Table 5.

Associations between TNFR1 and TNFR2 at baseline and eGFR difference (in % decrease per month) and risk of being a rapid eGFR-decliner (defined as quartile 4 of eGFR difference), respectively.

	eGFR difference		eGFR difference
	Continuous	P	Quartiles 1–3	Quartile 4	P
	Regression coefficient (95% CI)		ref	OR (95% CI)
n	455		342	113
TNFR1
Unadjusted model	0.0021 (0.0009–0.0033)	0.001	ref	1.71 (1.33–2.21)	<0.001
Model A (age, gender)	0.0023 (0.0011–0.0035)	<0.001	ref	1.76 (1.37–2.28)	<0.001
Model B (inflammation)	0.0023 (0.0011–0.0035)	<0.001	ref	1.74 (1.35–2.25)	<0.001
Model C (CVD risk factors)	0.0022 (0.0009–0.0033)	<0.001	ref	1.79 (1.38–2.33)	<0.001
Model D (A+B+C combined)	0.0021 (0.0009–0.0034)	0.002	ref	1.77 (1.35–2.30)	<0.001
Model E (Model D + baseline eGFR)	0.0012 (−0.0003 to 0.0027)	0.12	ref	1.29 (0.92–1.81)	0.14
TNFR2
Unadjusted model	0.0023 (0.0011–0.0036)	<0.001	ref	1.87 (1.43–2.45)	<0.001
Model A (age, gender)	0.0026 (0.0014–0.0039)	<0.001	ref	1.97 (1.50–2.60)	<0.001
Model B (inflammation)	0.0027 (0.0014–0.0039)	<0.001	ref	1.95 (1.47–2.59)	<0.001
Model C (CVD risk factors)	0.0024 (0.0011–0.0037)	<0.001	ref	1.97 (1.49–2.62)	<0.001
Model D (A+B+C combined)	0.0024 (0.0011–0.0037)	<0.001	ref	1.94 (1.45–2.60)	<0.001
Model E (Model D + baseline eGFR)	0.0009 (−0.0009 to 0.0027)	0.322	ref	1.33 (0.90–1.98)	0.148

HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; CVD: cardiovascular disease; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate.

eGFR based on cystatin C was also calculated using the CAPA equation. The differences in time between the measurements of eGFR were 4.37 years.

Model A: Adjusted for age and gender. Model B: Adjusted for age, gender, and C-reactive protein. Model C: Adjusted for age, gender, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, smoking status, heart failure, diabetes, and prevalent cardiovascular disease.

Model D: Model A + B + C combined. Model E: Model A+B+C+baseline eGFR and u-protein.