Evaluation of clinical factors associated with discordant estimated glomerular filtration rate values determined from creatinine vs cystatin C.

Abstract

Disclaimer: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Purpose: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is the standard for categorizing renal function. Current creatinine-based estimates have been demonstrated to have limited accuracy, with national organizations encouraging use of cystatin C to calculate eGFR. This study aimed to describe the relationship between eGFR calculated using serum cystatin C (eGFRcysC) vs serum creatinine (eGFRcreat) using Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations.

Methods: A retrospective review was performed for the period from July 2018 through June 2022 that included inpatient adults with a measured serum cystatin C level and a paired serum creatinine level obtained within 24 hours of each other. eGFRcreat and eGFRcysC were calculated using the CKD-EPI equations. The primary objective was to identify factors that were significantly associated with discordance between eGFRcysC vs eGFRcreat, which was expressed as the percentage difference in eGFR (eGFRpct_diff). Differences in eGFRpct_diff by patient subgroup were assessed using a paired t test or ANOVA as appropriate. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to further identify variables associated with eGFRpct_diff.

Results: The study population included 226 patients. The mean (95% confidence interval) eGFRpct_diff by patient subgroup was as follows: CKD stage 4, 45.0% (25.6% to 64.4%); weight loss of greater than 10% in 1 year, -33.9% (-45.6% to -22.2%); cancer, -36.1% (-48.2% to -24.1%); and hemiplegia, -32.7% (-46.2% to -19.2%). Thirty-seven patients had at least one 24-hour urine collection for determination of creatinine clearance. Measured 24-hour creatinine clearance was better correlated with eGFRcysC (R2 = 0.754) than it was with eGFRcreat (R2 = 0.557) or creatinine clearance calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault creatinine equation (R2 = 0.288).

Conclusion: Cautious interpretation is recommended when estimating renal function from serum creatinine alone in patients with conditions associated with loss of muscle mass, including weight loss, cancer, hemiplegia, and immobility.