The 2009 and 2021 CKD-EPI Equations: A Graphical Analysis of the Effect of Refitting GFR Estimating Equations Without a Race Coefficient.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Buchkremer F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9123604 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The 2009 and 2021 CKD-EPI Equations: A Graphical Analysis of the Effect of Refitting GFR Estimating Equations Without a Race Coefficient.
Buchkremer Florian F Segerer Stephan S
Kidney medicine 20220311 5
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionSouth Asian individuals possess a high risk of chronic kidney disease. There is a need to study, evaluate, and compare the newly suggested glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations for accurate CKD diagnosis, staging, and drug dosing. This study aimed to (1) evaluate the European Kidney Function Consortium (EKFC), Pakistani CKD-EPI, and 2021 Race-Free CKD-EPI creatinine equation in the South Asian population with CKD and (2) to examine the expected implications on both CKD classification as well as End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) prevalence across these equations in South Asian population.MethodsWe carried out a cross-sectional investigation on 385 participants, a CKD cohort ≥ 18 years, at Allama Iqbal Medical College, Jinnah Hospital, Lahore. Serum creatinine was measured by Jaffe's method and rGFR was measured by inulin clearance.ResultsPakistani CKD-EPI has a lower median difference at -1.33 ml/min/1.73m2 elevated precision (IQR) at 2.33 (-2.36, -0.03) and higher P30 value at 89.35% than 2021 CKD-EPI and EKFC equations. The mean difference (ml/min/1.73m2), 95% agreement limits (ml/min/1.73m2) of CKD-EPI PK: -1.18, -6.14, 2021 CKD-EPI: -5.98, -13.24 and EKFC: -5.62, -13.01 (P <0.001). These equations highly correlated to rGFR (P <0.001). An upward re-classification in GFR categories was shown by 2021 CKD-EPI and EKFC compared to the Pakistani CKD-EPI equation. However, there was an exception regarding the G5 category, where an elevated count of 217 (56.36%) was shown for CKD-EPI PK. The prevalence of ESRD was seen in entire age groups and prevailed among females more than in males overall equations.ConclusionsPakistani CKD-EPI exhibited outstanding performance, while 2021 CKD-EPI and EKFC demonstrated poor performances and could not show an adequate advantage for both CKD classification and prevalence of ESRD compared to Pakistani CKD-EPI. Therefore, Pakistani CKD-EPI appears optimal for this region and warrants future validation in other South Asian countries. In contrast, suitable measures must be implemented in Pakistani laboratories.
| S-EPMC10956795 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10118241 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8259644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2021, the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) validated a new equation for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). However, this new equation is not ethnic-specific, and prevalence of CKD in Asians is known to differ from other ethnicities. This study evaluates the impact of the 2009 and 2021 creatinine-based eGFR equations on the prevalence of CKD in multiple Asian cohorts.MethodsEight population-based studies from China, India, Russia (Asian), Singapore and South Korea provided individual-level data (n = 67,233). GFR was estimated using both the 2009 CKD-EPI equation developed using creatinine, age, sex, and race (eGFRcr [2009, ASR]) and the 2021 CKD-EPI equation developed without race (eGFRcr [2021, AS]). CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73m2 (G3-G5). Prevalence of eGFR categories was compared within each study and within subgroups of age, sex, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, and hypertension status. The extent of reclassification was examined using net reclassification improvement (NRI).FindingsOf 67,233 adults, CKD prevalence was 8.6% (n = 5800/67,233) using eGFRcr (2009, ASR) and 6.4% (n = 4307/67,233) using eGFRcr (2021, AS). With the latter, CKD prevalence was reduced across all eight studies, ranging from -7.0% (95% CI -8.5% to -5.4%) to -0.4% (-1.3% to 0.5%), and across all subgroups except those in the BMI < 18.5% subgroup. Net reclassification index (NRI) was significant at -2.33% (p < 0.001). No individuals were reclassified as a higher (more severe) eGFR category, while 1.7%-4.2% of individuals with CKD were reclassified as one eGFR category lower when eGFRcr (2021, AS) rather than eGFRcr (2009, ASR) was used.InterpretationeGFRcr (2021, AS) consistently provided reduced CKD prevalence and higher estimation of GFR among Asian cohorts than eGFRcr (2009, ASR). Based on current risk-stratified approaches to CKD management, more patients reclassified to lower-risk GFR categories could help reduce inappropriate care and its associated adverse effects among Asian renal patients. Comparison of both equations to predict progression to renal failure or adverse outcomes using prospective studies are warranted.FundingNational Medical Research Council, Singapore.
| S-EPMC9329617 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9214432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2021, an updated Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) without a coefficient for race (CKD-EPI21) was developed. The performance of this new equation has yet to be examined among specific patient groups.MethodsWe compared the performances of the new CKD-EPI21 equation and the 2009 equation assuming non-Black race (CKD-EPI09-NB) in patients with GFR measured by chromium-51-EDTA plasma clearance at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark during 2010-18. We examined bias, accuracy, precision and correct classification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage using chromium-51-EDTA clearance as the reference standard. We assessed the performance in the total cohort, cancer patients and potential living kidney donors. We also assessed the performance stratified by CKD stage in the total cohort.ResultsIn this predominantly white population, the CKD-EPI21 equation performed slightly better than the CKD-EPI09-NB equation in both the total cohort (N = 4668), and in cancer patients (N = 3313) and potential living kidney donors (N = 239). In the total cohort, the CKD-EPI21 equation demonstrated a slightly lower median absolute bias (-0.2 versus -4.4 mL/min/1.73 m2), and a similar accuracy, precision and correct classification of CKD stage compared with the CKD-EPI09-NB equation. When stratified by CKD stage, the CKD-EPI09-NB equation performed slightly better than the CKD-EPI21 equation among patients with a measured GFR (mGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2.ConclusionsIn a selected cohort of Danish patients with mGFR, the CKD-EPI21 equation performed slightly better than the CKD-EPI09-NB equation except for patients with a mGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, where CKD-EPI09-NB performed slightly better although the differences were considered clinically insignificant.
