Skip to main content
. 2017 Nov 1;33(11):1140–1148. doi: 10.1089/aid.2017.0009

Table 4.

Annual Change in eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) by Tertiles of 1,25(OH)2D (n = 273)

Range (pg/ml) Tertile 1 5.9–40.2 Tertile 2 40.3–51.3 Tertile 3 51.4–96.9 p
Difference in annual change in eGFR using tertile 3 as the reference
White participants
 Model 1 −0.22 (−0.95, 0.51) 0.16 (−0.60, 0.89) Reference .51
 Model 2 −0.20 (−0.95, 0.55) 0.09 (−0.67, 0.85) Reference .56
Black participants
 Model 1 −1.17 (−2.80, 0.46) −0.55 (−1.98, 0.88) Reference .15
 Model 2 −1.39 (−2.99, 0.21) −0.57 (−1.97, 0.84) Reference .09
Overall
 Model 1 −0.39 (−1.09, 0.30) −0.22 (−0.90, 0.46) Reference .29
 Model 2 −0.50 (−1.11, 0.10) −0.31 (−0.89, 0.28) Reference .18
Annual change in eGFR estimated from Model 2
 White −1.72 (−2.24, −1.20) −1.43 (−1.96, −0.90) −1.49 (−2.05, −0.93)  
 Black −2.71 (−3.96, −1.47) −1.95 (−2.92, −0.97) −1.35 (−2.38, −0.33)  
 Overall −1.76 (−2.21, −1.32) −1.57 (−1.98, −1.16) −1.26 (−1.68, −0.84)  

Model 1 covariates: baseline age, center, cohort, and follow-up time. Model 2 covariates: Model 1+baseline education below college, baseline income less than $20,000, longitudinal values of diabetes and hypertension status, and log transformed CD4 count and viral load. Race was a covariate in the overall analysis combining whites and blacks. Random effects: random intercept, which accounted for difference in baseline eGFR, and random slope, which accounts for individual differences in eGFR change patterns. p-Value was obtained using an interaction term between follow-up time in years and the tertiles of 25(OH)D as an ordinal variable. Sample sizes were 187 for white participants and 86 for black participants in all models.