Urine Creatinine Excretion and Clinical Outcomes in CKD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Twenty-four-hour urine creatinine excretion is a reliable approximation of muscle mass. Whether changes in urine creatinine predict clinical outcomes in persons with CKD is unknown. This work studied the relationship between urine creatinine and patient and renal survival in people with CKD not requiring renal replacement therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This longitudinal cohort study included incident stages 3-5 CKD patients referred to the renal clinic at the University Federico II in Naples between January of 1995 and December of 2005. Clinical data and urine creatinine were updated at each visit. Main outcomes were all-cause mortality and kidney failure requiring dialysis. RESULTS: This study enrolled 525 individuals and followed them for a median of 6 years (range of 4 months to 15 years). Urine creatinine excretion declined by 16 mg/d per year (95% confidence interval, 14 to 19) in participants with CKD stages 3a, 3b, and 4, and it remained stable in participants with stage 5 CKD. Per each 20 mg/d decline in urine creatinine, mortality increased by 3% (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.05), and the risk of initiating dialysis increased by 2% (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.03). These associations were independent of body mass index and GFR. CONCLUSIONS: In persons with CKD stages 3 and 4, urine creatinine declines at a rate of 16 mg/d per year. Lower urine creatinine excretion predicts greater risk of kidney failure and patient mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".