Abstract
Mayo Imaging Classification (MIC) for predicting future kidney growth in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) patients is calculated from a single MRI/CT scan assuming exponential kidney volume growth and height-adjusted total kidney volume at birth to be 150 mL/m. However, when multiple scans are available, how this information should be combined to improve prediction accuracy is unclear. Herein, we studied ADPKD subjects (n=36\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$n = 36$$\\end{document}) with 8+ years imaging follow-up (mean = 11 years) to establish ground truth kidney growth trajectory. MIC annual kidney growth rate predictions were compared to ground truth as well as 1- and 2-parameter least squares fitting. The annualized mean absolute error in MIC for predicting total kidney volume growth rate was 2.1%±2%\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$2.1\\% \\pm 2\\%$$\\end{document} compared to 1.1%±1%\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$1.1\\% \\pm 1\\%$$\\end{document} (p=0.002\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$p = 0.002$$\\end{document}) for a 2-parameter fit to the same exponential growth curve used for MIC when 4 measurements were available or 1.4%±1%\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$1.4\\% \\pm 1\\%$$\\end{document} (p=0.01\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$p = 0.01$$\\end{document}) with 3 measurements averaging together with MIC. On univariate analysis, male sex (p=0.05\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$p = 0.05$$\\end{document}) and PKD2 mutation (p=0.04\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$p = 0.04$$\\end{document}) were associated with poorer MIC performance. In ADPKD patients with 3 or more CT/MRI scans, 2-parameter least squares fitting predicted kidney volume growth rate better than MIC, especially in males and with PKD2 mutations where MIC was less accurate.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.