Background A comprehensive evaluation of the independent and combined associations of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria with mortality is required for assessment of the impact of kidney function on risk in the general population, with implications for improving the definition and staging of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods A collaborative meta-analysis of general population cohorts was undertaken to pool standardized data for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. The two kidney measures and potential confounders from 14 studies (105,872 participants; 730,577 person-years) with urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) measurements and seven studies (1,128,310 participants; 4,732,110 person-years) with urine protein dipstick measurements were modeled. Findings In ACR studies, mortality risk was unrelated to eGFR between 75-105 ml/min/1·73 m2 and increased at lower eGFR. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality at eGFR 60, 45, and 15 (versus 95) ml/min/1·73 m2 were 1·18 (95% CI: 1·05-1·32), 1·57 (1·39-1·78), and 3·14 (2·39-4·13), respectively. ACR was associated with mortality risk linearly on the log-log scale without threshold effects. Adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality at ACR 10, 30, and 300 (versus 5) mg/g were 1·20 (1·15-1·26), 1·63 (1·50-1·77), and 2·22 (1·97-2·51). eGFR and ACR were multiplicatively associated with mortality without evidence of interaction. Similar findings were observed for cardiovascular mortality and in dipstick studies. Interpretation Lower eGFR (<60 ml/min/1·73 m2) and higher albuminuria (ACR ≥10 mg/g) were independent predictors of mortality risk in the general population. This study provides quantitative data for using both kidney measures for risk evaluation and CKD definition and staging.

Objective To establish the incidence and aetiology of infectious intestinal disease in the community and presenting to general practitioners. Comparison with incidence and aetiology of cases reaching national laboratory based surveillance. Design Population based community cohort incidence study, general practice based incidence studies, and case linkage to national laboratory surveillance. Setting 70 general practices throughout England. Participants 459 975 patients served by the practices. Community surveillance of 9776 randomly selected patients.

The detection of fibrosis within nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is important for ascertaining prognosis and the stratification of patients for emerging therapeutic intervention. We validated the Original European Liver Fibrosis panel (OELF) and a simplified algorithm not containing age, the Enhanced Liver fibrosis panel (ELF), in an independent cohort of patients with NAFLD. Furthermore, we explored whether the addition of simple markers to the existing panel test could improve diagnostic performance. One hundred ninety-six consecutively recruited patients from 2 centers were included in the validation study. The diagnostic accuracy of the discriminant scores of the ELF panel, simple markers, and a combined panel were compared using receiver operator curves, predictive values, and a clinical utility model. The ELF panel had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 for distinguishing severe fibrosis, 0.82 for moderate fibrosis, and 0.76 for no fibrosis. Simplification of the algorithm by removing age did not alter diagnostic performance. Addition of simple markers to the panel improved diagnostic performance with AUCs of 0.98, 0.93, and 0.84 for the detection of severe fibrosis, moderate fibrosis, and no fibrosis, respectively. The clinical utility model showed that 82% and 88% of liver biopsies could be potentially avoided for the diagnosis of severe fibrosis using ELF and the combined panel, respectively. The ELF panel has good diagnostic accuracy in an independent validation cohort of patients with NAFLD. The addition of established simple markers augments the diagnostic performance across different stages of fibrosis, which will potentially allow superior stratification of patients with NAFLD for emerging therapeutic strategies. (HEPATOLOGY 2008;47:455-460.)