Correction

Gama-Axelsson T, Heimbürger O, Stenvinkel P, Bárány P, Lindholm B, Qureshi AR: Serum albumin as predictor of nutritional status in patients with ESRD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 7:1446–1453, 2012.

Due to author error, please note the updated abstract provided below, which includes the corrected GFR and β and P values.

Summary

Background and objectives Serum albumin is a widely used biomarker of nutritional status in patients with CKD; however, its usefulness is debated. This study investigated serum albumin and its correlation with several markers of nutritional status in incident and prevalent dialysis patients.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements In a cross-sectional study, serum albumin (bromocresol purple), and other biochemical (serum creatinine), clinical (subjective global assessment [SGA]), anthropometric (handgrip strength, skinfold thicknesses), and densitometric (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) markers of nutritional status were assessed in 458 incident (61% male; mean age 54±13 years; GFR, 6.6±2.3 ml/min per 1.73 m²; recruited 1994–2010) and 383 prevalent (56% male; mean age 62±14 years; recruited 1989–2004) dialysis patients.

Results In incident patients, serum albumin was correlated with sex (β=−0.13; P=0.02), diabetes mellitus (β=−0.18; P=0.004), and urinary albumin excretion (β=−0.42; P=0.001) but less so with poor nutritional status (SGA score >1; β=−0.19; P=0.001). In prevalent patients, serum albumin was correlated with age (β=−0.14; P=0.05), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (β=−0.34; P=0.001), diabetes mellitus (β=−0.11; P=0.04), and SGA score >1 (β=−0.14; P=0.003). In predicting nutritional status assessed by SGA and other markers, adding serum albumin to models that included age, sex, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease did not significantly increase explanatory power.

Conclusions In incident and prevalent dialysis patients, serum albumin correlates poorly with several markers of nutritional status. Thus, its value as a reliable marker of nutritional status in patients with ESRD is limited.

In addition, the following inconsistencies between the main text and Tables 1 and 3 are also corrected as follows. (1) In Table 1, the GFR initially written as 6±3 ml/min per 1.73² should be corrected to 6.6±2.3 ml/min per 1.73². (2) On line 11 of page 1448, under the Clinical Correlates of Serum Albumin Concentration section describing the multiple regression models (Table 3), the P value was initially written as “serum albumin was associated with age (β=−0.14; P=0.05).” The P value should be corrected to have the same value as that given in Table 3 (β=−0.14; P=0.005).