Systematic review of the application of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation and Oxford classification in estimating prognosis in IgA Nephropathy.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
M P Toal, R Fergie, M P Quinn, C J Hill, C O'Neill, A P Maxwell
{"title":"Systematic review of the application of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation and Oxford classification in estimating prognosis in IgA Nephropathy.","authors":"M P Toal, R Fergie, M P Quinn, C J Hill, C O'Neill, A P Maxwell","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02739-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is the most common primary glomerulonephritis in the world and is an important cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and kidney failure. Outcomes are heterogeneous, and accurate risk stratification is important to identify the highest risk individuals for treatment and to help prevent disease progression. The Oxford classification (OC) is an internationally adopted standard for renal biopsy reporting in IgAN, which measures the degree of histological abnormalities and predicts prognosis. The kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) was developed to predict kidney failure in all causes of CKD and has been shown to be highly accurate across diverse etiologies. This review aimed to compare the KFRE with formulae incorporating the OC in accurately determining the risk of kidney failure in IgAN.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane library guidelines and PRISMA statement for reporting of systematic reviews. Studies comparing the accuracy of the KFRE with the OC in predicting disease progression and kidney failure in IgAN were evaluated. The search strategy and analysis were performed independently by two reviewers. Studies that were eligible for inclusion compared the KFRE with any tool incorporating the OC in a cohort of individuals with IgAN. Eligible outcomes were reduction of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and prognostic tools were required to assess the accuracy of these formulae by discrimination and/or calibration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After searching several databases, only one study was eligible for inclusion in the review. This study of 2300 Chinese individuals with IgAN had a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Two-hundred eighty-eight individuals had a composite outcome of 50% decline in eGFR or ESRD, and 214 individuals developed ESRD. Both the KFRE and the IgAN Risk Prediction (IRP) tool (incorporating the OC) were highly accurate at predicting ESRD with a C-statistic of 0.90 and 0.91, respectively. Subgroup analysis demonstrated improved performance of IRP over KFRE in discrimination for individuals with preserved eGFR (> 60 ml/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>) at baseline. The risk of bias was high due to insufficient follow-up and handling of missing data, so overall confidence in findings is very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is currently insufficient evidence to compare the accuracy of the KFRE and OC in determining outcomes in IgAN. Further research is required in this field.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022364569.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11737263/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02739-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is the most common primary glomerulonephritis in the world and is an important cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and kidney failure. Outcomes are heterogeneous, and accurate risk stratification is important to identify the highest risk individuals for treatment and to help prevent disease progression. The Oxford classification (OC) is an internationally adopted standard for renal biopsy reporting in IgAN, which measures the degree of histological abnormalities and predicts prognosis. The kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) was developed to predict kidney failure in all causes of CKD and has been shown to be highly accurate across diverse etiologies. This review aimed to compare the KFRE with formulae incorporating the OC in accurately determining the risk of kidney failure in IgAN.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane library guidelines and PRISMA statement for reporting of systematic reviews. Studies comparing the accuracy of the KFRE with the OC in predicting disease progression and kidney failure in IgAN were evaluated. The search strategy and analysis were performed independently by two reviewers. Studies that were eligible for inclusion compared the KFRE with any tool incorporating the OC in a cohort of individuals with IgAN. Eligible outcomes were reduction of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and prognostic tools were required to assess the accuracy of these formulae by discrimination and/or calibration.

Results: After searching several databases, only one study was eligible for inclusion in the review. This study of 2300 Chinese individuals with IgAN had a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Two-hundred eighty-eight individuals had a composite outcome of 50% decline in eGFR or ESRD, and 214 individuals developed ESRD. Both the KFRE and the IgAN Risk Prediction (IRP) tool (incorporating the OC) were highly accurate at predicting ESRD with a C-statistic of 0.90 and 0.91, respectively. Subgroup analysis demonstrated improved performance of IRP over KFRE in discrimination for individuals with preserved eGFR (> 60 ml/min/1.73 m2) at baseline. The risk of bias was high due to insufficient follow-up and handling of missing data, so overall confidence in findings is very low.

Conclusion: There is currently insufficient evidence to compare the accuracy of the KFRE and OC in determining outcomes in IgAN. Further research is required in this field.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022364569.

肾功能衰竭风险方程和牛津分级在IgA肾病预后评估中的应用综述。
背景:IgA肾病(IgAN)是世界上最常见的原发性肾小球肾炎,是慢性肾脏疾病(CKD)和肾衰竭的重要病因。结果是不均匀的,准确的风险分层对于确定治疗的最高风险个体和帮助预防疾病进展非常重要。牛津分级(Oxford classification, OC)是国际上采用的IgAN肾活检报告标准,用于衡量组织学异常程度并预测预后。肾衰竭风险方程(KFRE)被开发用于预测CKD所有病因的肾衰竭,并且已被证明在不同病因中都是高度准确的。本综述旨在比较KFRE与含OC的配方在准确确定IgAN患者肾功能衰竭风险方面的差异。方法:按照Cochrane图书馆指南和PRISMA系统评价报告声明进行系统评价。比较KFRE和OC在预测IgAN疾病进展和肾衰竭方面的准确性的研究进行了评估。搜索策略和分析由两位评论者独立执行。有资格纳入的研究比较了KFRE与任何纳入OC的IgAN个体队列中的工具。符合条件的结果是估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)或终末期肾病(ESRD)的降低,并且需要预后工具通过鉴别和/或校准来评估这些公式的准确性。结果:在检索多个数据库后,只有一项研究符合纳入本综述的条件。这项研究纳入了2300名中国IgAN患者,随访时间中位数为2.5年。288例患者eGFR或ESRD下降50%,214例患者发展为ESRD。KFRE和IgAN风险预测(IRP)工具(包含OC)在预测ESRD方面都非常准确,c统计量分别为0.90和0.91。亚组分析表明,IRP比KFRE在区分eGFR(基线值为60 ml/min/1.73 m2)的个体方面的表现更好。由于缺乏足够的随访和对缺失数据的处理,偏倚的风险很高,因此对研究结果的总体信心非常低。结论:目前没有足够的证据来比较KFRE和OC在确定IgAN预后方面的准确性。这一领域有待进一步研究。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD42022364569。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信