ArticleJournal of nephrology2025
Comparison of GFR estimation in patients with diabetes mellitus using the EKFC and CKD-EPI equations.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bibliometrics and visualization analysis: Big data research on diabetic kidney disease from 2000 to 2025.Medicine · 2026Article
- Trajectory models of serum creatinine and 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis complicated by type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Comparison between Old and New GFR Estimating Equations in Children and Adults with Glomerular Disease in the NEPTUNE Study.Glomerular diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe estimation of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is essential in the early detection of diabetic nephropathy. We herein compare the performance of common eGFR formulas against a gold standard measurement of GFR in patients with diabetes mellitus.
methodsGFR was measured in 93 patients with diabetes mellitus using iohexol clearance as the reference standard. The performance of the creatinine- and cystatin C-based EKFC formulas (2021, 2023) and the CKD-EPI formulas (2009, 2012) was compared against measured GFR.
resultsSixty patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 33 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus were included. The creatinine-based EKFC formula showed lower bias and higher accuracy than the CKD-EPI formula. No significant difference was observed between the cystatin C-based formulas. The combined creatinine- and cystatin C-based formulas had the highest accuracy and lowest bias. Body fat or diabetes type did not significantly influence the accuracy of the cystatin C-based formulas.
conclusionsOur study demonstrated a slight advantage of the creatinine-based EKFC formula over the CKD-EPI formula in patients with diabetes. However, both for the CKD-EPI and the EKFC formula, the best performance was achieved by the combined creatinine- and cystatin C-based formulas.
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.