30% decline in eGFRCys , eGFR Cr-Cys , and eGFRCr-Cys-B2M were associated with clinical outcomes. Measurement of alternative filtration markers, particularly B2M in adults with type 2 diabetes may be warranted.