Discordant Results Between Creatinine- and Cystatin C-based Equations for Estimating GFRDepartment of Translational Medi- cine, Division of Medical Radiology, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Chemistry, Skåne Uni- versity Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Néphrologie, Dialyse, Hypertension et Exploration Fonctionnelle Rénale, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester Minnesota, USA.
Section of Nephrology, University Hospital of North Norway and Metabolic and Renal Research Group, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Section of Nephrology, University Hospital of North Norway and Metabolic and Renal Research Group, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Public Health, Berlin, Germany.
Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Public Health, Berlin, Germany.
Function Area Clinical Chemistry, Karolinska University Laboratory, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Division of Medicine Huddinge (MedH), Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Chemistry, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Université Paris Est Créteil, INSERM, Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale, Créteil, France; Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Service de Néphrologie et Transplantation, Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire, Innovative therapy for immune disorders, Créteil, France.
Department of Clinical Chemistry, University of Liège, CHU Sart Tilman, Liège, Belgium.
Renal Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Kinshasa University Hospital, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Renal Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Kinshasa University Hospital, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Département de Biochimie, UFR Sciences Pharmaceutiques et Biologiques, Université Felix Houphouët Boigny, Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire.
Service de Néphrologie, Dialyse et Transplantation Rénale, Hôpital Nord, CHU de Saint- Etienne, France.
Department of Nephrology-Dialysis-Apheresis, Hôpital Universitaire Carémeau, Université de Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Department of Nephrology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Normandie Université, Unicaen, CHU de Caen Normandie, Néphrologie, Côte de Nacre Caen, France; Normandie Université, Unicaen, UFR de médecine, Caen, France; ANTICIPE" U1086 INSERM-UCN, Center François Baclesse, Caen, France; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven Campus Kulak Kortrijk, Kortrijk, Belgium.
Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven Campus Kulak Kortrijk, Kortrijk, Belgium.
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: Kidney International Reports, E-ISSN 2468-0249, Vol. 10, no 4, p. 1248-1259Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
Introduction: Discordant results between cystatin C and creatinine in estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are an important medical issue. However, the equation that should be used when GFR estimates are discordant remains unclear.
Methods: This cross-sectional analysis included 15,485 participants with GFR measured by the clearance of an exogenous marker, serum creatinine, and cystatin C. We studied the proportion of discordant results defined as an absolute (> 15 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)) or relative (> 20%) difference between creatinine-based estimated GFR (eGFR, eGFR(crea)) and cystatin C-based eGFR (eGFR(cys)) using different equations (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration [CKD-EPI], European Kidney Function Consortium [EKFC], and reexpressed Lund-Malm & ouml; [r-LMR]). We also researched for the best estimating equations to be used in subjects with concordant or discordant results to estimate measured GFR (mGFR).
Results: In the total cohort, the proportion of subjects with discordant results (absolute or relative) was larger for CKD-EPI (35.1 and 40.6%) than for EKFC (21.9 and 31.7%) or r-LMR (22.8 and 32.8%) equations. Among discrepant results, the proportion of eGFR(cys) < eGFR(crea) was significantly higher than the proportion of eGFR(crea) < eGFR(cys) for the CKD-EPI equations, whereas the occurrence of discrepancy was similar in the 2 discrepant groups for EKFC or r-LMR. For the EKFC and r-LMR equations, but not for the CKD-EPI, the equation combining creatinine and cystatin C was consistently the closest to the mGFR in the discrepant groups.
Conclusion: Based on the lower discrepancy proportion, better balance between eGFR(crea) and eGFR(cys), and better concordance with mGFR, the EKFC, and r-LMR equations should be preferred over the CKD-EPI to estimate GFR.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2025. Vol. 10, no 4, p. 1248-1259
Keywords [en]
creatinine, cystatin C, glomerular filtration rate
National Category
Urology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-120810DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2025.01.030ISI: 001464895300001PubMedID: 40303200Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-105001081415OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-120810DiVA, id: diva2:1954917
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2019-00192025-04-282025-04-282025-05-05Bibliographically approved