Table 3.
Linear regression analyses (R2 values) between the natural logarithmic functions of different uremic retention solute concentrations as a function of the eGFR as calculated according to four different methods
| MDRD | C-G | epi-GFR | Stevens | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCrea | 0.833 | 0.737 | 0.737 | 0.570 | |
| SDMA | 0.237 | 0.300 | 0.309 | 0.320 | |
| ADMA | 0.108 | 0.149 | 0.167 | 0.193 | |
| UA | 0.054 | 0.062 | 0.058 | 0.062 | |
| IS | Total | 0.416 | 0.426 | 0.426 | 0.361 |
| HA | Total | 0.107 | 0.141 | 0.130 | 0.117 |
| pCS | Total | 0.150 | 0.129 | 0.119 | 0.085 |
| IAA | Total | 0.123 | 0.134 | 0.132 | 0.115 |
| CMPF | Total | 0.035 | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| IS | Free | 0.265 | 0.289 | 0.282 | 0.257 |
| HA | Free | 0.122 | 0.160 | 0.147 | 0.134 |
| pCS | Free | 0.203 | 0.175 | 0.164 | 0.124 |
| IAA | Free | 0.218 | 0.257 | 0.253 | 0.238 |
C-G, Cockcroft-Gault; SCrea, serum creatinine; MDRD, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease. All correlations were significant (P <0.05) except total CMPF. R2 values <0.2 are in bold.