ABSTRACT Background One of the challenges in living kidney donor screening is to estimate remaining kidney function after donation. Here we developed a new model to predict post-donation measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) from pre-donation serum creatinine, age and sex. Methods In the prospective development cohort (TransplantLines, n = 511), several prediction models were constructed and tested for accuracy, precision and predictive capacity for short- and long-term post-donation 125I-iothalamate mGFR. The model with optimal performance was further tested in specific high-risk subgroups (pre-donation eGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m2, a declining 5-year post-donation mGFR slope or age >65 years) and validated in internal (n = 509) and external (Mayo Clinic, n = 1087) cohorts. Results In the development cohort, pre-donation estimated GFR (eGFR) was 86 ± 14 mL/min/1.73 m2 and post-donation mGFR was 64 ± 11 mL/min/1.73 m2. Donors with a pre-donation eGFR ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2 (present in 43%) had a mean post-donation mGFR of 69 ± 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 5% of these donors reached an mGFR <55 mL/min/1.73 m2. A model using pre-donation serum creatinine, age and sex performed optimally, predicting mGFR with good accuracy (mean bias 2.56 mL/min/1.73 m2, R2 = 0.29, root mean square error = 11.61) and precision [bias interquartile range (IQR) 14 mL/min/1.73 m2] in the external validation cohort. This model also performed well in donors with pre-donation eGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 [bias 0.35 mL/min/1.73 m2 (IQR 10)], in donors with a negative post-donation mGFR slope [bias 4.75 mL/min/1.73 m2 (IQR 13)] and in donors >65 years of age [bias 0.003 mL/min/1.73 m2 (IQR 9)]. Conclusions We developed a novel post-donation mGFR prediction model based on pre-donation serum creatinine, age and sex.
Assessment of kidney function: clinical indications for measured GFR
Abstract In the vast majority of cases, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is estimated using serum creatinine, which is highly influenced by age, sex, muscle mass, body composition, severe chronic illness and many other factors. This often leads to misclassification of patients or potentially puts patients at risk for inappropriate clinical decisions. Possible solutions are the use of cystatin C as an alternative endogenous marker or performing direct measurement of GFR using an exogenous marker such as iohexol. The purpose of this review is to highlight clinical scenarios and conditions such as extreme body composition, Black race, disagreement between creatinine- and cystatin C–based estimated GFR (eGFR), drug dosing, liver cirrhosis, advanced chronic kidney disease and the transition to kidney replacement therapy, non-kidney solid organ transplant recipients and living kidney donors where creatinine-based GFR estimation may be invalid. In contrast to the majority of literature on measured GFR (mGFR), this review does not include aspects of mGFR for research or public health settings but aims to reach practicing clinicians and raise their understanding of the substantial limitations of creatinine. While including cystatin C as a renal biomarker in GFR estimating equations has been shown to increase the accuracy of the GFR estimate, there are also limitations to eGFR based on cystatin C alone or the combination of creatinine and cystatin C in the clinical scenarios described above that can be overcome by measuring GFR with an exogenous marker. We acknowledge that mGFR is not readily available in many centres but hope that this review will highlight and promote the expansion of kidney function diagnostics using standardized mGFR procedures as an important milestone towards more accurate and personalized medicine.
Current criteria for the diagnosis of CKD in adults include persistent signs of kidney damage, such as increased urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio or a GFR below the threshold of 60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . This threshold has important caveats because it does not separate kidney disease from kidney aging, and therefore does not hold for all ages. In an extensive review of the literature, we found that GFR declines with healthy aging without any overt signs of compensation (such as elevated single-nephron GFR) or kidney damage. Older living kidney donors, who are carefully selected based on good health, have a lower predonation GFR compared with younger donors. Furthermore, the results from the large meta-analyses conducted by the CKD Prognosis Consortium and from numerous other studies indicate that the GFR threshold above which the risk of mortality is increased is not consistent across all ages. Among younger persons, mortality is increased at GFR <75 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , whereas in elderly people it is increased at levels <45 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Therefore, we suggest that amending the CKD definition to include age-specific thresholds for GFR. The implications of an updated definition are far reaching. Having fewer healthy elderly individuals diagnosed with CKD could help reduce inappropriate care and its associated adverse effects. Global prevalence estimates for CKD would be substantially reduced. Also, using an age-specific threshold for younger persons might lead to earlier identification of CKD onset for such individuals, at a point when progressive kidney damage may still be preventable.