disease progression.

In 2018, AJKD published a study, “Biological Variability of Estimated GFR and Albuminuria in CKD¹,” which demonstrated that UACR values can be quite diverse in a patient, even within a four-week timeframe. In fact, the data indicates that values would have to increase by 124% and decrease by 55% (vs previous readings) to ensure that the findings were not just normal “noise” signals in the body from one week to the next.

• That’s why the associated “risk staging” based on these values would have been quite different from one reading to the next.
• Estimated GFR does not vary as much as UACR. That said, the eGFR values would still need to increase by 20% or decrease by 16% (vs previous readings) to ensure that the findings were not just normal body “noise” signals from one week to the next.
• Whereas both of these metrics may be viable at the population health level, they become problematic at the patient level, where the variability disallows precise insights and care.

¹Waikar SS, et al. Am J Kidney Dis. 2018. 72(4): 538-546

The increased flow increases the delivery and reabsorption of small and large molecular weight solutes resulting in injury to the kidneys.

Despite significant damage to some of the kidney’s tissue, the remaining tissue compensates, trying to preserve kidney function. That’s why, even when testing eGFR and urine albumin, kidney function levels can look normal, which may lead to a false sense of security.

Proof Point