A prospective study to compare the measured glomerular filtration rate compared to estimated glomerular filtration rate in patients undergoing definitive chemoradiation, with platinum agents for various malignancies
Context: Renal function assessment is of paramount importance before using the platinum agents especially cisplatin. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation by diethyl-triamine-penta-acetic acid (DTPA) scan (measured GFR [mGFR]) is considered gold standard. Aims: The aim of this study is to know...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of cancer research and therapeutics Vol. 15; no. 8; pp. 56 - 59 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
India
Wolters Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd
01.03.2019
Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Context: Renal function assessment is of paramount importance before using the platinum agents especially cisplatin. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation by diethyl-triamine-penta-acetic acid (DTPA) scan (measured GFR [mGFR]) is considered gold standard.
Aims: The aim of this study is to know if we can replace the mGFR with the GFR estimation with Cockcroft-Gault formula (eGFR) in patients undergoing chemoradiation.
Settings and Design: This is a prospective, descriptive study.
Subjects and Methods: Patients who are planned for definitive chemoradiation will be eligible for the study. Renal function will be measured DTPA scan and Cockcroft-Gault (CG) formula. Subgroup analysis based on the weight, age, and sex will be done.
Statistical Analysis Used: Demographic and renal function parameters were analyzed using summary measures. To test the significance of the difference between mGFR and cGFR, a paired t-test will be used; to look for an association between various estimates of renal function, the Pearson's correlation coefficient will be calculated using a two-tailed test.
Results: Median mGFR of patients was 82.7 (range: 65-125 ml/min, standard deviation [SD] =14.0 ml/min) while the median eGFR as per the CG formula was 83.9 ml/min (range: 37-137 ml/min, SD = 24.4 ml/min). The median mGFR was only 1.2 ml/min lesser when measures by the CG formula with no significance difference between them (P = 0.66, 95% confidence interval: −4.5-6.3).
Conclusions: We concluded that in resource-limited setting eGFR using CG formula can replace mGFR, especially in patients with age <60 years. Although weight did not showed a significant difference by two methods, a study with large sample is needed to confirm the result. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0973-1482 1998-4138 |
DOI: | 10.4103/0973-1482.204881 |