Reference standard analysis of multiple new and old plasma clearance models and renal clearance with special attention to measurement of reduced glomerular filtration rate

AI-generated keywords: GFR estimation plasma clearance models renal clearance methods reduced GFR reference standards

AI-generated Key Points

  • Study evaluated multiple new and old plasma clearance models and renal clearance methods for estimating GFR
  • Nine models were evaluated as candidate GFR reference standards in three datasets using different anions in 98 studies
  • Reduced GFR in adults led to inflated clearance estimates using current models and methods
  • Two logarithmic models with exponential tails were created to address the issue of reduced GFR estimation
  • Logarithmic formulae could be used with only two plasma samples and fit 13 studies totaling 162 plasma samples drawn from 5 minutes to 24 hours
  • Standard deviation of residuals for logarithmic models was 8%, compared to a 20% error for monoexponential models
  • Adaptively regularized gamma variate (Tk-GV) models were evaluated as potential reference standards, showing promising results and no correlation between volume of distribution and mean residence time divided by weight
  • Authors discussed potentially better methods for routine clinical usage using Tk-GV as a candidate reference standard, but emphasized the need for further research, testing, and metabolic scaling before implementing changes to patient triage.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Carl A. Wesolowski

Scand.J.Clin.Lab.Invest.2024
arXiv: 2303.14995v2 - DOI (q-bio.QM)
32 pages, 11 figures, in press
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Nine models were evaluated as candidate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) reference standards in three datasets using [$^{51}$Cr(EDTA)]$^-$ or [$^{169}$Yb(DTPA)]$^{2-}$ anions in 98 studies. Noncompartmental methods formed an upper limit for estimating mass excreted and voluntary urine collection formed a lower limit. For current models and methods, reduced GFR in adults resulted in inflated clearance estimates. Two different logarithmic models with exponential tails were created and may have underestimated reduced clearance. The logarithmic formulae can be used with only two plasma samples, and fit 13 studies totalling 162 plasma samples drawn from 5 min to 24 h with an 8% standard deviation of residuals compared to 20% error for monoexponentials. For shorter times (4 or 5 h) the fit errors decreased but the ratio of errors remained at circa 2.5 times lesser for the logarithmic versus monoexponential models. Adaptively regularised gamma variate, Tk-GV, models that are well documented, but not in common use, were largely contained within the reference extreme values, were unbiased for different levels of clearance and were the only models to be uncorrelated to volume of distribution from mean residence time divided by weight. Using Tk-GV as a candidate reference standard, potentially better methods for routine clinical usage were discussed. Prospective clinical testing, and metabolic scaling of decreased renal function is advised for potential changes to patient triage.

Submitted to arXiv on 27 Mar. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2303.14995v2

This study evaluated multiple new and old plasma clearance models and renal clearance methods for estimating GFR. Nine models were evaluated as candidate GFR reference standards in three datasets using different anions in 98 studies. The noncompartmental methods provided an upper limit for estimating mass excreted, while voluntary urine collection formed a lower limit. However, it was found that reduced GFR in adults led to inflated clearance estimates using current models and methods. To address this issue, two different logarithmic models with exponential tails were created. These models may have underestimated reduced clearance but showed promising results. The logarithmic formulae could be used with only two plasma samples and were able to fit 13 studies totaling 162 plasma samples drawn from 5 minutes to 24 hours. The standard deviation of residuals for these models was 8%, compared to a 20% error for monoexponential models. For shorter times (4 or 5 hours), the fit errors decreased, but the ratio of errors remained approximately 2.5 times lesser for the logarithmic models compared to monoexponential models. Additionally, adaptively regularized gamma variate (Tk-GV) models were evaluated as potential reference standards. These Tk-GV models were well-documented but not commonly used. They showed promising results as they were largely contained within the reference extreme values and were unbiased for different levels of clearance. Furthermore, these Tk-GV models were the only ones that showed no correlation between volume of distribution and mean residence time divided by weight. Based on these findings, the authors discussed potentially better methods for routine clinical usage using Tk-GV as a candidate reference standard. However, they emphasized the need for prospective clinical testing and metabolic scaling of decreased renal function before implementing any changes to patient triage. In conclusion, this study evaluated multiple new and old plasma clearance models and renal clearance methods for estimating GFR. The findings highlighted issues with current models in accurately estimating reduced GFR in adults. The logarithmic models with exponential tails and Tk-GV models showed promise as potential reference standards for GFR estimation. Further research and testing are needed to validate these findings and improve patient triage in clinical settings.
Created on 25 Jan. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: -1

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.