MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293105638 · doi:10.1177/20543581221118991

Clinical Implementation of NGAL Testing to Improve Diagnostic Assessment of AKI Episodes in a Canadian Center

2022· article· en· W4293105638 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean Côté, Roxanne Authier, Isabelle Éthier, Jean‐François Cailhier, William Beaubien‐Souligny, Patrick Murray, Pierre‐Olivier Hétu, Marie–Claire Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute kidney injuryInternal medicineCohortLogistic regressionProspective cohort studyCohort studyCreatinineUrinalysisIntensive care medicineNephrologyUrine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The differential diagnosis of acute kidney injury (AKI) episodes is often challenging. Novel AKI biomarkers have shown their utility to improve prognostic prediction and diagnostic assessment in various research populations but their implementation in standard clinical practice is still rarely reported. Objective: To report the differential diagnostic ability and associated clinical utility of the neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) testing in a real-life setting of a heterogeneous AKI population. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study combined with a clinical audit using questionnaires distributed to consultant nephrologists following NGAL results. Setting: The first 250 consecutive patients with a confirmed AKI where an NGAL test (plasma NGAL [pNGAL] or urine NGAL [uNGAL]) was ordered from a large academic center in Montreal, Canada from January 2021 to August 2021. Patients: Patients were classified into 3 groups based on the final AKI etiology category (functional, intrarenal, and postrenal) following definitive adjudication by 2 independent nephrologists. Methods: The ability of plasma NGAL (pNGAL), urine NGAL (uNGAL), and uNGAL-to-creatinine ratio (uNGAL/Cr) to discriminate intrarenal from functional AKI etiologies was compared to standard urine chemistry (FENa) and proteinuria. A logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between intrarenal AKI and increased biomarker levels. The overall clinical utility and appreciation of the NGAL test was evaluated using a questionnaire completed prospectively by the consultant nephrologist at the time of receiving the NGAL result. The NGAL results were prospectively available to clinicians with a median time of 2.9 (1.3-7.4) hours from the initial order. Results: A total of 214 uNGAL and 44 pNGAL were ordered from 100 functional, 139 intrarenal and 11 postrenal AKI episodes after final adjudication. The discriminative ability of FENa (AUC 0.68 [95% CI: 0.61-0.75]) was lower than uNGAL (AUC 0.80 [95% CI: 0.73-0.86]) and uNGAL/Cr (AUC 0.83 [95% CI: 0.77-0.88]) but better than pNGAL (AUC 0.66 [95% CI: 0.48-0.85]). According to consultant nephrologists, the NGAL testing has led to a change in clinical management in 42% of cases. Limitations: Data reported came from a single center and NGAL was reserved for more complex cases, which limits generalizability. No biopsy has been performed for most AKI cases as the final adjudication was based on a retrospective review of the hospitalization episode. Conclusions: Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin testing can be successfully integrated as part of the diagnostic workup for AKI in clinical practice. The integration of tubular damage biomarkers to functional biomarkers can further improve the differential diagnostic assessment. However, the impact of such biomarkers on AKI management and associated outcomes still needs further validation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207