du.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Cystatin C versus creatinine in determining risk based on kidney function
Dalarna University, School of Education, Health and Social Studies, Medical Science.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6933-4637
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 12
2013 (English)In: New England Journal of Medicine, ISSN 0028-4793, E-ISSN 1533-4406, Vol. 369, no 10, 932-943 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Adding the measurement of cystatin C to that of serum creatinine to determine the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) improves accuracy, but the effect on detection, staging, and risk classification of chronic kidney disease across diverse populations has not been determined.

METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of 11 general-population studies (with 90,750 participants) and 5 studies of cohorts with chronic kidney disease (2960 participants) for whom standardized measurements of serum creatinine and cystatin C were available. We compared the association of the eGFR, as calculated by the measurement of creatinine or cystatin C alone or in combination with creatinine, with the rates of death (13,202 deaths in 15 cohorts), death from cardiovascular causes (3471 in 12 cohorts), and end-stage renal disease (1654 cases in 7 cohorts) and assessed improvement in reclassification with the use of cystatin C.

RESULTS: In the general-population cohorts, the prevalence of an eGFR of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area was higher with the cystatin C-based eGFR than with the creatinine-based eGFR (13.7% vs. 9.7%). Across all eGFR categories, the reclassification of the eGFR to a higher value with the measurement of cystatin C, as compared with creatinine, was associated with a reduced risk of all three study outcomes, and reclassification to a lower eGFR was associated with an increased risk. The net reclassification improvement with the measurement of cystatin C, as compared with creatinine, was 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.28) for death and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.21) for end-stage renal disease. Results were generally similar for the five cohorts with chronic kidney disease and when both creatinine and cystatin C were used to calculate the eGFR.

CONCLUSIONS: The use of cystatin C alone or in combination with creatinine strengthens the association between the eGFR and the risks of death and end-stage renal disease across diverse populations. (Funded by the National Kidney Foundation and others.).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 369, no 10, 932-943 p.
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Research subject
Health and Welfare
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-13381DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1214234ISI: 000323906900010PubMedID: 24004120OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-13381DiVA: diva2:669005
Available from: 2013-12-02 Created: 2013-11-29 Last updated: 2016-09-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ärnlöv, Johan
By organisation
Medical Science
In the same journal
New England Journal of Medicine
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 545 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf