Estimating glomerular filtration rate in acute coronary syndromes: Different equations, different mortality risk prediction

AIMS: Renal dysfunction is a powerful predictor of adverse outcomes in patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndrome. Three new glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations recently emerged, based on serum creatinine (CKD-EPIcreat), serum cystatin C (CKD-EPIcyst) or a combination of both (CKD-EPIcreat/cyst), and they are currently recommended to confirm the presence of renal dysfunction. Our aim was to analyse the predictive value of these new estimated GFR (eGFR) equations regarding mid-term mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome, and compare them with the traditional Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD-4) formula. METHODS AND RESULTS: 801 patients admitted for acute coronary syndrome (age 67.3±13.3 years, 68.5% male) and followed for 23.6±9.8 months were included. For each equation, patient risk stratification was performed based on eGFR values: high-risk group (eGFR<60ml/min per 1.73m2) and low-risk group (eGFR⩾60ml/min per 1.73m2). The predictive performances of these equations were compared using area under each receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs). Overall risk stratification improvement was assessed by the net reclassification improvement index. The incidence of the primary endpoint was 18.1%. The CKD-EPIcyst equation had the highest overall discriminate performance regarding mid-term mortality (AUC 0.782±0.20) and outperformed all other equations (ρ<0.001 in all comparisons). When compared with the MDRD-4 formula, the CKD-EPIcyst equation accurately reclassified a significant percentage of patients into more appropriate risk categories (net reclassification improvement index of 11.9% (p=0.003)). The CKD-EPIcyst equation added prognostic power to the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score in the prediction of mid-term mortality. CONCLUSION: The CKD-EPIcyst equation provides a novel and improved method for assessing the mid-term mortality risk in patients admitted for acute coronary syndrome, outperforming the most widely used formula (MDRD-4), and improving the predictive value of the GRACE score. These results reinforce the added value of cystatin C as a risk marker in these patients.

Polymyalgia Rheumatica (PMR) Special Interest Group at OMERACT 11: outcomes of importance for patients with PMR

We worked toward developing a core outcome set for clinical research studies in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) by conducting (1) patient consultations using modified nominal group technique; (2) a systematic literature review of outcome measures in PMR; (3) a pilot observational study of patients presenting with untreated PMR, and further discussion with patient research partners; and (4) a qualitative focus group study of patients with PMR on the meaning of stiffness, using thematic analysis. (1) Consultations included 104 patients at 4 centers. Symptoms of PMR included pain, stiffness, fatigue, and sleep disturbance. Function, anxiety, and depression were also often mentioned. Participants expressed concerns about diagnostic delay, adverse effects of glucocorticoids, and fear of relapse. (2) In the systematic review, outcome measures previously used for PMR include pain visual analog scores (VAS), morning stiffness, blood markers, function, and quality of life; standardized effect sizes posttreatment were large. (3) Findings from the observational study indicated that asking about symptom severity at 7 AM, or "on waking," appeared more relevant to disease activity than asking about symptom severity "now" (which depended on the time of assessment). (4) Preliminary results were presented from the focus group qualitative study, encompassing broad themes of stiffness, pain, and the effect of PMR on patients' lives. It was concluded that further validation work is required before a core outcome set in PMR can be recommended. Nevertheless, the large standardized effect sizes suggest that pain VAS is likely to be satisfactory as a primary outcome measure for assessing response to initial therapy of PMR. Dissection of between-patient heterogeneity in the subsequent treatment course may require attention to comorbidity as a potential confounding factor.