Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate: The Query for a Workable Golden Standard Technique

Inulin clearance has, for a long time, been considered as the reference method to determine measured glomerular filtration rates (mGFRs). However, given the known limitations of the standard marker, serum creatinine, and of inulin itself, and the frequent need for accurate GFR estimations, several other non-radioactive (iohexol and iothalamate) and radioactive (Cr-51-EDTA, Tc-99m-DTPA, I-125 iothalamate) exogenous mGFR filtration markers are nowadays considered the most accurate options to evaluate GFR. The availability of Cr-51-EDTA is limited, and all methods using radioactive tracers necessitate specific safety precautions. Serum- or plasma-based certified reference materials for iohexol and iothalamate and evidence-based protocols to accurately and robustly measure GFR (plasma vs. urinary clearance, single-sample vs. multiple-sample strategy, effect of sampling time delay) are lacking. This leads to substantial variation in reported mGFR results across studies and questions the scientific reliability of the alternative mGFR methods as the gold standard to evaluate kidney function. On top of the scientific discussion, regulatory issues are further narrowing the clinical use of mGFR methods. Therefore, this review is a call for standardization of mGFR in terms of three aspects: the marker, the analytical method to assess concentrations of that marker, and the procedure to determine GFR in practice. Moreover, there is also a need for an endogenous filtration marker or a panel of filtration markers from a single blood draw that would allow estimation of GFR as accurately as mGFR, and without the need for application of anthropometric, clinical, and demographic characteristics.

Automated summary

Inulin clearance is no longer considered the gold standard for measuring glomerular filtration rates due to limitations in accuracy and safety, with non-radioactive and radioactive markers now being preferred. However, standardization and regulatory issues remain challenges in the use of alternative mGFR methods.