William B. Schwartz Division of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):69-78. doi: 10.2215/CJN.03660316. Epub 2016 Nov 10.
Serum β-trace protein (BTP) and β-2 microglobulin (B2M) are associated with risk of ESRD and death in the general population and in populations at high risk for these outcomes (GP/HR) and those with CKD, but results differ among studies.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We performed an individual patient-level meta-analysis including three GP/HR studies (n=17,903 participants) and three CKD studies (n=5415). We compared associations, risk prediction, and improvement in reclassification of eGFR using BTP (eGFR) and B2M (eGFR) alone and the average (eGFR) of eGFR, eGFR, creatinine (eGFR), and cystatin C (eGFR), to eGFR, eGFR, and their combination (eGFR) for ESRD (2075 events) and death (7275 events).
Mean (SD) follow up times for ESRD and mortality for GP/HR and CKD studies were 13 (4), 6.2 (3.2), 14 (5), and 7.5 (3.9) years, respectively. Compared with eGFR, eGFR and eGFR improved risk associations and modestly improved prediction for ESRD and death even after adjustment for established risk factors. eGFR provided the most consistent improvement in associations and prediction across both outcomes and populations. Assessment of heterogeneity did not yield clinically relevant differences. For ESRD, addition of albuminuria substantially attenuated the improvement in risk prediction and risk classification with novel filtration markers. For mortality, addition of albuminuria did not affect the improvement in risk prediction with the use of novel markers, but lessened improvement in risk classification, especially for the CKD cohort.
These markers do not provide substantial additional prognostic information to eGFR and albuminuria, but may be appropriate in circumstances where eGFR is not accurate or albuminuria is not available. Educational efforts to increase measurement of albuminuria in clinical practice may be more cost-effective than measurement of BTP and B2M for improving prognostic information.
血清β-痕迹蛋白(BTP)和β-2 微球蛋白(B2M)与普通人群和高风险人群(GP/HR)的终末期肾病(ESRD)和死亡风险以及慢性肾脏病(CKD)患者的风险相关,但不同研究结果存在差异。
设计、地点、参与者和测量方法:我们进行了一项个体患者水平的荟萃分析,包括三项 GP/HR 研究(n=17903 名参与者)和三项 CKD 研究(n=5415 名)。我们比较了 BTP(eGFR)和 B2M(eGFR)单独使用以及 eGFR、eGFR、肌酐(eGFR)和胱抑素 C(eGFR)的平均值(eGFR)与 eGFR、eGFR 及其组合(eGFR)在预测 ESRD(2075 例事件)和死亡(7275 例事件)方面的关联、风险预测和重新分类能力。
GP/HR 和 CKD 研究的 ESRD 和死亡率的平均(SD)随访时间分别为 13(4)、6.2(3.2)、14(5)和 7.5(3.9)年。与 eGFR 相比,eGFR 和 eGFR 改善了 ESRD 和死亡的风险关联,并在调整了既定危险因素后适度改善了风险预测。eGFR 在两个结局和人群中均提供了最一致的关联和预测改善。评估异质性并未产生临床相关差异。对于 ESRD,添加白蛋白尿会大大削弱新型滤过标志物对风险预测和风险分类的改善作用。对于死亡率,添加白蛋白尿不会影响新型标志物在风险预测方面的改善作用,但会降低风险分类的改善程度,尤其是对于 CKD 队列。
这些标志物不能为 eGFR 和白蛋白尿提供实质性的额外预后信息,但在 eGFR 不准确或白蛋白尿不可用时可能是合适的。在临床实践中增加白蛋白尿的测量可能比测量 BTP 和 B2M 以改善预后信息更具成本效益。