Abstract
The normalization of GFR to a standardized body-surface area of 1.73 m(2) impedes comparison of GFR across individuals of different genders, heights, or weights. Ideally, GFR should be normalized to a parameter that best explains variation in GFR. Here, we measured true GFR by iohexol clearance in a representative sample of 1627 individuals from the general population who did not have diabetes, cardiovascular disease, or kidney disease. We also estimated total body water (TBW), extracellular fluid volume, lean body mass, liver volume, metabolic rate, and body-surface area. We compared two methods of normalizing GFR to these physiologic variables: (1) the conventional method of scaling GFR to each physiologic variable by simple division and (2) a method based on regression of the GFR on each variable. TBW explained a higher proportion of the variation in GFR than the other physiologic variables. GFR adjusted for TBW by the regression method exhibited less dependence on gender, height, and weight compared with the other physiologic variables. Thus, adjusting GFR for TBW by the regression method allows direct comparisons between individuals of different genders, weights, and heights. We propose that regression-based normalization of GFR to a standardized TBW of 40 L should replace the current practice of normalizing GFR to 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area.