Natural history of older adults with impaired kidney function: the InCHIANTI study.

Department of Internal Medicine, Rehabilitation and Geriatrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rejuvenation Research (Impact Factor: 3.93). 09/2011; 14(5):513-23. DOI: 10.1089/rej.2011.1179
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to assess the kidney function of an older community-dwelling population at baseline and appraise its evolution after 3 years of follow-up in terms of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage progression, magnitude of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) changes, and value of serum creatinine. This was a prospective population-based study of 676 Italian participants, aged 65 years and older. GFR was estimated using the Cockcroft-Gault equation and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation. Using the Cockcroft-Gault equation. A total of 33% of participants had criteria of CKD (GFR < 60 mL/min) at baseline; among them, the majority remained stable, 10% improved, and 7% progressed to more severe CKD stages at follow-up. Loss of GFR in participants with GFR < 60 mL/min was significantly lower (1.4 mL/min per year) than in participants with GFR ≥ 60 mL/min (3.3 mL/min per year) at baseline. Most participants classified with CKD stage 2 (GFR 60-89 mL/min) or stage 3 (GFR 30-59 mL/min) at baseline did not change stage, whereas 55% of people with CKD stage 1 (GFR > 90 mL/min) at baseline worsened to stage 2 and 10% worsened to stage 3. An abnormal high level of serum creatinine at baseline did not help to predict who might worsen at follow-up. Older people with CKD displayed a low progression of renal disease and therefore are at higher risk for co-morbidities related to CKD than for progression to end-stage renal disease.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aims: To investigate differences in prostate cancer detection rates according to the level of glomerular filtration rates (GFR). Materials and methods: Patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of 4.0-10.0 ng/ml were analysed. Age, serum creatinine, estimated GFR, body mass index, total PSA (tPSA), free PSA (fPSA), per cent free PSA (%fPSA), comorbidities, biopsy Gleason sum and per cent positive core were retrospectively reviewed. All parameters were compared to show whether patients with GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (group A) have higher risk of prostate cancer than patients with GFR ≥ 60 (group B). The primary endpoint was cancer detection rate and the secondary endpoints were differences in mean tPSA, fPSA, %fPSA and pathologic outcomes. Results: A total of 1092 men (243 cancer patients) were included. Mean age was 65.8 ± 7.7 years. No differences in mean age and tPSA were found between groups A and B. Mean fPSA, %fPSA and cancer detection rate were significantly higher in group A than group B. The incidence of %fPSA < 25% was significantly lower in group A than in group B. GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) , fPSA and %fPSA < 25% were significant predictors for the presence of prostate cancer in patients with tPSA between 4 and 10 ng/ml. However, %fPSA < 25% was not a significant predictor for group A. Conclusions: Because of the increased cancer detection rates in patients with CKD of stage ≥ 3 whose tPSA levels are 4.0-10.0 ng/ml, performing prostate biopsy should be actively considered in patients with CKD.
    International Journal of Clinical Practice 06/2013; 67(6):552-7. DOI:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.03014.x · 2.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Internal and Emergency Medicine 09/2012; 7(5):399-401. DOI:10.1007/s11739-012-0845-2 · 2.41 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of kidney function estimation equations and to determine the frequency of drug dose discordance in an older population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of data from community-dwelling volunteers randomly selected from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010. SUBJECTS: A total of 269 men and women with a mean ± SD age of 81 ± 6 years, mean serum creatinine concentration (Scr ) of 1.1 ± 0.4 mg/dl, and mean 24-hour measured creatinine clearance (mClcr ) of 53 ± 13 ml/minute. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Kidney function was estimated by using the following equations: Cockcroft-Gault (CG), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI). The performance of each equation was assessed by measuring bias and precision relative to mClcr . Dose calculation errors (discordance) were determined for 10 drugs requiring renal dosage adjustments to avoid toxicity when compared with the dosages approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The CG equation was the least biased estimate of mClcr . The MDRD and CKD-EPI equations were significantly positively biased compared with CG (mean ± SD 34 ± 20% and 22 ± 15%, respectively, p<0.001) and mClcr (29 ± 47% and 18 ± 40%, respectively, p<0.001). Rounding low Scr values (less than 1.0 mg/dl) up to an arbitrary value of 1.0 mg/dl resulted in CG values (44 ± 10 ml/minute) that were significantly lower than mClcr (56 ± 12 ml/minute, p<0.001) and CG (56 ± 15 ml/minute, p<0.001). The MDRD and CKD-EPI equations had median dose discordance rates of 28.6% and 22.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The MDRD and CKD-EPI equations significantly overestimated creatinine clearance (mClcr and CG) in elderly individuals. This leads to dose calculation errors for many drugs, particularly in individuals with severe renal impairment. Thus equations estimating glomerular filtration rate should not be substituted in place of the CG equation in older adults for the purpose of renal dosage adjustments. In addition, the common practice of rounding or replacing low Scr values with an arbitrary value of 1.0 mg/dl for use in the CG equation should be avoided. Additional studies that evaluate alternative eGFR equations in the older populations that incorporate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic outcomes measures are needed.
    Pharmacotherapy 09/2013; 33(9). DOI:10.1002/phar.1282 · 2.20 Impact Factor