Table 6.
Dependent Variables | Adjusted | F | P value | Constant (SE) | P value | Independent Variables | Standardized B coefficient | SE | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
eGFR-Baseline (ml/min per 1.73 | Unadjusted model | ||||||||
0.16 (15.45) | 12.83 | 0.001 | 48.26 (4.72) | 0.0001 | Interstitial fibrosis (%) | −0.42 | 0.08 | 0.001 | |
Adjusted modela | |||||||||
0.16 (15.45) | 12.83 | 0.001 | 48.26 (4.72) | 0.0001 | Interstitial fibrosis (%) | −0.42 | 0.08 | 0.001 | |
eGFR Change (%/y) | Unadjusted model | ||||||||
0.22 (0.11) | 11.25 | 0.001 | 0.33 (0.03) | 0.0001 | Global Sclerosis | −0.34 | 0.01 | 0.004 | |
Mesangiolysis | −0.31 | 0.03 | 0.009 | ||||||
Adjusted modela | |||||||||
0.3 (0.11) | 9.77 | 0.0001 | 0.44 (0.05) | 0.0001 | eGFR-Baseline (ml/min per 1.73 | −0.3 | 0.001 | 0.009 | |
Global Sclerosis | −0.44 | 0.01 | 0.0001 | ||||||
Mesangiolysis | −0.33 | 0.03 | 0.003 | ||||||
UPCR-Baseline (mg/g) | Unadjusted model | ||||||||
0.51 (0.47) | 21.68 | 0.0001 | −1.76 (0.3) | 0.0001 | Intimal Fibrosis | 0.51 | 0.08 | 0.0001 | |
Foot Process Effacement (%) | 0.41 | 0.003 | 0.0001 | ||||||
RPS DN Class | 0.32 | 0.08 | 0.001 | ||||||
Endothelial Fenestration Loss | −0.2 | 0.09 | 0.04 | ||||||
Adjusted modela | |||||||||
0.48 (0.49) | 20.15 | 0.0001 | −1.73 (0.31) | 0.0001 | RPS DN Class | 0.29 | 0.08 | 0.003 | |
Intimal Fibrosis | 0.46 | 0.08 | 0.0001 | ||||||
Foot Process Effacement (%) | 0.36 | 0.003 | 0.0001 | ||||||
UPCR Fold Change (/y) | Unadjusted model | ||||||||
0.18 (0.61) | 10.84 | 0.001 | 0.15 (0.16) | 0.34 | Mesangial Hyaline | 0.42 | 0.07 | 0.001 | |
KW Nodules (0:NO, 1:Yes) | −0.25 | 0.18 | 0.03 | ||||||
Adjusted modela | |||||||||
0.37 (0.54) | 18.89 | 0.0001 | 0.1 (0.1) | 0.32 | Mesangial Hyaline | 0.41 | 0.06 | 0.0001 | |
UPCR-Baseline (mg/g) | −0.49 | 0.1 | 0.0001 |
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; KW, Kimmelstiel-Wilson Nodule; RPS DN Class, Renal Pathology Society diabetic nephropathy class; SE, standard error; UPCR, urine protein to creatinine ratio.
All 20 pathological variables were included as independent predictors to the models; then the best fit model was calculated in a stepwise manner. In adjusted models, demographic and baseline characteristics were included in addition to pathological features.
Adjusted in terms of age, gender, race, HbA1C, duration of diabetes mellitus and baseline clinical parameters (eGFR-baseline and UPCR-baseline).