External Validation of a Novel Multimarker GFR Estimating Equation

Abstract

Key Points Using multiple markers may improve GFR estimation especially in settings where creatinine and cystatin C are known to be limited.Panel eGFR is a novel multimarker eGFR equation consisting of age, sex, cystatin C, and nuclear magnetic resonance–measured creatinine, valine, and myo-inositol.eGFR-Cr and eGFR-Cr-CysC may underestimate measured GFR, while panel eGFR was unbiased among younger Black male individuals. Background Using multiple markers may improve accuracy in GFR estimation. We sought to externally validate and compare the performance of a novel multimarker eGFR (panel eGFR) equation among Black and White persons using the Genetic Epidemiology Network of Arteriopathy cohort. Methods We included 224 sex, race/ethnicity, and measured GFR (mGFR) category–matched persons, with GFR measured using urinary clearance of iothalamate. We calculated panel eGFR using serum creatinine, valine, myo-inositol, cystatin C, age, and sex. We compared its reliability with current eGFR equations (2021 CKD Epidemiology Collaboration creatinine [eGFR-Cr] and creatinine with cystatin C [eGFR-Cr-CysC]) using median bias, precision, and accuracy metrics. We evaluated each equation's performance in age, sex, and race subgroups. Results In the overall cohort, 49% were Black individuals, and mean mGFR was 79 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Panel eGFR overestimated mGFR (bias: −2.4 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% confidence interval [CI], −4.4 to −0.7), eGFR-Cr-CysC underestimated mGFR (bias: 4.8 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 2.1 to 6.7), while eGFR-Cr was unbiased (bias: 2.0 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, −1.1 to 4.6). All equations had comparable accuracy. Among Black male individuals younger than 65 years, both eGFR-Cr (bias: 17.0 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 8.6 to 23.5) and eGFR-Cr-CysC (bias: 14.5 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 6.0 to 19.7) underestimated mGFR, whereas panel eGFR was unbiased (bias: 1.7 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, −3.4 to 10.0). Metrics of accuracy for all eGFRs were acceptable in all subgroups except for panel eGFR in Black female individuals younger than 65 years (P30: 73.3%). Conclusions Panel eGFR can be used to estimate mGFR and may have utility among Black male individuals younger than 65 years where current CKD Epidemiology Collaboration equations are biased.