Search

Background Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) causes about 10% of cases of end stage renal disease. Disease progression rate is heterogeneous. Tolvaptan is presently the only specific therapeutic option to slow kidney function decline in adults at risk of rapidly progressing ADPKD with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 1–4. Thus, a reliable evaluation of kidney function in patients with ADPKD is needed. Methods We evaluated the agreement between measured (mGFR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by 61 formulas based on creatinine and/or cystatin-C (eGFR) in 226 ADPKD patients with diverse GFR values, from predialysis to glomerular hyperfiltration. Also, we evaluated whether incorrect categorization of CKD using eGFR may interfere with the indication and/or reimbursement of Tolvaptan treatment. Results No formula showed acceptable agreement with mGFR. Total Deviation Index averaged about 50% for eGFR based on creatinine and/or cystatin-C, indicating that 90% of the estimations of GFR showed bounds of error of 50% when compared with mGFR. In 1 out of 4 cases with mGFR Conclusions The evaluation of renal function with formulas in ADPKD patients is unreliable. Extreme deviation from real renal function is quite frequent. The consequences of this error deserve attention, especially in rapid progressors who may benefit from starting treatment with tolvaptan and in whom specific GFR thresholds are needed for the indication or reimbursement. Whenever possible, mGFR is recommended. Graphic abstract

Background Diabetes is a risk factor for cancer in the general population. However, few data are available on the association between post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) and cancer after transplantation. Methods We analyzed this issue in a Spanish cohort of patients without diabetes before transplantation. PTDM was diagnosed with consensus criteria at 12 months after transplantation and 12 months before the diagnosis of cancer. The association between PTDM and cancer (overall and specific types) was evaluated with regression analysis. Results During a follow-up of 12 years (interquartile range 8–14), 85 cases of 603 developed cancer (829/100 000/year) and 164 (27%) PTDM. The most frequent cancers were renal cell cancer (RCC) n = 15, 146/cases/100 000/year), lung (n = 12, 117/cases/100 000/year), colon (n = 9, 88/cases/100 000/year) and prostate (n = 9, 88/cases/100 000/year). In logistic regression, PTDM was not associated with cancer. Eight of the 164 patients with PTDM (4.9%) vs 7 of the 439 without PTDM developed RCC (1.6%) (P = .027). In multivariate analysis, PTDM was independently associated with RCC [odds ratio (OR) 2.92, confidence interval (CI) 1.03–8.27], adjusting for smoking (OR 4.020, 95% CI 1.34–12.02) and other covariates. PTDM was not associated with other types of cancer. Conclusions Patients with PTDM must be considered a population at risk for RCC and accordingly, the subject of active surveillance.

BackgroundReliable determination of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is crucial in the evaluation of living kidney donors. Although some guidelines recommend the use of measured GFR (mGFR), many centres still rely on estimated GFR (eGFR) obtained through equations or 24-h creatinine clearance. However, eGFR is neither accurate nor precise in reflecting real renal function. We analysed the impact of eGFR errors on evaluation and decision making regarding potential donors.MethodsWe evaluated 103 consecutive living donors who underwent mGFR via iohexol plasma clearance and eGFR by 51 creatinine- and/or cystatin C–based equations. The cut-off for living donation in our centre is GFR > 80 mL/min for donors >35 years of age or 90 mL/min for those ResultsNinety-three subjects (90.3%) had mGFR values above (donors) and 10 [9.7% (95% confidence interval 5.4–17)] below (non-donors) the cut-off. In non-donors, most of the equations gave eGFR values above the cut-off, so donation would have been allowed based on eGFR. All non-donors were female with reduced weight, height and body surface. In donors, up to 32 cases showed eGFR below the cut-off, while mGFR was actually higher. Therefore an important number of donors would not have donated based on eGFR alone.ConclusionThe misclassification of donors around the cut-off for donation is very common with eGFR, making eGFR unreliable for the evaluation of living kidney donors. Whenever possible, mGFR should be implemented in this setting.

