ArticleClinical kidney journal2026
Which equation and which biomarker should be used in the Kidney Failure Risk Equation? A comparative analysis in the CKD-REIN cohort.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Similar predictive performance and clinical utility of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation using EKFC or CKD-EPI estimated glomerular filtration rate.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) is a widely used tool to estimate the 2- and 5-year risk of progression to kidney failure in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The choice of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation and biomarker may influence its prognostic performance. We aimed at comparing the predictive performance of the KFRE when used with different eGFR equations [CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) vs. EKFC (European Kidney Function Consortium)] and biomarkers (creatinine, cystatin C, or both) in a large French CKD cohort. Methods: We analyzed 2168 patients with CKD stages G3-G5 from the prospective Chronic Kidney Disease Renal Epidemiology and Information Network cohort. Eight eGFR equations were evaluated in combination with both the four- and eight-variable KFRE models. Prognostic performance was assessed at 2 and 5 years using the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), Brier scores, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed by age and sex. Results: Discrimination was uniformly high (AUROC > 0.89), but calibration patterns and decision curve analyses differed between equations. The creatinine-based CKD-EPI 2009 equation demonstrated robust and consistent performance across models and time horizons. EKFC equations-especially when using creatinine alone-showed slightly improved clinical utility at the 40% decision threshold. Cystatin C-based equations did not improve KFRE predictions compared to creatinine-based ones. Conclusions: In this French CKD cohort, both CKD-EPI 2009 and EKFC creatinine-based equations supported accurate risk prediction using the KFRE. These findings support the use of EKFC in European clinical practice and reinforce the importance of aligning eGFR equations with the population context when applying prognostic models.
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.