Observational studyJAMA network open2022
Association of Intraindividual Difference in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate by Creatinine vs Cystatin C and End-stage Kidney Disease and Mortality.
Observational study in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discordance in Creatinine- and Cystatin C-Based eGFR and Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.JAMA · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Use of Cystatin C in Tandem with Creatinine to Improve GFR Estimation and Clinical Decision Making.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2026Review
- Which kidney function estimate should guide anticoagulant dosing and risk assessment in atrial fibrillation?European heart journal open · 2026Article
- Impact of differences in kidney function estimation by creatinine compared to cystatin C on clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- Estimated glomerular filtration rate discordance and cardiopulmonary morbidity in sickle cell disease.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Discrepancy between cystatin C-based and creatinine-based eGFR predicts all-cause mortality in a community-based population: the Takahata study.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Article
- Creatinine muscle index in UK Biobank: comparison with MRI and associations with frailty and mortality.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Association Between Differences in Estimated GFR by Creatinine Vs. Cystatin C and Stroke Outcomes: Results From the Third China National Stroke Registry.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Unravelling Sarcopenia in Chronic Kidney Disease: From Pathogenesis to Diagnosis and Therapeutics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The difference between cystatin C- and creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate and survival in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a population-based cohort study.Neurodegenerative disease management · 2026Article
- Outcomes and Risk Factors of Widened Difference in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Based on Creatinine or Cystatin C: Adjust Model Development With More Than 300,000 UK Biobank Participants.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- The association between the cystatin C- and creatinine-based estimated GFR ratio and post-ablation outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Association between the difference in estimated GFR based on cystatin C versus creatinine in coronary artery diseases.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Low Cystatin C-to-Creatinine Estimated GFR Ratio Predicts Post-Kidney Transplant Cardiovascular Events.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Difference between estimated glomerular filtration rate based on cystatin c versus creatinine and risk of hypertension: a prospective cohort study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Size-selective glomerular filtration as a hallmark of premature kidney ageing in nondiabetic individuals.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- Discordance between Cystatin C-Based and Creatinine-Based Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate as a Measure of Health.Clinical chemistry · 2025Article
- Association of Difference Between eGFR From Cystatin C and Creatinine and Serum GDF-15 With Adverse Outcomes in Diabetes Mellitus.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Article
- Complex Etiologies of the Discordance Between Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated GFR and Its Adverse Associations: Findings From the CRIC Study.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: As cystatin C is increasingly adopted to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), clinicians will encounter patients in whom cystatin C-based eGFR (eGFRcys) and creatinine-based eGFR (eGFRcr) differ widely. The clinical implications of these differences, eGFRdiffcys-cr, are unknown. Objective: To evaluate the associations of eGFRdiffcys-cr with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and mortality among individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a prospective cohort study of 4956 individuals with mild to moderate CKD from 7 clinical centers in the United States who enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study between 2003 to 2018. Statistical analyses were completed in December 2021. Exposures: eGFRdiffcys-cr (eGFRcys - eGFRcr) was calculated at baseline and annually thereafter for 3 years. Because 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 represents a clinically meaningful difference in eGFR that also distinguishes CKD stages, eGFRdiffcys-cr was categorized as: less than -15 mL/min/1.73 m2, -15 to 15 mL/min/1.73 m2, and 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or greater. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of ESKD, defined as initiation of maintenance dialysis or receipt of a kidney transplant, and all-cause mortality were adjudicated from study entry until administrative censoring in 2018. Results: Among 4956 participants with mean (SD) age of 59.5 (10.5) years, 2152 (43.4%) were Black, 515 (10.4%) were Hispanic, and 2113 (42.6%) were White. There were 2156 (43.5%) women and 2800 (56.5%) men. At baseline, eGFRcys and eGFRcr values differed by more than 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 in one-third of participants (1638 participants [33.1%]). Compared with participants with similar baseline eGFRcys and eGFRcr (eGFRdiffcys-cr -15 to 15 mL/min/1.73 m2), those in whom eGFRcys was substantially lower than eGFRcr (eGFRdiffcys-cr < -15 mL/min/1.73 m2) had a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.40-2.48) while those with eGFRdiffcys-cr of 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or greater had lower risks of ESKD (subHR [SHR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.89) and mortality (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, CI 0.58-0.81). In time-updated analyses, participants with eGFRdiffcys-cr less than -15 mL/min/1.73 m2 had higher risks of ESKD (SHR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.10-3.04) and mortality (HR, 3.03; 95% CI, 2.19-4.19) compared with participants with similar eGFRcys and eGFRcr. Conversely, participants with eGFRdiffcys-cr of 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or greater had lower risks of ESKD (SHR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.71) and mortality (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.75). Longitudinal changes in eGFRdiffcys-cr were associated with mortality risk. Compared with participants who had similar slopes by eGFRcys and eGFRcr, those with smaller eGFRcr declines had an 8-fold increased mortality risk (HR, 8.20; 95% CI, 6.37-10.56), and those with larger apparent declines by eGFRcr had a lower mortality risk (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.08-0.24). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that large differences between eGFRcys and eGFRcr were common in persons with CKD. These differences and their changes over time may be informative of ESKD and mortality risks, warranting monitoring of both eGFRcys and eGFRcr in this high-risk population.
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.