ArticleKidney international reports2018
Limited Reliability of the Spot Urine Protein/Creatinine Ratio in the Longitudinal Evaluation of Patients With Lupus Nephritis.
Article in Kidney international reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urinary Albumin-to-Creatinine Ratio, Cardiovascular Health, and All-Cause Mortality in Hypertension: A Nationwide Cohort Analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Urine Proteomics Link Complement Activation with Interstitial Fibrosis/Tubular Atrophy in Lupus Nephritis Patients.Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2023Article
- Triglycerides as Biomarker for Predicting Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Related Kidney Injury of Negative Proteinuria.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Spot Urine Protein/Creatinine Ratio Testing at a Large University Medical Center: Evidence for Overuse of This Low-Value Diagnostic Test.Kidney international reports · 2020Article
- Lupus nephritis: challenges and progress.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2019Review
- [Lupus nephritis].Der Internist · 2019Review
- Proteomic profiling of urine: implications for lupus nephritis.Expert review of proteomics · 2019Review
- Commentary on the Current Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Lupus Nephritis Flare.Current rheumatology reports · 2019Review
- Clinical efficacy and safety of rituximab in lupus nephritis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCross-sectional studies document that the spot protein/creatinine ratio (PCR) is often an inaccurate estimate of proteinuria magnitude compared with the 24-hour PCR, which is the gold standard. However, the extent to which the inaccuracy of the spot PCR varies over time and between individuals has not previously been reported. We address these crucial questions using a unique database, an National Institutes of Health trial in which lupus nephritis (LN) patients (N = 103) provided spot PCR testing each month and 24-hour PCR testing every 3 months for up to 15 months after induction therapy.
methodsA gold standard proteinuria trend line was constructed for each patient by joining the points that represented the serial 24-hour PCR values of the patient. The spot PCR values of the patient were then plotted in relationship to the 24-hour PCR trend line. Using our previous work, which estimated the 95% confidence intervals for the 24-hour PCR at specific levels, we determined in each patient whether the spot PCR values were "reliable," "problematic," or "unreliable." The sequential spot PCR of the patients deviated widely and often from the 24-hour PCR trend line, to the extent that, if the spot PCR results were used in real time for clinical decision-making, it was likely management errors would occur.
resultsSpot PCRs were reliable in 41%, problematic in 24%, and unreliable in 35% of patients. Those with unreliable spot PCRs could not be predicted and were more likely to respond poorly to treatment.
conclusionThe spot PCR should not be used for management of LN, and perhaps, other glomerulopathies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.