Creatinine assays relying on both the Jaffe and enzymatic methods

Creatinine assays relying on both the Jaffe and enzymatic methods are now standardized to a material DAPT ic50 characterized by a gold standard method, IDMS-traceable method. Many of the equations evaluated herein used an enzymatic IDMS-traceable creatinine method, which is what we use at our institution. The Gao et al12 Scr-only equation is based on a Jaffe IDMS-traceable method, and we found this equation, using our creatinine values, to have high agreement with mGFR. The methodological differences noted between cystatin C assays lead to similar limitations that were historically experienced with

creatinine and various eGFR equations. Efforts are now underway to calibrate different cystatin C methods to a single traceable reference material. The first report of a virtually assay-independent simple cystatin C-based eGFR equation based on calibration of different methods to an international reference material was recently published.35 In the present study, our laboratory used a PETIA method on the Roche Cobas 6000 e501. Most of the equations evaluated reportedly used a PENIA method, most commonly that on the Siemens Bulk Nanocrystallized Ingot Iron platform. Hansson et al36 showed in a comparison of 180 patient

samples that Passing-Bablok regression analyses yielded a slope of 0.904 and intercept of 0.21 with regression coefficient of 0.9343 for cystatin C measured by Roche Cobas e501 cystatin C PETIA and Siemens NU7441 Bulk Nanocrystallized Ingot Iron PENIA. Despite the limitations because of analytical differences among methods, we have shown that the combination of creatinine and cystatin C improves accuracy to mGFR. The primary strength of this study is that it compares performance of 14 published eGFR equations in pediatric patients evaluated against an accurate and precise mGFR method in the routine clinical setting. The effects

of different variables in the eGFR formulas were compared using a rigorous analytic plan to test the formulas against mGFR. Different analytic methods demonstrated similar results for performance of each equation. No previous 17-DMAG (Alvespimycin) HCl study has specifically assessed the comparison of these comprehensive equations in this age group. The limitations of this study include a relatively small sample of subjects, and the analysis was not based on CKD stage, owing to a relatively small number expected in some groups. However, in data shown from the scatterplot regression analyses, a stronger correlation can be seen with worsening CKD stage than in CKD stage 1, especially for the 2 Schwartz multivariate equations. Alternatively, the high overall correlation suggests that it would not have been different by differing stage of CKD with greater patient numbers within the lower bounds of mGFR. The multivariate eGFR equations performed in a superior fashion than the univariate equations.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>