Comparison of estimated GFR using cystatin C versus creatinine in pediatric kidney transplant recipients

Abstract

BackgroundAn accurate, rapid estimate of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in kidney transplant patients affords early detection of transplant deterioration and timely intervention. This study compared the performance of serum creatinine (Cr) and cystatin C (CysC)-based GFR equations to measured GFR (mGFR) using iohexol among pediatric kidney transplant recipients.MethodsCysC, Cr, and mGFR were obtained from 45 kidney transplant patients, 1–18 years old. Cr- and CysC-estimated GFR (eGFR) was compared against mGFR using the Cr-based (Bedside Schwartz, U25-Cr), CysC-based (Gentian CysC, CAPA, U25-CysC), and Cr-CysC combination (CKiD Cr-CysC, U25 Cr-CysC) equations in terms of bias, precision, and accuracy. Bland–Altman plots assessed the agreement between eGFR and mGFR. Secondary analyses evaluated the formulas in patients with biopsy-proven histological changes, and K/DOQI CKD staging.ResultsBias was small with Gentian CysC (0.1 ml/min/1.73 m2); 88.9% and 37.8% of U25-CysC estimations were within 30% and 10% of mGFR, respectively. In subjects with histological changes on biopsy, Gentian CysC had a small bias and U25-CysC were more accurate—both with 83.3% of and 41.7% of estimates within 30% and 10% mGFR, respectively. Precision was better with U25-CysC, CKiD Cr-CysC, and U25 Cr-CysC. Bland–Altman plots showed the Bedside Schwartz, Gentian CysC, CAPA, and U25-CysC tend to overestimate GFR when > 100 ml/min/1.72 m2. CAPA misclassified CKD stage the least (whole cohort 24.4%, histological changes on biopsy 33.3%).ConclusionsIn this small cohort, CysC-based equations with or without Cr may have better bias, precision, and accuracy in predicting GFR.Graphical abstractA higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information