Abstract

Background and Aims

Precise estimates of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) are important in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Current eGFR formulas based on plasma creatinine and/or cystatin C are associated with significant bias. We investigated whether race free formulas based on plasma values of β-trace-protein and β-2-microglobulin performed better than formulas based on creatinine and cystatin C in a Scandinavian cohort of KTRs.

Method

We included samples and data from the randomised, controlled trial CONTEXT. GFR was measured by plasma clearance of 51Cr-EDTA or iodothalamate. eGFR was calculated using the new race-free CKD-EPI eGFR-creatinine and/or cystatin C(2021) formulas as well as the CKD-EPI eGFR-β-trace-protein and/or eGFR-β-2-microglobulin formulas. GFR estimates were evaluated at 3 (n = 82) and 12 (n = 64) months post-transplant using mean bias, precision, and accuracy. Also, formulas were analysed for their ability to correctly classify changes in measured GFR from 3 to 12 months.

Results

At 12 months eGFR-creatinine-cystatin C performed best according to mean bias (−4.54 ml/min/1.73 m2), precision (SD = 8.18 ml/min/1.73 m2) and accuracy (P10 = 47%) among creatinine and cystatin C based formulas (Table 1). Among the β-trace-protein and β-2-microglobulin based formulas, eGFR-β-trace-protein-β-2-microglobulin performed best according to precision (SD = 7.64 ml/min/1.73 m2) and accuracy (P10 = 36%) (Table 1). eGFR-β-trace-protein-β-2-microglobulin and eGFR-creatinine-cystatin C performed similar when comparing residuals (p = 0.481). eGFR-β-trace-protein, eGFR-β-trace-protein-β-2-microglobulin and eGFR-creatinine-cystatin C performed best in correctly classifying changes in mGFR from 3 to 12 months.

Conclusion

β-trace-protein and β-2-microglobulin do not improve the measurement of GFR compared to creatinine and cystatin C based formulas in KTRs.

Table 1:

Mean bias, precision and accuracy of eGFR formulas.

Measured GFReGFR-BTPeGFR-B2MeGFR-BTP-B2MeGFR-crea-cysceGFR-crea
Median (ml/min/1.73 m2)49.6550.2042.4144.6143.9252.37
Interquartile range36.95-65.340.7-57.9331.58-57.3834.25-58.9334.69-54.7743.27-68.15
Mean bias--1.38-4.83-4.07-4.544.82
Standard deviation-10.028.627.648.1813.63
P10 (%)-36%30%36%47%36%
Root mean square error-10.039.828.609.3014.36
Measured GFReGFR-BTPeGFR-B2MeGFR-BTP-B2MeGFR-crea-cysceGFR-crea
Median (ml/min/1.73 m2)49.6550.2042.4144.6143.9252.37
Interquartile range36.95-65.340.7-57.9331.58-57.3834.25-58.9334.69-54.7743.27-68.15
Mean bias--1.38-4.83-4.07-4.544.82
Standard deviation-10.028.627.648.1813.63
P10 (%)-36%30%36%47%36%
Root mean square error-10.039.828.609.3014.36
Table 1:

Mean bias, precision and accuracy of eGFR formulas.

Measured GFReGFR-BTPeGFR-B2MeGFR-BTP-B2MeGFR-crea-cysceGFR-crea
Median (ml/min/1.73 m2)49.6550.2042.4144.6143.9252.37
Interquartile range36.95-65.340.7-57.9331.58-57.3834.25-58.9334.69-54.7743.27-68.15
Mean bias--1.38-4.83-4.07-4.544.82
Standard deviation-10.028.627.648.1813.63
P10 (%)-36%30%36%47%36%
Root mean square error-10.039.828.609.3014.36
Measured GFReGFR-BTPeGFR-B2MeGFR-BTP-B2MeGFR-crea-cysceGFR-crea
Median (ml/min/1.73 m2)49.6550.2042.4144.6143.9252.37
Interquartile range36.95-65.340.7-57.9331.58-57.3834.25-58.9334.69-54.7743.27-68.15
Mean bias--1.38-4.83-4.07-4.544.82
Standard deviation-10.028.627.648.1813.63
P10 (%)-36%30%36%47%36%
Root mean square error-10.039.828.609.3014.36
This content is only available as a PDF.
This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://dbpia.nl.go.kr/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)

Comments

0 Comments
Submit a comment
You have entered an invalid code
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. Your comment will be reviewed and published at the journal's discretion. Please check for further notifications by email.