| S-EPMC10689151 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4421875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale & Objective Recent studies evaluated and proposed new race-neutral, creatinine-based glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation equations. The performance of these equations in diverse potential living kidney donors requires study. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting & Participants 637 potential living kidney donors from one tertiary hospital with serum creatinine concentration measurement and GFR measurement by iohexol plasma clearance between October 2016 and December 2020. Exposure Creatinine-based estimation of GFR by Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (2009, CKDEPI09; 2021, CKDEPI21) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equations with and without inclusion of race coefficient, where applicable. Outcomes Equation bias, precision, accuracy, and accurate classification of GFR as equal to and above or below 80 mL/min/1.73 m2. Analytical Approach GFR estimation equation performance compared to measured GFR (mGFR) by iohexol clearance. Results The median bias of the CKDEPI21 equation underestimated mGFR by 2.8 mL/min/1.73 m2. The bias in the Black subgroup underestimated mGFR by 9.0 mL/min/1.73 m2. Compared to CKDEPI09 with and without race adjustment, the accuracy of CKDEPI21 increased across all subgroups. On average, 3.9% of individuals were misclassified by CKDEPI21 as having a GFR greater than, and 8.9% misclassified less than, 80 mL/min/1.73 m2, compared to 3.1% and 13.2% for CKDEPI09 with race adjustment, respectively. Total misclassification (either above or below 80 mL/min/1.73 m2) was 16.3% for CKDEPI21 and 16.0% for CKDEPI09 (with race adjustment). Limitations Limited sample of individuals identifying as Black. Lack of cystatin C data. Conclusions In our potential living donor sample, GFR estimation by creatinine-based CKDEPI21 is less biased and more accurate than previous creatinine-based estimated GFR equations. When evaluated by race, this summative improvement remains in individuals identifying as Asian, Hispanic, or White. More external validation is needed to assess whether the new equation is an improvement over the previous CKDEPI equation with a race coefficient.
| S-EPMC9719087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeEstimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) as calculated by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation is used for detection of chronic kidney disease and drug dose adjustment. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of freely available eGFR online calculators.MethodsAll identified CKD-EPI online calculators were run with five reference cases differing in age, sex, serum creatinine, and ethnicity. Conversion from eGFRindexed (unit ml/min per 1.73 m2) to eGFRnon-indexed (unit ml/min) and creatinine unit from milligramme/decilitre to micromole/litre was checked, if available.ResultsOnly 36 of 47 calculators (76.6%) produced accurate eGFR results for all reference cases. Eight of 47 (17.0%) calculators were considered as faulty because of errors relating to ethnicity (4 calculators), to conversion of the eGFR unit (2 calculators), to erroneous eGFR values without obvious explanation (2 calculators), to conversion of the creatinine unit (1 calculator), and to an error in the eGFR unit displayed (1 calculator). Overall, 28 errors were found (range 59 to 147% of the correct eGFR value), the majority concerning calculation of eGFRindexed and the conversion to eGFRnon-indexed. Only 7 of 47 (14.9%) calculators offered conversion of the eGFR unit.ConclusionsErroneous calculations that might lead to inappropriate clinical decision-making were found in 8 of 47 calculators. Thus, online calculators should be evaluated more thoroughly after implementation. Conversion of eGFR units that might be needed for drug dose adjustments should be implemented more often.
| S-EPMC7481157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation underestimates measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at levels>60 mL/min/1.73 m2, with variable accuracy among subgroups; consequently, estimated GFR (eGFR)>or=60 mL/min/1.73 m2 is not reported by clinical laboratories. Here, performance of a more accurate GFR-estimating equation, the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation, is reported by level of GFR and clinical characteristics.Study designTest of diagnostic accuracy.Setting & participantsPooled data set of 3,896 people from 16 studies with measured GFR (not used for the development of either equation). Subgroups were defined by eGFR, age, sex, race, diabetes, prior solid-organ transplant, and body mass index.Index testseGFR from the CKD-EPI and MDRD Study equations and standardized serum creatinine.Reference testMeasured GFR using urinary or plasma clearance of exogenous filtration markers.ResultsMean measured GFR was 68+/-36 (SD) mL/min/1.73 m2. For eGFR<30 mL/min/1.73 m2, both equations have similar bias (median difference compared with measured GFR). For eGFR of 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m2, bias was decreased from 4.9 to 2.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 (57% improvement). For eGFR of 60-89 mL/min/1.73 m2, bias was decreased from 11.9 to 4.2 mL/min/1.73 m2 (61% improvement). For eGFR of 90-119 mL/min/1.73 m2, bias was decreased from 10.0 to 1.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 (75% improvement). Similar or improved performance was noted for most subgroups with eGFR<90 mL/min/1.73 m2, other than body mass index<20 kg/m2, with greater variation noted for some subgroups with eGFR>or=90 mL/min/1.73 m2.LimitationsLimited number of elderly people and racial and ethnic minorities with measured GFR.ConclusionsThe CKD-EPI equation is more accurate than the MDRD Study equation overall and across most subgroups. In contrast to the MDRD Study equation, eGFR>or=60 mL/min/1.73 m2 can be reported using the CKD-EPI equation.
| S-EPMC2926290 | biostudies-literature