Laterza Omar F, Price Christopher P, Scott Mitchell G
Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Immunology, Division of Laboratory Medicine, Box 8118, 660 S. Euclid Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Clin Chem. 2002 May;48(5):699-707.
Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is routinely assessed by measuring the concentrations of endogenous serum markers such as blood urea nitrogen and serum creatinine (SCr). Although widely used, these endogenous markers are not ideal and do not perform optimally in certain clinical settings. The purpose of this review is to critically review the potential utility of cystatin C (CysC), especially in patient populations in which CysC may have an advantage over routinely used endogenous markers of GFR.
In a narrative approach, we extensively review publications, primarily from the last 5 years, that address the development of methods to measure CysC, reference intervals, and the diagnostic accuracy of CysC to assess GFR. Between June 2000 and September 2001 Medline was searched using "cystatin c" as a textword, and articles that examined >75 individuals (except for renal transplant studies) and/or used accepted "gold standards" for assessing GFR were selected for inclusion. A total of 17 studies are reviewed that provide reference interval data for several populations. A total of 24 studies make conclusions about the utility of CysC vs SCr and/or creatinine clearance, with 20 providing data on the sensitivity and specificity of CysC for detecting impaired GFR. These publications are organized into subgroups that deal with specific patient populations or clinical situations.
This review focuses on two areas: (a) the evolution of immunoassays used to determine the concentration of CysC in serum, their analytic sensitivity, and reference intervals; and (b) the diagnostic performance of CysC against other renal markers in the general population and in specific subpopulations of patients.
Studies of reference intervals for CysC overwhelmingly demonstrated that CysC values in blood are independent of age and sex. Of the 24 studies that examined clinical utility, 15 concluded that CysC is superior to SCr, whereas 9 concluded that CysC is equivalent but provides no advantage. Summary ROC plot analysis of 20 studies that provide sensitivity and specificity data strongly suggests that CysC will be superior to SCr for detecting impaired GFR. Taken together, it is clear that CysC performs at least as well as SCr in the population at large and that it is likely to be superior to SCr in specific patient populations.
肾小球滤过率(GFR)通常通过测量内源性血清标志物如血尿素氮和血清肌酐(SCr)的浓度来评估。尽管这些内源性标志物被广泛使用,但它们并不理想,在某些临床情况下表现不佳。本综述的目的是批判性地评估胱抑素C(CysC)的潜在效用,特别是在CysC可能比常规使用的GFR内源性标志物具有优势的患者群体中。
采用叙述性方法,我们广泛回顾了主要来自过去5年的出版物,这些出版物涉及测量CysC的方法的发展、参考区间以及CysC评估GFR的诊断准确性。在2000年6月至2001年9月期间,使用“cystatin c”作为关键词在Medline上进行检索,并选择了检查超过75例个体(肾移植研究除外)和/或使用公认的“金标准”评估GFR的文章纳入。总共回顾了17项研究,这些研究提供了几个人群的参考区间数据。共有24项研究对CysC与SCr和/或肌酐清除率的效用得出结论,其中20项提供了CysC检测GFR受损的敏感性和特异性数据。这些出版物被组织成处理特定患者群体或临床情况的亚组。
本综述关注两个领域:(a)用于测定血清中CysC浓度的免疫测定方法的演变、其分析灵敏度和参考区间;(b)CysC在一般人群和特定患者亚组中与其他肾脏标志物相比的诊断性能。
关于CysC参考区间的研究绝大多数表明,血液中的CysC值与年龄和性别无关。在24项检查临床效用的研究中,15项得出结论认为CysC优于SCr,而9项得出结论认为CysC相当但没有优势。对提供敏感性和特异性数据的20项研究进行的汇总ROC曲线分析强烈表明,在检测GFR受损方面,CysC将优于SCr。综上所述,很明显CysC在总体人群中的表现至少与SCr一样好,并且在特定患者群体中可能优于SCr。