. 2016 Oct 11;12(1):69–78. doi: 10.2215/CJN.03660316

Table 2.

Comparison of associations (hazard ratios) of eGFR from novel filtration markers compared with eGFR from creatinine, cystatin, and creatinine–cystatin C across different eGFR ranges

Populations	Creatinine	Cystatin C	BTP	B2M	Cr-Cys	Average 4
ESRD GP
eGFR<60	3.36 (1.96 to 5.76)	3.17 (2.76 to 3.64)	5.27^a^,^b^,^c (4.53 to 6.13)	5.26^a^,^b^,^c (4.14 to 6.69)	3.25 (1.87 to 5.65)	3.98^a^,^c (1.86 to 8.53)
eGFR 60–90	2.82 (1.72 to 4.62)	2.22 (1.65 to 3.00)	1.45^a^,^b^,^c (0. 96 to 2.20)	1.68 (1.06 to 2.66)	2.88 (1.71 to 4.87)	2.99^b^,^c (2.21 to 4.04)
ESRD CKD
eGFR<60	3.08 (2.36 to 4.03)	3.05 (2.33 to 3.99)	4.53^a^,^b^,^c (3.29 to 6.23)	3.29^a (2.34 to 4.61)	3.36^a^,^b (2.56 to 4.43)	4.11^a^,^b^,^c (2.87 to 5.87)
eGFR 60–90	1.32 (0.89 to 1.94)	1.34 (0.76 to 2.38)	1.11^c (0.80 to 1.53)	5.14^a^,^b^,^c (1.30 to 20.35)	1.44 (0.69 to 3.00)	3.14^a^,^b^,^c (1.30 to 7.55)
ACM GP
eGFR<60	1.69 (1.38 to 2.06)	1.52 (1.36 to 1.69)	1.98^b^,^c (1.63 to 2.41)	1.83^b^,^c (1.53 to 2.19)	1.60 (1.39 to 1.83)	1.77^b^,^c (1.52 to 2.05)
eGFR 60–90	1.13 (1.06 to 1.19)	1.20^a (1.13 to 1.27)	0.93^b^,^c (0.72 to 1.22)	1.28^a^,^b^,^c (1.21 to 1.37)	1.21^a (1.13 to 1.30)	1.26^a^,^b^,^c (1.19 to 1.36)
ACM CKD
eGFR<60	1.31 (1.12 to 1.53)	1.67^a (1.54 to 1.81)	1.69^a^,^c (1.42 to 2.01)	1.79^a^,^b^,^c (1.55 to 2.06)	1.48^a^,^b (1.27 to 1.72)	1.67^a^,^c (1.43 to 1.94)
eGFR 60–90	1.03 (0.75 to 1.41)	1.21 (0.94 to 1.56)	1.05 (0.84 to 1.31)	1.31 (0.49 to 3.50)	1.48 (0.82 to 2.66)	1.04 (0.28 to 3.86)

Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals are given as per 15 ml/min per 1.73 m² eGFR. BTP, β-trace protein; B2M, β-microglobulin; Cr-Cys, creatinine–cystatin C; Average 4, average of all four markers for GFR; GP, general population; ACM, all-cause mortality.

Indicates significantly different from eGFR from creatinine.

Indicates significantly different from eGFR from cystatin C.

Indicates significantly different from eGFR from creatinine–cystatin C.