Using Standardized Serum Creatinine Values in the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Equation for Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate

  1. Andrew S. Levey, MD;
  2. Josef Coresh, MD, PhD, MHS;
  3. Tom Greene, PhD;
  4. Lesley A. Stevens, MD, MS;
  5. Yaping (Lucy) Zhang, MS;
  6. Stephen Hendriksen, BA;
  7. John W. Kusek, PhD;
  8. Frederick Van Lente, PhD; and
  9. for the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration*
  1. From Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland; Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio; and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, Maryland.

    Abstract

    Background: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimates facilitate detection of chronic kidney disease but require calibration of the serum creatinine assay to the laboratory that developed the equation. The 4-variable equation from the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study has been reexpressed for use with a standardized assay.

    Objective: To describe the performance of the revised 4-variable MDRD Study equation and compare it with the performance of the 6-variable MDRD Study and Cockcroft–Gault equations.

    Design: Comparison of estimated and measured GFR.

    Setting: 15 clinical centers participating in a randomized, controlled trial.

    Patients: 1628 patients with chronic kidney disease participating in the MDRD Study.

    Measurements: Serum creatinine levels were calibrated to an assay traceable to isotope-dilution mass spectrometry. Glomerular filtration rate was measured as urinary clearance of 125I-iothalamate.

    Results: Mean measured GFR was 39.8 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (SD, 21.2). Accuracy and precision of the revised 4-variable equation were similar to those of the original 6-variable equation and better than in the Cockcroft–Gault equation, even when the latter was corrected for bias, with 90%, 91%, 60%, and 83% of estimates within 30% of measured GFR, respectively. Differences between measured and estimated GFR were greater for all equations when the estimated GFR was 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or greater.

    Limitations: The MDRD Study included few patients with a GFR greater than 90 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Equations were not compared in a separate study sample.

    Conclusions: The 4-variable MDRD Study equation provides reasonably accurate GFR estimates in patients with chronic kidney disease and a measured GFR of less than 90 mL/min per 1.73 m2. By using the reexpressed MDRD Study equation with the standardized serum creatinine assay, clinical laboratories can report more accurate GFR estimates.

    *For a list of investigators of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration, see the Appendix.

    Article and Author Information

    • Acknowledgments: The authors thank John Eckfeldt, PhD, and Amy Deysher for assistance.

    • Grant Support: By grants UO1 DK 053869, UO1 DK 067651, and UO1 DK 35073.

    • Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest:Grants received: A.S. Levey (National Institutes of Health, Amgen, National Kidney Foundation).

    • Requests for Single Reprints: Andrew S. Levey, MD, Division of Nephrology, Tufts-New England Medical Center, 750 Washington Street, Box 391, Boston, MA 02111.

    • Current Author Addresses: Drs. Levey and Stevens, Ms. Zhang, and Mr. Hendriksen: Division of Nephrology, Tufts-New England Medical Center, 750 Washington Street, Box 391, Boston, MA 02111.

    • Dr. Coresh: Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, 2024 East Monument Street, 2-645, Baltimore, MD 21205.

    • Drs. Greene and Van Lente: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195.

    • Dr. Kusek: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 617, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    • Author Contributions: Conception and design: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, L.A. Stevens, Y. Zhang, S. Hendriksen, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Analysis and interpretation of the data: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, L.A. Stevens, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Drafting of the article: A.S. Levey, L.A. Stevens.

    • Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, L.A. Stevens, Y. Zhang, S. Hendriksen, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Final approval of the article: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, L.A. Stevens, Y. Zhang, S. Hendriksen, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Provision of study materials or patients: A.S. Levey, T. Greene, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Statistical expertise: J. Coresh, T. Greene, Y. Zhang.

    • Obtaining of funding: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, F. Van Lente.

    • Administrative, technical, or logistic support: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, L.A. Stevens, Y. Zhang, S. Hendriksen, J.W. Kusek, F. Van Lente.

    • Collection and assembly of data: A.S. Levey, J. Coresh, T. Greene, Y. Zhang, S. Hendriksen, F. Van Lente.

    Comments on This Article

    | Table of Contents
    Most Read Most Read
    Most Commented Most Commented On
    Annals in the News Annals in the News
    Clinical Trials Clinical Trials
    Comparative Effectiveness Comparative Effectiveness
    Hospital Medicine Hospital Medicine
    • Advertisement
    • Advertisement