Current CKD Definition Takes into Account Both Relative and Absolute Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delanaye et al.1 propose that GFR thresholds to define CKD should depend on age. Specifically, people aged≥65 years with GFR 45–59 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and albumin-creatinine ratio<30 mg/g should not be classified as having CKD. This is not a new proposal. It has been discussed many times, including by the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative in 2002 and Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) work groups in 2009 and 2012.2 Each time, the consensus was that the GFR threshold for the definition of CKD should be age-independent. Delanaye et al. now reopen the discussion, suggesting that the GFR threshold for the CKD definition should be determined only by relative risks for mortality. They cite data from the CKD Prognosis Consortium, the largest meta-analysis, showing that the relative hazard of mortality for eGFR 45–59 versus 75–89 ml/min per 1.73 m2 with albumin-creatinine ratio<30 mg/g was lower at older age. However, they do not mention the higher absolute risk of mortality (two to four times higher at the oldest compared with youngest group).3 Absolute risk is more important than relative risk to patients and providers. The threshold for CKD should also take into account outcomes beyond mortality such as ESKD, AKI, heart failure, and hospitalization which are often more specific and sensitive consequences of CKD, and have substantial excess risk in older age. Many other diseases, such as hypertension and diabetes, follow a similar pattern of higher prevalence at older age with smaller relative risks but higher attributable risks of mortality and complications. Yet, the hypertension and diabetes guidelines define these diseases independently of age while recommending evaluation and management personalized to age and other factors. Similarly, the KDIGO guideline recommends an age-independent definition but personalized evaluation and management. The CKD definition has been stable since 2002, enabling great progress in the field. The age-independent GFR threshold has been widely accepted by nephrology societies across the world, endorsed by the World Health Organization, and incorporated into the International Classification of Disease Coding System. At each deliberation, the expanding evidence base has supported the original definition. We think that changing the GFR threshold at older age on the basis solely of relative risk of mortality while ignoring the higher absolute risk for mortality and other outcomes is a narrow view that impedes progress. We believe it is time, as a nephrology community, to move the discussion to optimizing management and discovering new therapies. DISCLOSURES None.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".