SynthesisJAMA2025
Discordance in Creatinine- and Cystatin C-Based eGFR and Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in JAMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- 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
- Association of the Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value-to-Albumin Ratio as a Novel Cardiovascular Disease Predictor in Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective Cohort Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Association of Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate With Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- Estimated glomerular filtration rate discordance and cardiopulmonary morbidity in sickle cell disease.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Cystatin C-creatinine eGFR discordance and all-cause mortality in adults with preserved creatinine-based kidney function: a dual-cohort study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- The eGFR difference between creatinine-based and cystatin-C-based equations is also important in an Asian population within the J-CKD-DB-Ex.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Creatinine muscle index in UK Biobank: comparison with MRI and associations with frailty and mortality.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Early diagnosis of radiation-induced renal injury: from lagging indicators to multimodal, pre-fibrotic detection.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Sex differences in cardiac risk and kidney function: serum creatinine versus cystatin C.BMC medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) can differ according to whether creatinine or cystatin C is used for the eGFR calculation, but the prevalence and importance of these differences remain unclear. Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of a discordance between cystatin C-based eGFR (eGFRcys) and creatinine-based eGFR (eGFRcr), identify characteristics associated with greater discordance, and evaluate associations of discordance with adverse outcomes. Data Sources: Participants in the Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium (CKD-PC). Study Selection: Participants with concurrent cystatin C and creatinine measurements and clinical outcome measurement. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Between April 2024 and August 2025, data were synthesized using individual-level meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary independent measurement was a large negative eGFR difference (eGFRdiff), defined as an eGFRcys that was at least 30% lower than eGFRcr. Secondary (dependent) outcomes included all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and kidney failure with replacement therapy. Results: A total of 821 327 individuals from 23 outpatient cohorts (mean [SD] age, 59 [12] years; 48% female; 13.5% with diabetes; 40% with hypertension) and 39 639 individuals from 2 inpatient cohorts (mean [SD] age, 67 [16] years; 31% female; 30% with diabetes; 72% with hypertension) were included. Among outpatient participants, 11% had a large negative eGFRdiff (range, 3%-50%). Among inpatients, 35% had a large negative eGFRdiff. Among outpatient participants, at a mean (SD) follow-up of 11 (4) years, a large negative eGFRdiff, compared with an eGFRdiff between -30% and 30%, was associated with higher rates of all-cause mortality (28.4 vs 16.8 per 1000 person-years [PY]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.69 [95% CI, 1.57-1.82]), cardiovascular mortality (6.1 vs 3.8 per 1000 PY; HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.48-1.76]), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (13.3 vs 9.8 per 1000 PY; HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.27-1.44]), heart failure (13.2 vs 8.6 per 1000 PY; HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.40-1.68]), and kidney failure with replacement therapy (2.7 vs 2.1 per 1000 PY; HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.13-1.47]). Conclusions and Relevance: In the CKD-PC, 11% of outpatient participants and 35% of hospitalized patients had an eGFRcys that was at least 30% lower than their eGFRcr. In the outpatient setting, presence of eGFRcys at least 30% lower than eGFRcr was associated with significantly higher rates of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and kidney failure.
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.