HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: CJN.05281008v1 4/5/965    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Foley, R. N. Articles by Collins, A. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Foley, R. N. Articles by Collins, A. J.

Cystatin C Levels in U.S. Adults, 1988–1994 Versus 1999–2002: NHANES

Robert N. Foley^*,, Changchun Wang, Jon J. Snyder, and Allan J. Collins^*,

^* Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; United States Renal Data System Coordinating Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Correspondence: Robert N. Foley, MB, United States Renal Data System, 914 South 8th Street, Suite S-406, Minneapolis, MN 55404. Phone: 612-347-5979; Fax: 612-347-5878; E-mail: rfoley{at}usrds.org

Background and objectives: Creatinine-based estimates of GFR suggest an evolving epidemic of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in U.S. adults that is inadequately explained by conventional, modifiable risk factors. Cystatin C has recently emerged as a promising measure of GFR. To enable further insights into the evolution of CKD in the U.S. population, this study aimed to examine cystatin C levels in U.S. adults.

Design, setting, participants, and measurements: Stored serum samples, measured in 2006, were used to compare cystatin C levels among adult participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) in two time periods, 1988–1994 (n = 6877) and 1999–2002 (n = 4563).

Results: Mean cystatin C levels (0.9 versus 0.9 mg/L, P = 0.65) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratios were similar (5.8 versus 5.9 mg/g, P = 0.19) in the 2 study eras. In contrast, standardized serum creatinine (0.8 versus 0.9 mg/dl, P < 0.0001) was higher and estimated GFR (93.2 versus 87.6 ml/min/1.73 m², P < 0.001) was lower in 1999–2002. Similar discrepancies in population trends (when cystatin C and creatinine-based methods were used to define GFR) were present when categories of kidney function were considered, and when adjustment was made for demography and comorbid illness.

Conclusions: The disparity between temporal trends when kidney function is assessed with different measurements suggests that estimating trends in disease burden remains an open question.