Cited by 158Chronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementAcute Kidney Injury Research

Effect of dietary protein restriction on the progression of kidney disease: long-term follow-up of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study

Levey, Andrew S., Greene, Tom, Sarnak, Mark J., Wang, Xuelei, Beck, Gerald J., Kusek, John W., Collins, Allan J., Kopple, Joel D.·2006·American Journal of Kidney Diseases

Abstract

Background The long-term effect of a low-protein diet on the progression of chronic kidney disease is unknown. We evaluated effects of protein restriction on kidney failure and all-cause mortality during extended follow-up of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study. Methods Study A was a randomized controlled trial from 1989 to 1993 of 585 patients with predominantly nondiabetic kidney disease and a moderate decrease in glomerular filtration rate (25 to 55 mL/min/1.73 m(2) [0.42 to 0.92 mL/s/1.73 m(2)]) assigned to a low- versus usual-protein diet (0.58 versus 1.3 g/kg/d). We used registries to ascertain the development of kidney failure (initiation of dialysis therapy or transplantation) or a composite of kidney failure and all-cause mortality through December 31, 2000. We used Cox regression models and intention-to-treat principles to compute hazard ratios for the low- versus usual-protein diet, adjusted for baseline glomerular filtration rate and other factors previously associated with the rate of decrease in glomerular filtration rate. We estimated hazard ratios for the entire follow-up period and then, in time-dependent analyses, separately for 2 consecutive 6-year periods of follow-up. Results Kidney failure and the composite outcome occurred in 327 (56%) and 380 patients (65%), respectively. After adjustment for baseline factors, hazard ratios were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.12) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.08), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios for both outcomes were lower during the first 6 years (0.68; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.93 and 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.87, respectively) than afterward (1.27; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.80 and 1.29; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.78; interaction P = 0.008 and 0.002, respectively). Limitations include lack of data for dietary intake and clinical conditions after conclusion of the trial. Conclusion The efficacy of a 2- to 3-year intervention of dietary protein restriction on progression of nondiabetic kidney disease remains inconclusive. Future studies should include a longer duration of intervention and follow-up.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.ajkd.2006.08.023

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • In the MDRD study, a dietary protein target of 0.6 g/kg/d appeared to limit progression of chronic kidney disease, at least during the 6-year follow-up.

    “In the MDRD study (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease), a dietary protein target of 0.6 g·kg−1·d−1 appeared to limit progression of CKD, at least during the 6-year follow-up time frame.125,126”
  • There are safety concerns about augmenting dietary protein above 0.8 g/kg/d, especially from animal sources, because of concerns of accelerating coronary artery disease and heart failure incidence, as well as the potential for accelerating chronic kidney disease progression.

    “There are, however, safety concerns about augmenting dietary protein above the 0.8 g·kg−1·d−1 range, especially from animal sources, because of concerns of accelerating coronary artery disease and HF incidence, as well as the potential for accelerating CKD progression.123–125”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 158

Authors
Levey, A. S., Greene, T., Sarnak, M. J., Wang, X., Beck, G. J., Kusek, J. W., Collins, A. J., & Kopple, J. D.
Affiliations
Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Levey, Andrew S.
Venue
American Journal of Kidney Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-12
Volume
48
Issue
6
Pages
879-888
ISSN
0272-6386 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079680494
Cited by
158
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 11
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Kidney Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23 DK 02904, K23DK002904, UO1 DK35073, U01DK035073)
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, low-protein diet, chronic kidney disease progression, renal failure, dialysis initiation, kidney transplantation, all-cause mortality, glomerular filtration rate decline, MDRD Study, non-diabetic kidney disease, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Blood Pressure, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Glomerular Filtration Rate, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Polycystic Kidney Diseases, Male, Middle Aged, Regression Analysis, Disease Progression, Diet, Protein-Restricted

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