Objective: 186 kidney transplant recipients with stable kidney function were included in our study. The patients’ GFRs were estimated by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI creatinine 2009), CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012,  CKD-EPI cystatin C 2012 and 6 other ScysC-based equations (Arnal Dade, Filler-LePage, Hoek, Grubb, Le Bricon, Rule). The 99mTc-DTPA clearancce was considered as the measured GFR (mGFR). We compared the accuracy of the equations to the mGFR. Methods: The mean age of the patients was 42.95±11.2 years. CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations appeared the least biased (ΔmGFR: 0.64±13.2;  0.13±14.3 ml/min/1.73m2, respectively) and had the best correlation with mGFR (r1 = 0.734, r2 =0.736, (p<0.001)). Also, CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations had the highest sensitivity (84,8%; 83,8%) and specificity (67,4%; 64,8%)  at the cutoff value of  60mL/min/1.73 m2 DTPA.  Results: We found that the CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations had better predictive performance than the others based on Scr or Scys alone to estimate GFR in kidney transplant recipients. Conclusions: Objective: Assessing accurate estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in kidney transplant recipients is indispensable. In Vietnamese clinical settings, we usually evaluate the  renal function by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) based on serum creatinine (Scr) or serum cystatin C (ScysC). We compared equations based on ScysC alone or combined with Scr, with equations based on Scr-based alone to estimate GFR as precisely and simply as possible in kidney transplant recipients. Methods: 186 kidney transplant recipients with stable kidney function were included in our study. The patients’ GFRs were estimated by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI creatinine 2009), CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012,  CKD-EPI cystatin C 2012 and 6 other ScysC-based equations (Arnal Dade, Filler-LePage, Hoek, Grubb, Le Bricon, Rule). The 99mTc-DTPA clearancce was considered as the measured GFR (mGFR). We compared the accuracy of the equations to the mGFR. Results: The mean age of the patients was 42.95±11.2 years. CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations appeared the least biased (ΔmGFR: 0.64±13.2;  0.13±14.3 ml/min/1.73m2, respectively) and had the best correlation with mGFR (r1 = 0.734, r2 =0.736, (p<0.001)). Also, CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations had the highest sensitivity (84,8%; 83,8%) and specificity (67,4%; 64,8%)  at the cutoff value of  60mL/min/1.73 m2 DTPA.  Conclusions: We found that the CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C 2012 and Hoek equations had better predictive performance than the others based on Scr or Scys alone to estimate GFR in kidney transplant recipients.