Key result
Indians living in U.S. cities had a similar age-adjusted prevalence of chronic kidney disease (14.0%) compared to Indians living in Indian cities (10.8%).
Cross-Sectional (n=6,042)
Yes
The prevalence of CKD is similar among urban Indians in India and the US, but those in India have more severe disease and poorer risk factor management, increasing their risk for end-stage renal disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports targeted risk factor management in India; leaves open migration effects on CKD severity and progression.
BACKGROUND: While data from the latter part of the twentieth century consistently showed that immigrants to high-income countries faced higher cardio-metabolic risk than their counterparts in low- and middle-income countries, urbanization and associated lifestyle changes may be changing these patterns, even for conditions considered to be advanced manifestations of cardio-metabolic disease (e.g., chronic kidney disease [CKD]). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using cross-sectional data from the Center for cArdiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS, n = 5294) and Mediators of Atherosclerosis in South Asians Living in America (MASALA, n = 748) studies, we investigated whether prevalence of CKD is similar among Indians living in Indian and U.S. cities. We compared crude, age-, waist-to-height ratio-, and diabetes- adjusted CKD prevalence difference. Among participants identified to have CKD, we compared management of risk factors for its progression. Overall age-adjusted prevalence of CKD was similar in MASALA (14.0% [95% CI 11.8-16.3]) compared with CARRS (10.8% [95% CI 10.0-11.6]). Among men the prevalence difference was low (prevalence difference 1.8 [95% CI -1.6,5.3]) and remained low after adjustment for age, waist-to-height ratio, and diabetes status (-0.4 [-3.2,2.5]). Adjusted prevalence difference was higher among women (prevalence difference 8.9 [4.8,12.9]), but driven entirely by a higher prevalence of albuminuria among women in MASALA. Severity of CKD--i.e., degree of albuminuria and proportion of participants with reduced glomerular filtration fraction--was higher in CARRS for both men and women. Fewer participants with CKD in CARRS were effectively treated. 4% of CARRS versus 51% of MASALA participants with CKD had A1c < 7%; and 7% of CARRS versus 59% of MASALA participants blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg. Our analysis applies only to urban populations. Demographic--particularly educational attainment--differences among participants in the two studies are a potential source of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of CKD among Indians living in Indian and U.S. cities is similar. Persons with CKD living in Indian cities face higher likelihood of experiencing end-stage renal disease since they have more severe kidney disease and little evidence of risk factor management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anand et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Chronic kidney disease (n=6,042). Living in U.S. cities (MASALA study) vs. Living in Indian cities (CARRS study) was evaluated on Age-adjusted prevalence of chronic kidney disease (p=<0.05). Indians living in U.S. cities had a similar age-adjusted prevalence of chronic kidney disease (14.0%) compared to Indians living in Indian cities (10.8%).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: