Original ArticlesDiabetes and the Kidney

Early Glomerular Hyperfiltration and Long-Term Kidney Outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes

The DCCT/EDIC Experience

Mark E. Molitch, Xiaoyu Gao, Ionut Bebu, Ian H. de Boer, John Lachin, Andrew Paterson, Bruce Perkins, Amy K. Saenger, Michael Steffes, Bernard Zinman and for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Research Group
CJASN June 2019, 14 (6) 854-861; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.14831218

Abstract

Background and objectives Glomerular hyperfiltration has been considered to be a contributing factor to the development of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). To address this issue, we analyzed GFR follow-up data on participants with type 1 diabetes undergoing 125I-iothalamate clearance on entry into the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications study.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements This was a cohort study of DCCT participants with type 1 diabetes who underwent an 125I-iothalamate clearance (iGFR) at DCCT baseline. Presence of hyperfiltration was defined as iGFR levels ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2, with secondary thresholds of 130 or 150 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between the baseline hyperfiltration status and the subsequent risk of reaching an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2.

Results Of the 446 participants, 106 (24%) had hyperfiltration (iGFR levels ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2) at baseline. Over a median follow-up of 28 (interquartile range, 23, 33) years, 53 developed an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2. The cumulative incidence of eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at 28 years of follow-up was 11.0% among participants with hyperfiltration at baseline, compared with 12.8% among participants with baseline GFR <140 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Hyperfiltration was not significantly associated with subsequent risk of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in an unadjusted Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.43 to 1.62) nor in an adjusted model (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 1.54). Application of alternate thresholds to define hyperfiltration (130 or 150 ml/min per 1.73 m2) showed similar findings.

Conclusions Early hyperfiltration in patients with type 1 diabetes was not associated with a higher long-term risk of decreased GFR. Although glomerular hypertension may be a mechanism of kidney injury in DKD, higher total GFR does not appear to be a risk factor for advanced DKD.

Introduction

Glomerular hyperfiltration has long been considered to be a major contributing factor to the development of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) (1–4). Initial studies in various rodent models of DKD demonstrated that partial ablation of kidney mass resulted in the surviving nephrons undergoing adaptations to meet the increased excretory demands, i.e., an increase in single nephron GFR, and ultimately resulted in proteinuria, hypertension, glomerulosclerosis and eventual kidney failure (2). In diabetic rodent models, hyperglycemia induced increases in total and single nephron GFR but proteinuria and glomerulosclerosis did not occur if the increased GFR was prevented by instituting a low protein diet or giving an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, supporting the hypothesis that hyperfiltration rather than hyperglycemia was the pathogenetic factor (5,6).

Early studies in small numbers of patients with type 1 diabetes showed that with diabetes of short duration, the GFR was increased compared with that of nondiabetic controls (7,8). Patients with type 1 diabetes with higher GFRs had an increased risk of developing microalbuminuria in some (9–13), but not all studies (14–18). In larger, more recent studies of patients with type 1 diabetes, those with hyperfiltration had a higher risk of developing microalbuminuria in one study (19), but not in others (20–23). Few studies have been carried out in patients with type 2 diabetes, but results have similarly been conflicting, as one study showed that hyperfiltration was associated with an increased risk of albuminuria (24) whereas others did not show such a risk (25,26).

The impact of hyperfiltration on the long-term development of DKD, defined by low eGFR, is even less clear. Two studies in patients with type 1 diabetes have shown that hyperfiltration is associated with a rapid decline in GFR using a diethylene-triamine-penta-acetic acid clearance method (27) or the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation (28). However, neither demonstrated an increased risk for the development of a GFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (stage 3 CKD) or more advanced levels of CKD, leaving it uncertain whether these changes represented statistical regression to the mean, a “beneficial” resolution of elevated single nephron GFR to normofiltration, or indeed an abnormal loss of GFR that would persist and result in stage 3 CKD over time. In patients with type 2 diabetes, an increase in the proportion of patients with a rapid decline in GFR was demonstrated in studies using a labeled EDTA clearance method (25), an iohexol clearance method (24), and a Modified Diet in Renal Disease equation method for GFR measurements (29), but again, none demonstrated an increased risk for the development of stage 3 CKD or more advanced stages of CKD.

To address whether early glomerular hyperfiltration results in a subsequent increased risk of developing clinically significant loss of GFR (stage 3 CKD), we have analyzed 30-year GFR follow-up data on patients who underwent 125I-iothalamate clearance (iGFR) on entry into the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study.

Materials and Methods

Study Population

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) enrolled 1441 persons with type 1 diabetes from 1983 to 1989 in an international, multicenter study to determine the effects of intensive diabetes therapy on the long-term complications of diabetes (30). Clinicaltrial.gov identification numbers for the study are NCT00360893 and NCT00360815, with a date of registration of August 7, 2006. All participants gave informed, written consent under the individual centers’ institutional review board guidelines, which adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki. The trial included two cohorts. The primary prevention cohort was characterized by diabetes duration 1–5 years, albumin excretion rate (AER) <40 mg/24 h, and no retinopathy by fundus photography. The secondary intervention cohort was characterized by diabetes duration 1–15 years, AER≤200 mg/24 h, and at least one microaneurysm in either eye (but no more than moderate nonproliferative retinopathy). For both cohorts, serum creatinine <1.2 mg/dl and creatinine clearance >100 ml/min per 1.73 m2 were required for eligibility.

Participants were randomly assigned to intensive diabetes therapy aimed at lowering glucose levels to as close as safely possible to the nondiabetic range, whereas conventional therapy aimed at preventing symptoms of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. In 1994, after completion of the DCCT, 1375 participants (96% of the surviving cohort) agreed to participate in the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. All participants were instructed in intensive therapy methods and responsibility for ongoing diabetes care was returned to the participants’ health care provider. Diabetes therapy and glycemic control, as measured by hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), became similar in the two original DCCT treatment groups, and yearly follow-up is currently ongoing as of 2019 (31).

DCCT enrollment spanned 1983–1989, during which 1441 participants were enrolled. Starting in 1986, after many patients had already been enrolled, iGFR was added to the protocol (32) and was assessed at DCCT baseline in 446 participants. This analysis includes long-term follow-up data on the 446 DCCT/EDIC participants who underwent assessment of kidney function using iothalamate clearance (see below) at the time of entry into the DCCT.

Iothalamate Clearance

The details of the iothalamate clearance methodology and coefficients of variation of this test have been described previously (33). Briefly, GFR was measured as the urinary clearance of 125I-Iothalamate after a subcutaneous injection of 35 µCi without epinephrine. After an equilibration period of at least 1 hour, four consecutive urine collections were obtained by voluntary voiding and five serum samples were drawn bracketing the urine collections. The overall GFR was calculated as if the clearance periods were one long period. The median intratest coefficient of variation was 11.7%. All iothalamate clearances were adjusted for body surface area (34).

A review of the pertinent literature showed considerable variability on the level of GFR used for the definition of hyperfiltration: levels (all in ml/min per 1.73 m2) included 120 (24,28,29), 125 (11,13,19,27), 130 (19,22), 135 (17,18,22 [in men]), 137 (26), 140 (12,23), and 150 (9,22 [in women]). The primary analysis here utilized an iothalamate clearance of ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2 to indicate hyperfiltration, as being in the middle of these prior estimates, but sensitivity analyses were also conducted using hyperfiltration cutoff points of ≥130 and ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2.

Outcomes

Serum creatinine was measured annually throughout the DCCT and EDIC study using a method traceable to isotope dilution mass spectrometry, and was used to determine eGFR (31–35) using the CKD-EPI equation (36). Reduced GFR was defined as an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (stage 3 CKD) and included patients with ESKD. A secondary outcome was sustained reduced GFR, defined as two consecutive visits with eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2, and included participants who had developed ESKD. All reduced GFR events among the 446 participants in this study that occurred up to a median total study follow-up period of 28 years were included in these analyses, whereas participants without an event were censored at last follow-up or at this time. A secondary analysis was also conducted using all the first iGFR values, to include an additional 719 participants with a first iGFR measurement at DCCT year 3/4, and 19 at year 5, for a total of 1184 participants. Other secondary outcomes included the development of macroalbuminuria (AER≥300 mg/24 h or 300 mg/g creatinine) and sustained macroalbuminuria, defined as two consecutive visits with macroalbuminuria.

Covariates

The risk factors considered in these analyses were evaluated at the DCCT baseline visit, which included a medical history, physical examination, and collection of blood and urine biospecimens. HbA1c was measured using high-performance ion-exchange liquid chromatography. BP was measured by trained observers after ≥5 minutes of rest. A seven-point capillary blood glucose profile was collected by the participants and analyzed for glucose as previously described (37).

Statistical Analyses

Discrete variables were summarized using percentages, and continuous variables were summarized using means (±SDs) and medians (first and third quartiles). Event-free (survival) probability curves for onset of stage 3 CKD were obtained using the Kaplan–Meier estimator.

The associations between the iothalamate-determined GFR and eGFR, HbA1c, and seven-point profile blood glucose levels were described using Spearman correlation coefficients. The association between hyperfiltration and the subsequent risk of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 was assessed using Cox proportional hazards (PH) models both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline age, systolic and diastolic BP, duration of type 1 diabetes, cohort (primary prevention versus secondary intervention), group (intensive versus conventional), and HbA1c. Additional Cox PH models investigated whether the association between hyperfiltration and risk of stage 3 CKD differed by cohort and treatment group using interaction terms. Separate models were employed for the three cutoffs considered for iothalamate GFR values (i.e., ≥130, ≥140, and ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2), and for incident stage 3 CKD and sustained stage 3 CKD. A spline function with three degrees of freedom described the risk gradient of stage 3 CKD as a function of iothalamate-determined GFR values. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using all the first iGFR values (even after baseline). The association between hyperfiltration and the risk of eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in this combined group was assessed using a Cox model stratified by the time of the iGFR measurement (baseline versus DCCT year 3/4 versus DCCT year 5). Because the iGFR values may differ after baseline (i.e., at DCCT year 3/4 and DCCT year 5) between the intensive and the conventional groups, the effect of hyperfiltration was also assessed using an additional model with an interaction term between hyperfiltration (yes/no) and a binary variable, which is 1 for participants in the intensive group first evaluated after DCCT baseline.

Similar to the reduced eGFR analyses, we used Cox PH models to investigate the association between hyperfiltration (yes/no) and the risk of macroalbuminuria (AER≥300 mg/24 h).

Data Sharing

DCCT/EDIC data and biological specimens are routinely submitted to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) Repositories on a predetermined schedule according to a joint agreement between the DCCT/EDIC Research Group and the NIDDK. The most recent submission of data and of biological specimens included data and samples collected up to June 30, 2012 (EDIC year 19). Data and samples collected up to June 30, 2017 (EDIC year 24) will be deposited on December 31, 2019. The NIDDK Repository does not assign accession numbers to publicly available data sets. More information regarding the DCCT/EDIC data available is located at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.niddkrepository.org_studies_edic_-3Fquery-3Ddcct&d=DwICAg&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=96U9k0VXFdwCJ-8PFmUBhkwJT4AsYzKQDhilMhXfoSw&m=RbtH1N0lsIzegO4rE1aflq8NZJaYJ4FlPWVfOGYCpXY&s=o6DDGrvFm2Z3HW4VY9TyTnMxlUKvTiONfY-zip-kajE&e=

Results

The characteristics of the 446 participants who underwent iothalamate GFR assessments on entry into the DCCT, both overall and stratified by iothalamate GFR levels, are shown in Table 1. The participants were young (mean age 28±7 years) and had a short duration of diabetes at just over 4 years. They were normotensive and the mean HbA1c was 8.8%. The characteristics of these 446 participants were similar to the total of 1441 participants in the DCCT (Supplemental Table 1). Overall, 178 participants had iothalamate GFR levels ≥130 ml/min per 1.73 m2, 106 had levels ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2, and 55 had levels ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (Supplemental Figure 1). The proportions of participants with iothalamate clearances of ≥130, 140, and 150 ml/min per 1.73 m2 were similar between treatment groups (Supplemental Table 2).

View this table:
Table 1.

Characteristics of study participants with baseline iothalamate GFR measurements (before randomization in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial; n=446), both overall and stratified by the iothalamate GFR levels

The correlations between the iothalamate GFR levels and the HbA1c and mean seven-point blood glucose profile were 0.07 and 0.09, respectively, and were not statistically significant (Supplemental Figures 2 and 3). A comparison was also carried out of the iothalamate GFR versus the calculated CKD-EPI eGFR on the basis of the serum creatinine levels at baseline (correlation, 0.29; Supplemental Figure 4).

Among the 446 participants in this study, there were 53 (12%) eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 events over a median follow-up period of 28 (interquartile range, 26, 29) years (rate of 4.69 events per 1000 individuals at risk for 1 year). This is similar to the occurrence in the full cohort, where 13% reached an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (rate of 4.91 events per 1000 person-years). Of the 446 participants who underwent iothalamate studies, 34 experienced sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 events over a median follow-up time of 28 (14, 24) years (rate of 2.98 sustained events per 1000 individuals at risk for 1 year). Figure 1 depicts the Kaplan–Meier survival curves for developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 according to their initial filtration status, as determined by the iothalamate GFR using 140 ml/min per 1.73 m2 as the cutoff. The proportion maintaining an eGFR ≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 was not decreased and was actually somewhat greater in the hyperfiltration group (95 out of 106, 89.6% versus 298 out of 340, 87.6%) using the cutoff of 140 ml/min per 1.73 m2. The cumulative incidences of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 were again similar in the two hyperfiltration groups (≥140 versus <140 ml/min/1.73m2: 4.1% versus 5.9% after 20 years, 9.7% versus 8.9% after 24 years, and 11% versus 12.8% after 28 years) (Table 2).

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Kaplan–Meier survival curves and 95% CIs for developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 show no difference for those with hyperfiltration (eGFR >140 ml/min per 1.73 m2) compared to those without hyperfiltration (eGFR <140 ml/min per 1.73 m2).

View this table:
Table 2.

Associations of baseline iothalamate GFR with the long-term incidence of eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the study

Hyperfiltration (iothalamate GFR ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2) was not associated with subsequent risk of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in an unadjusted Cox PH model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.43 to 1.62) nor in the adjusted model (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.38 to 1.54) (Table 2). Similar results were obtained for the developing of a sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (Supplemental Table 3). Interactions between hyperfiltration and cohort and treatment group were not significant for the risk of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (P=0.8 and P=0.9, respectively) (Supplemental Figure 5).

Sensitivity analyses were performed using hyperfiltration cutoffs of ≥130 and ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2. These analyses similarly did not show that hyperfiltration resulted in increased long-term risks of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Table 2 shows the cumulative incidences and HRs of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at 20, 24, and 28 years for the cutoffs of ≥130 and ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Interactions between hyperfiltration, cohort, and group were again not significant. Additional sensitivity analyses were carried out using all the first iGFR values (even after baseline): the 446 participants with iGFR measurements at DCCT baseline were combined with the 719 participants with a first iGFR measurement at DCCT year 3/4 and the 19 participants with a first iGFR measurement at DCCT tear 5, for a total of 1184 participants. There were 150 eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 events and 89 sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 events among the 1184 participants. The results of these analyses are shown in Supplemental Tables 4 and 5. Briefly, the results for the 140 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and other cutoff values showed no increase in risk of eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (sustained or not) associated with iGFR values above the cutoffs, supporting the main analysis.

There were 53 macroalbuminuria events and 35 sustained macroalbuminuria events among the 446 participants with baseline iGFR values. Similar to the eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 analyses, the analyses reported in Supplemental Tables 6 and 7 did not show an increase in the risk of macroalbuminuria associated with iGFR values above versus below the three cutoff values considered.

Figure 2 depicts the risk gradient of developing an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 as a function of the iothalamate GFR considered as a continuous variable. The risk decreased as the iothalamate GFR increases up to approximately 130 ml/min per 1.73 m2, and the risk remained approximately flat beyond that value.

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Risk gradient showing the log hazard rate (and 95% pointwise CIs) for the development of an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 as a function of the iothalamate GFR.

Discussion

Our analyses from the long-term follow-up of participants with type 1 diabetes in the DCCT/EDIC study demonstrated that early hyperfiltration is not associated with an increased risk for the subsequent development of an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2, i.e., stage 3 CKD. The primary analysis used an iothalamate GFR of ≥140 ml/min per 1.73 m2 to define hyperfiltration and additional analyses using ≥130 and ≥150 ml/min per 1.73 m2 showed similar findings. Furthermore, similar findings were found when patients were in either the former DCCT conventional or intensive treatment groups. Most prior studies that assessed the effects of hyperfiltration using cutoffs between 120 and 150 ml/min per 1.73 m2, so the cutoffs used here were similar those used previously. All of the sensitivity analyses, including all participants with a first iGFR evaluation and risk of macroalbuminuria, yielded results similar to the main analysis.

Prior studies that attempted to show an adverse effect of hyperfiltration on DKD outcomes primarily used the development of microalbuminuria as an outcome, but those studies were not uniform in demonstrating this. A concern with these studies is the use of microalbuminuria as a surrogate outcome denoting DKD. The use of microalbuminuria and even macroalbuminuria as a valid surrogate for DKD has been challenged (38,39). Perkins et al. (40) showed that 58% of patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria had regression of their microalbuminuria to normoalbuminuria on subsequent testing. In a similar study of the DCCT/EDIC cohort of those who developed microalbuminuria, the 10-year cumulative incidence of progression to macroalbuminuria was 28%, progression to impaired GFR (<60 ml/min per 1.73 m2) was only 15%, and progression to ESKD was only 4%, whereas regression to normoalbuminuria was 40% (41). Furthermore, in the DCCT/EDIC cohort, of those who developed macroalbuminuria, the 10-year cumulative incidence of impaired GFR (<60 ml/min per 1.73 m2) was only 32%, progression to ESKD was only 16%, and regression to micro- or normoalbuminuria was 48% (42).

A few studies showed an association of hyperfiltration with an increased rate of decline of eGFR over several years (24,25,27–29), but whether this was a true effect on kidney function or a regression to the mean, in many cases, is not clear. Because GFR can have measurement errors and naturally varies within individuals over time, GFR values are likely to regress toward mean values when only those with high initial values are examined. In addition, the implications of short- or medium-term decline of GFR from the elevated back to the normal range is not clear: this could be pathologic or, in fact, a beneficial resolution of potentially damaging elevated single nephron GFR. No prior study has demonstrated that hyperfiltration caused a sustained loss of GFR to levels <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2.

The major strength of this study is the large number of participants followed over a very long period of time. Additionally, there was a very high completion rate of tests in this long-term study. The use of an isotope clearance method to define the initial GFR is a major strength, as it is known that calculated eGFRs are less accurate in the normal range (36). Using stage 3 CKD as the primary outcome is also a major strength because it has a much higher correlation with the progression to ESKD than does microalbuminuria. A weakness of this study is that only a small number of participants actually reached ESKD. Another weakness is the fact there was only one measurement per participant for the iothalamate designation of hyperfiltration and glucose concentrations were not closely regulated during the iothalamate clearance procedure.

Finally, we wish to be clear about our interpretation of the term “hyperfiltration.” In the medical literature, this term has been used to describe two phenomena. First, the term has been used to describe an elevation of global GFR, as we have examined in this analysis. However, hyperfiltration is a term that has also been used to describe an elevation in single nephron GFR in response to either adaptation to loss of surrounding nephrons (2,4), or due to tubular mechanisms (such as the sodium reabsorptive effect of sodium glucose linked transporter 2 activation) (43) or neurohormonal mechanisms (such as activation of the renin angiotensin aldosterone system) that independently raise intraglomerular pressure regardless of global GFR (44). Although we could not demonstrate a relationship between global hyperfiltration and the risk of reduced eGFR, we cannot exclude the possibility that single-nephron hyperfiltration is associated with such risk. Global and single nephron GFR may diverge according to the number of functional nephrons each individual possesses.

Hyperfiltration has been attributed to poor glycemic control. However, when we analyzed the relationship of the baseline iothalamate GFR levels to concurrent HbA1c and to a seven-point glycemic curve done on entry into the DCCT, neither of these correlations were meaningful in magnitude or statistically significant.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated that early hyperfiltration in patients with type 1 diabetes is not associated with any long-term decrease in kidney function. Although it is known with certainty that long-term improved glycemic control reduces the development of microalbuminuria, macroalbuminuria, and stage 3 CKD (30,31,34,35), the notion that early hyperfiltration is a marker of poor long-term kidney outcome is not supported by these robust findings.

Disclosures

Dr. de Boer reports personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Ironwood, nonfinancial support from Medtronic and Abbott, outside the submitted work. Dr. Molitch reports grants and other funding from Novartis, grants from Bayer, grants and other from NovoNordisk, other from Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi, and Senseonics outside the submitted work. Dr. Perkins reports grants and other from Boerhinger Ingelheim, personal fees from Medtronic, Abbott, Insulet, Dexcom, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Neurometrix, and grants and personal fees from Bank of Montreal outside the submitted work. Dr. Bebu, Dr. Gao, Dr. Lachin, Dr. Paterson, Dr. Saenger, and Dr. Steffes have nothing to disclose.

Supplemental Material

This article contains the following supplemental material online at http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.2215/CJN.14831218/-/DCSupplemental.

Supplemental Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the full DCCT cohort (n=1441) and of the subcohort (n=446) with baseline iothalamate GFR measurements.

Supplemental Table 2. Baseline characteristics and proportion of participants with hyperfiltration by treatment group and overall.

Supplemental Table 3. Number of participants, number of sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 events, cumulative incidence of sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2, and hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the association between hyperfiltration and the risk of sustained CKD stage 3 separately for different iothalamate GFR cutoff values.

Supplemental Table 4. Associations of first iothalamate GFR measurement with the long-term incidence of eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2.

Supplemental Table 5. Associations of first iothalamate GFR measurement with the long-term incidence of sustained eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2.

Supplemental Table 6. Association between hyperfiltration and the risk of macroalbuminuria (53 events).

Supplemental Table 7. Association between hyperfiltration and sustained macroalbuminuria (35 events).

Supplemental Figure 1. Density of the iothalamate GFR.

Supplemental Figure 2. Iothalamate GFR versus HbA1c (%) (Spearman correlation coefficient =0.07, not statistically significant).

Supplemental Figure 3. Iothalamate GFR versus seven-point blood glucose profile mean (Spearman correlation coefficient =0.09, not statistically significant).

Supplemental Figure 4. Iothalamate GFR versus CKD-EPI eGFR (Spearman correlation coefficient =0.28; P<0.001).

Supplemental Figure 5. Kaplan–Meier event-free (survival) curves stratified by initial DCCT treatment group (intensive versus conventional) comparing the time to development of an eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 for different iothalamate GFR cutoff values.

Acknowledgments

 Research idea and study design: Drs. Molitch, Gao, Bebu, de Boer, Lachin, Paterson, Perkins, Saenger, Steffes, and Zinman; data acquisition: Drs. Molitch, de Boer, Paterson, Perkins, Saenger, Steffes, and Zinman; statistical analysis: Drs. Gao, Bebu, and Lachin. Each author contributed important intellectual content during the manuscript drafting or revision and accepts accountability for the overall work by ensuring that questions pertaining to the accuracy or integrity of any portion of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Dr. Bebu had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

The following industry contributors have had no role in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study but have provided free or discounted supplies or equipment to support participants’ adherence to the study: Abbott Diabetes Care (Alameda, CA), Animas (Westchester, PA), Bayer Diabetes Care (North American Headquarters, Tarrytown, NY), Becton Dickinson (Franklin Lakes, NJ), Eli Lilly (Indianapolis, IN), Extend Nutrition (St. Louis, MO), Insulet Corporation (Bedford, MA), Lifescan (Milpitas, CA), Medtronic Diabetes (Minneapolis, MN), Nipro Home Diagnostics (Ft. Lauderdale, FL), Nova Diabetes Care (Billerica, MA), Omron (Shelton, CT), Perrigo Diabetes Care (Allegan, MI), Roche Diabetes Care (Indianapolis, IN), and Sanofi-Aventis (Bridgewater, NJ).

The DCCT/EDIC has been supported by cooperative agreement grants (1982–1993, 2012–2017), and contracts (1982–2012) with the Division of Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease (current grant numbers U01 DK094176 and U01 DK094157), and through support by the National Eye Institute, the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke, the General Clinical Research Centers Program (1993–2007), and Clinical Translational Science Center Program (2006–present), Bethesda, Maryland. Dr. de Boer reports grants from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), during the conduct of the study. Dr. Lachin reports grants from NIDDKD, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and US Government during the conduct of the study. Dr. Molitch reports grants from NIDDK during the conduct of the study. Dr. Steffes reports grants from the NIH during the conduct of the study, and grants from the NIH outside the submitted work. Dr. Zinman reports grants from the NIH during the conduct of the study.

Because Dr. de Boer is a Deputy Editor of the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, he was not involved in the peer review process for this manuscript. Another Editor oversaw the peer review and decision-making process for this manuscript.

A complete list of investigators and members of the research group appears in Nathan et al. (45).

Footnotes

  • Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org.

  • See related editorial, “Hyperfiltration: Much Ado about Nothing?,” on pages 789–791.

  • Received December 18, 2018.
  • Accepted March 24, 2019.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Mogensen CE
    : Glomerular hyperfiltration in human diabetes. Diabetes Care 17: 770–775, 1994pmid:7924792
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Brenner BM,
    2. Lawler EV,
    3. Mackenzie HS
    : The hyperfiltration theory: A paradigm shift in nephrology. Kidney Int 49: 1774–1777, 1996pmid:8743495
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Jerums G,
    2. Premaratne E,
    3. Panagiotopoulos S,
    4. MacIsaac RJ
    : The clinical significance of hyperfiltration in diabetes. Diabetologia 53: 2093–2104, 2010pmid:20496053
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Tonneijck L,
    2. Muskiet MHA,
    3. Smits MM,
    4. van Bommel EJ,
    5. Heerspink HJL,
    6. van Raalte DH,
    7. Joles JA
    : Glomerular hyperfiltration in diabetes: Mechanisms, clinical significance, and treatment. J Am Soc Nephrol 28: 1023–1039, 2017pmid:28143897
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Zatz R,
    2. Meyer TW,
    3. Rennke HG,
    4. Brenner BM
    : Predominance of hemodynamic rather than metabolic factors in the pathogenesis of diabetic glomerulopathy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 82: 5963–5967, 1985pmid:3862110
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Anderson S,
    2. Meyer TW,
    3. Rennke HG,
    4. Brenner BM
    : Control of glomerular hypertension limits glomerular injury in rats with reduced renal mass. J Clin Invest 76: 612–619, 1985pmid:2993362
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Ditzel J,
    2. Schwartz M
    : Abnormally increased glomerular filtration rate in short-term insulin-treated diabetic subjects. Diabetes 16: 264–267, 1967pmid:6023168
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Mogensen CE,
    2. Andersen MJF
    : Increased kidney size and glomerular filtration rate in early juvenile diabetes. Diabetes 22: 706–712, 1973pmid:4728209
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Mogensen CE,
    2. Christensen CK
    : Predicting diabetic nephropathy in insulin-dependent patients. N Engl J Med 311: 89–93, 1984pmid:6738599
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Mogensen CE
    : Early glomerular hyperfiltration in insulin-dependent diabetics and late nephropathy. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 46: 201–206, 1986pmid:3715374
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Rudberg S,
    2. Persson B,
    3. Dahlquist G
    : Increased glomerular filtration rate as a predictor of diabetic nephropathy--an 8-year prospective study. Kidney Int 41: 822–828, 1992pmid:1513104
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Chiarelli F,
    2. Verrotti A,
    3. Morgese G
    : Glomerular hyperfiltration increases the risk of developing microalbuminuria in diabetic children. Pediatr Nephrol 9: 154–158, 1995pmid:7794707
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Dahlquist G,
    2. Stattin EL,
    3. Rudberg S
    : Urinary albumin excretion rate and glomerular filtration rate in the prediction of diabetic nephropathy; a long-term follow-up study of childhood onset type-1 diabetic patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 16: 1382–1386, 2001pmid:11427629
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Lervang H-H,
    2. Jensen S,
    3. Brøchner-Mortensen J,
    4. Ditzel J
    : Early glomerular hyperfiltration and the development of late nephropathy in type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 31: 723–729, 1988pmid:3071482
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Lervang H-H,
    2. Jensen S,
    3. Brøchner-Mortensen J,
    4. Ditzel J
    : Does increased glomerular filtration rate or disturbed tubular function early in the course of childhood type 1 diabetes predict the development of nephropathy? Diabet Med 9: 635–640, 1992pmid:1511570
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Bognetti E,
    2. Meschi F,
    3. Bonfanti R,
    4. Gianolli L,
    5. Chiumello G
    : Decrease of glomerular hyperfiltration in short-term diabetic adolescents without microalbuminuria. Diabetes Care 16: 120–124, 1993pmid:8422765
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Yip JW,
    2. Jones SL,
    3. Wiseman MJ,
    4. Hill C,
    5. Viberti G
    : Glomerular hyperfiltration in the prediction of nephropathy in IDDM: A 10-year follow-up study. Diabetes 45: 1729–1733, 1996pmid:8922358
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Caramori MLA,
    2. Gross JL,
    3. Pecis M,
    4. de Azevedo MJ
    : Glomerular filtration rate, urinary albumin excretion rate, and blood pressure changes in normoalbuminuric normotensive type 1 diabetic patients: An 8-year follow-up study. Diabetes Care 22: 1512–1516, 1999pmid:10480518
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Amin R,
    2. Turner C,
    3. van Aken S,
    4. Bahu TK,
    5. Watts A,
    6. Lindsell DRM,
    7. Dalton RN,
    8. Dunger DB
    : The relationship between microalbuminuria and glomerular filtration rate in young type 1 diabetic subjects: The Oxford Regional Prospective Study. Kidney Int 68: 1740–1749, 2005pmid:16164650
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Steinke JM,
    2. Sinaiko AR,
    3. Kramer MS,
    4. Suissa S,
    5. Chavers BM,
    6. Mauer M; International Diabetic Nephorpathy Study Group
    : The early natural history of nephropathy in Type 1 Diabetes: III. Predictors of 5-year urinary albumin excretion rate patterns in initially normoalbuminuric patients. Diabetes 54: 2164–2171, 2005pmid:15983218
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Zerbini G,
    2. Bonfanti R,
    3. Meschi F,
    4. Bognetti E,
    5. Paesano PL,
    6. Gianolli L,
    7. Querques M,
    8. Maestroni A,
    9. Calori G,
    10. Del Maschio A,
    11. Fazio F,
    12. Luzi L,
    13. Chiumello G
    : Persistent renal hypertrophy and faster decline of glomerular filtration rate precede the development of microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 55: 2620–2625, 2006pmid:16936212
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Ficociello LH,
    2. Perkins BA,
    3. Roshan B,
    4. Weinberg JM,
    5. Aschengrau A,
    6. Warram JH,
    7. Krolewski AS
    : Renal hyperfiltration and the development of microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 32: 889–893, 2009pmid:19196883
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    1. Thomas MC,
    2. Moran JL,
    3. Harjutsalo V,
    4. Thorn L,
    5. Wadén J,
    6. Saraheimo M,
    7. Tolonen N,
    8. Leiviskä J,
    9. Jula A,
    10. Forsblom C,
    11. Groop PH; FinnDiane Study Group
    : Hyperfiltration in type 1 diabetes: Does it exist and does it matter for nephropathy? Diabetologia 55: 1505–1513, 2012pmid:22322918
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Ruggenenti P,
    2. Porrini EL,
    3. Gaspari F,
    4. Motterlini N,
    5. Cannata A,
    6. Carrara F,
    7. Cella C,
    8. Ferrari S,
    9. Stucchi N,
    10. Parvanova A,
    11. Iliev I,
    12. Dodesini AR,
    13. Trevisan R,
    14. Bossi A,
    15. Zaletel J,
    16. Remuzzi G; GFR Study Investigators
    : Glomerular hyperfiltration and renal disease progression in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 35: 2061–2068, 2012pmid:22773704
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Silveiro SP,
    2. Friedman R,
    3. de Azevedo MJ,
    4. Canani LH,
    5. Gross JL
    : Five-year prospective study of glomerular filtration rate and albumin excretion rate in normofiltering and hyperfiltering normoalbuminuric NIDDM patients. Diabetes Care 19: 171–174, 1996pmid:8718441
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. Murussi M,
    2. Gross JL,
    3. Silveiro SP
    : Glomerular filtration rate changes in normoalbuminuric and microalbuminuric Type 2 diabetic patients and normal individuals A 10-year follow-up. J Diabetes Complications 20: 210–215, 2006pmid:16798471
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Thomson HJ,
    2. Ekinci EI,
    3. Radcliffe NJ,
    4. Seah JM,
    5. MacIsaac RJ,
    6. Jerums G,
    7. Premaratne E
    : Elevated baseline glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is independently associated with a more rapid decline in renal function of patients with type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes Complications 30: 256–261, 2016pmid:26794645
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Bjornstad P,
    2. Cherney DZ,
    3. Snell-Bergeon JK,
    4. Pyle L,
    5. Rewers M,
    6. Johnson RJ,
    7. Maahs DM
    : Rapid GFR decline is associated with renal hyperfiltration and impaired GFR in adults with Type 1 diabetes. Nephrol Dial Transplant 30: 1706–1711, 2015pmid:26050268
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Moriya T,
    2. Tanaka S,
    3. Sone H,
    4. Ishibashi S,
    5. Matsunaga S,
    6. Ohashi Y,
    7. Akanuma Y,
    8. Haneda M,
    9. Katayama S
    : Patients with type 2 diabetes having higher glomerular filtration rate showed rapid renal function decline followed by impaired glomerular filtration rate: Japan Diabetes Complications Study. J Diabetes Complications 31: 473–478, 2017pmid:27396240
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Nathan DM,
    2. Genuth S,
    3. Lachin J,
    4. Cleary P,
    5. Crofford O,
    6. Davis M,
    7. Rand L,
    8. Siebert C; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group
    : The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 329: 977–986, 1993pmid:8366922
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. de Boer IH,
    2. Sun W,
    3. Cleary PA,
    4. Lachin JM,
    5. Molitch ME,
    6. Steffes MW,
    7. Zinman B; DCCT/EDIC Research Group
    : Intensive diabetes therapy and glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 365: 2366–2376, 2011pmid:22077236
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. DCCT Research Group
    : Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Update. Diabetes Care 13: 427–433, 1990pmid:2180661
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    1. Levey AS,
    2. Greene T,
    3. Schluchter MD,
    4. Cleary PA,
    5. Teschan PE,
    6. Lorenz RA,
    7. Molitch ME,
    8. Mitch WE,
    9. Siebert C,
    10. Hall PM,
    11. Steffes MW; Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group and the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group
    : Glomerular filtration rate measurements in clinical trials. J Am Soc Nephrol 4: 1159–1171, 1993pmid:8305642
    OpenUrlAbstract
  34. ↵
    1. de Boer IH,
    2. Sun W,
    3. Cleary PA,
    4. Lachin JM,
    5. Molitch ME,
    6. Zinman B,
    7. Steffes MW for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study Research Group
    : Longitudinal changes in estimated and measured GFR in Type 1 Diabetes. J Am Soc Nephrol 25: 810–818, 2014pmid:8305642
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. The Diabetes Control and Complications (DCCT) Research Group
    : Effect of intensive therapy on the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Kidney Int 47: 1703–1720, 1995pmid:7643540
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Levey AS,
    2. Stevens LA,
    3. Schmid CH,
    4. Zhang YL,
    5. Castro AF 3rd.,
    6. Feldman HI,
    7. Kusek JW,
    8. Eggers P,
    9. Van Lente F,
    10. Greene T,
    11. Coresh J; CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration)
    : A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 150: 604–612, 2009pmid:19414839
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Lachin JM,
    2. Bebu I,
    3. Bergenstal RM,
    4. Pop-Busui R,
    5. Service FJ,
    6. Zinman B,
    7. Nathan DM; DCCT/EDIC Research Group
    : Association of glycemic variability in type 1 diabetes with progression of microvascular outcomes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 40: 777–783, 2017pmid:28404658
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    1. Stevens LA,
    2. Greene T,
    3. Levey AS
    : Surrogate end points for clinical trials of kidney disease progression. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 1: 874–884, 2006pmid:17699300
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    1. Bakris GL,
    2. Molitch M
    : Microalbuminuria as a risk predictor in diabetes: The continuing saga. Diabetes Care 37: 867–875, 2014pmid:24558077
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    1. Perkins BA,
    2. Ficociello LH,
    3. Silva KH,
    4. Finkelstein DM,
    5. Warram JH,
    6. Krolewski AS
    : Regression of microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 348: 2285–2293, 2003pmid:12788992
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. de Boer IH,
    2. Rue TC,
    3. Cleary PA
    et al., for the DCCT/EDIC Study Research Group: Long-term renal outcomes of patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria: an analysis of the DCCT/EDIC cohort. Arch Intern Med 171: 412–420, 2011pmid:21949179
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. de Boer IH,
    2. Afkarian M,
    3. Rue TC,
    4. Cleary PA,
    5. Lachin JM,
    6. Molitch ME,
    7. Steffes MW,
    8. Sun W,
    9. Zinman B; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Research Group
    : Renal outcomes in patients with type 1 diabetes and macroalbuminuria. J Am Soc Nephrol 25: 2342–2350, 2014pmid:24925722
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    1. Thomas MC,
    2. Cherney DZI
    : The actions of SGLT2 inhibitors on metabolism, renal function and blood pressure. Diabetologia 61: 2098–2107, 2018pmid:30132034
    OpenUrlPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Cherney DZ,
    2. Scholey JW,
    3. Miller JA
    : Insights into the regulation of renal hemodynamic function in diabetic mellitus. Curr Diabetes Rev 4: 280–290, 2008pmid:18991597
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Nathan DM,
    2. Bebu I,
    3. Hainsworth D,
    4. Klein R,
    5. Tamborlane W,
    6. Lorenzi G,
    7. Gubitosi-Klug R,
    8. Lachin JM for the DCCT/EDIC Research Group
    : Frequency of evidence-based screening for retinopathy in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 376: 1507–1516, 2017pmid:24309189
    OpenUrlPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top

In this issue

View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools
Request Permissions
Early Glomerular Hyperfiltration and Long-Term Kidney Outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes
Mark E. Molitch, Xiaoyu Gao, Ionut Bebu, Ian H. de Boer, John Lachin, Andrew Paterson, Bruce Perkins, Amy K. Saenger, Michael Steffes, Bernard Zinman, for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Research Group
CJASN Jun 2019, 14 (6) 854-861; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.14831218
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section

Keywords