Frequency Of Renal Monitoring - Creatinine And Cystatin C (Form-2c): An Observational Cohort Study Of Patients With Reduced Egfr In Primary Care

BackgroundMonitoring is the mainstay of chronic kidney disease management in primary care; however, them is little evidence about the best way to do this.AimTo compare the effectiveness of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) derived from serum creatinine and serum cystatin C to predict renal function decline among those with a recent eGFR of 30-89 ml/min/1.73 m(2).Design and settingObservational cohort study in UK primary care.MethodSerum creatinine and serum cystatin C were both measured at seven study visits over 2 years in 750 patients aged >= 18 years with an eGFR of 30-89 ml/min/1.73 m(2) within the previous year The primary outcome was change in eGFR derived from serum creatinine or serum cystatin C between 6 and 24 months.ResultsAverage change in eGFR was 0.51 ml/min/1.73 m(2)/year when estimated by serum creatinine and -2.35 ml/min/1.73 m(2)/year when estimated by serum cystatin C. The c-statistic for predicting renal decline using serum creatinine derived eGFR was 0.495 [95% confidence interval [Cl] = 0.471 to 0.519]. The equivalent c-statistic using serum cystatin C-derived eGFR was 0.497 [95% Cl. 0.468 to 0.525). Similar results were obtained when restricting analyses to those aged >= 75 or <75 years. or with eGFR >= 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). In those with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). serum cystatin C-derived eGFR was more predictive than serum creatinine-derived eGFR for future decline in kidney function.ConclusionIn the primary analysis neither eGFR estimated from serum creatinine nor from serum cystatin C predicted future change in kidney function. partly due to small changes during 2 years. In some secondary analyses there was a suggestion that serum cystatin C was a more useful biomarker to estimate eGFR, especially in those with a baseline eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2).