Cited by 408Chronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementAcute Kidney Injury Research

A meta-analysis of the effects of dietary protein restriction on the rate of decline in renal function

Kasiske, BL, Lakatua, JD, Ma, JZ, Louis, TA·1998·American Journal of Kidney Diseases

Abstract

Dietary protein restriction has been reported to delay the need for renal replacement therapy in clinical trials and meta-analyses. However, less clear is what effect dietary protein has on the rate of decline in renal function. We pooled the results of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 1,919 patients) and found that dietary protein restriction reduced the rate of decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate by only 0.53 mL/min/yr (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08 to 0.98 mL/min/yr). We also used weighted regression analysis to determine the reasons for the differences in the results of these 13 randomized trials along with 11 other nonrandomized controlled trials (n = 2,248 patients). The effect of dietary protein restriction (glomerular filtration rate decline in treatment minus control) was substantially less in randomized versus nonrandomized trials (regression coefficient, -5.2 mL/min/yr; 95% CI, -7.8 to -2.5 mL/min/yr; P < 0.05) and relatively greater among diabetic versus nondiabetic patients (5.4 mL/min/yr; 95% CI, 0.3 to 10.5 mL/min/yr; P < 0.05), while there was a trend toward a greater effect with each additional year of follow-up (2.1 mL/min/yr; 95% CI, -0.05 to 4.2 mL/min/yr; P = NS). However, the number of diabetic patients studied was small and the duration of follow-up was short in most trials. No other patient or study characteristics altered the effect of dietary protein restriction on the rate of decline in renal function. Thus, although dietary protein restriction retards the rate of renal function decline, the relatively weak magnitude of this effect suggests that better therapies are needed to slow the rate of renal disease progression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/ajkd.1998.v31.pm9631839

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kasiske, B., Lakatua, J., Ma, J., & Louis, T.
Affiliations
Hennepin County Medical Center (US)
Venue
American Journal of Kidney Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-06
Volume
31
Issue
6
Pages
954-961
ISSN
0272-6386 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003748292
Cited by
408
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
2.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Kidney Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
Keywords
protein restriction, renal function decline, estimated glomerular filtration rate, chronic kidney disease progression, diabetic nephropathy, renal replacement therapy, trial heterogeneity, follow-up duration
MeSH terms
Diabetic Nephropathies, Dietary Proteins, Glomerular Filtration Rate, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Disease Progression

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review