Background Formulas do not estimate renal function with acceptable precision and accuracy. Methods We compared 51 creatinine-based and/or cystatin c-based formulas with a gold standard (iohexol plasma clearance) in 193 renal transplant recipients using concordance correlation coefficient, total deviation index, coverage probability and the error in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage classification. Results No formula showed a concordance correlation coefficient greater than 0.90 (average for creatinine-based formulas: ∼0.70 and for cystatin c-based formulas: ∼0.85). A wide total deviation index was observed: approximately 70% (creatinine-based) and approximately 50% (cystatin c-based), indicating that 90% of the estimations showed bounds of error of ±70% or ±50%, respectively, compared with the gold standard. No formula included 90% of the estimations within a coverage probability of ±10%. Half the CKD stages classified by creatinine-based formulas were incorrect, mainly due to overestimation of renal function. One of 3 CKD stages diagnosed by cystatin c-based formulas was incorrect, with both overestimation and underestimation. Overall, the formulas showed very low precision and accuracy and a high degree of error in reflecting real renal function. Conclusions In conclusion, formulas do not properly reflect renal function in kidney transplantation, which makes their use in clinical practice unreliable. Moreover, their use in clinical trials should be avoided.

Background Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects 10-13% of the population worldwide. CKD classification stratifies patients in five stages of risk for progressive renal disease based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by formulas and albuminuria. However, the reliability of formulas to reflect real renal function is a matter of debate. The effect of the error of formulas in the CKD classification is unclear, particularly for cystatin C-based equations. Methods We evaluated the reliability of a large number of cystatin C and/or creatinine-based formulas in the definition of the stages of CKD in 882 subjects with different clinical situations over a wide range of glomerular filtration rates (GFRs) (4.2-173.7 mL/min). Results Misclassification was a constant for all 61 formulas evaluated and averaged 50% for creatinine-based and 35% for cystatin C-based equations. Most of the cases were misclassified as one stage higher or lower. However, in 10% of the subjects, one stage was skipped and patients were classified two stages above or below their real stage. No clinically relevant improvement was observed with cystatin C-based formulas compared with those based on creatinine. Conclusions The error in the classification of CKD stages by formulas was extremely common. Our study questions the reliability of both cystatin C and creatinine-based formulas to correctly classify CKD stages. Thus the correct classification of CKD stages based on estimated GFR is a matter of chance. This is a strong limitation in evaluating the severity of renal disease, the risk for progression and the evolution of renal dysfunction over time.

Background Renal function can be estimated with formulas, which are inaccurate, or measured with gold standard methods, which are reliable but unpractical. We propose to simplify the plasma clearance of iohexol, a gold standard method to measure renal function, by dried blood spot (DBS) testing. Methods We compared glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values assessed by DBS and the reference plasma analysis technique. We tested in vitro the agreement between non-volumetric and volumetric DBS with the reference technique. Then, we performed a clinical validation in vivo between volumetric DBS and plasma analysis in 203 patients. The agreement was evaluated with the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), the total deviation index (TDI) and the coverage probability. We defined acceptable agreement as a TDI Results In the in vitro studies, the non-volumetric DBS showed moderate agreement, TDI = 26.0%, while the volumetric method showed better but insufficient agreement, TDI = 13.0%, with the reference method in plasma. The non-volumetric DBS was rejected. To improve the agreement of the volumetric DBS, iopamidol was used as an internal standard. This method showed acceptable agreement, TDI = 9.0% with the analysis in plasma, and was selected as the definitive DBS method. In the in vivo studies, the agreement between the final DBS method and the reference technique was acceptable: TDI = 9.5%. This indicates that 90% of the GFR values ranged from -9.5% to + 9.5% compared with the reference method. Conclusions We simplified the plasma clearance of iohexol using DBS without losing accuracy and precision with respect to the reference technique. This may facilitate the use of a reliable determination of renal function to the medical community.