Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, and their combination on microalbuminuria in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes

Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers for preventing the progression of diabetic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Guidelines suggest that adults with diabetes and kidney disease receive treatment with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB). This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

We compared the efficacy and safety of ACEi and ARB therapy (either as monotherapy or in combination) on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in adults with diabetes and kidney disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplants Register of Studies to 17 March 2024 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies evaluating ACEi or ARB alone or in combination, compared to each other, placebo or no treatment in people with diabetes and kidney disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and nine studies (28,341 randomised participants) were eligible for inclusion. Overall, the risk of bias was high. Compared to placebo or no treatment, ACEi may make little or no difference to all-cause death (24 studies, 7413 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.15; I2 = 23%; low certainty) and with similar withdrawals from treatment (7 studies, 5306 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; low certainty). ACEi may prevent kidney failure (8 studies, 6643 participants: RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Compared to placebo or no treatment, ARB may make little or no difference to all-cause death (11 studies, 4260 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; I2 = 0%; low certainty). ARB have uncertain effects on withdrawal from treatment (3 studies, 721 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26; I2 = 2%; low certainty) and cardiovascular death (6 studies, 878 participants: RR 3.36, 95% CI 0.93 to 12.07; low certainty). ARB may prevent kidney failure (3 studies, 3227 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; low certainty), doubling of serum creatinine (SCr) (4 studies, 3280 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97; I2 = 32%; low certainty), and the progression from microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria (5 studies, 815 participants: RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.85; I2 = 74%; low certainty). Compared to ACEi, ARB had uncertain effects on all-cause death (15 studies, 1739 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.88; I2 = 0%; low certainty), withdrawal from treatment (6 studies, 612 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.28; I2 = 0%; low certainty), cardiovascular death (13 studies, 1606 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.98; I2 = 0%; low certainty), kidney failure (3 studies, 837 participants: RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; low certainty), and doubling of SCr (2 studies, 767 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Compared to ACEi plus ARB, ACEi alone has uncertain effects on all-cause death (6 studies, 1166 participants: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.40; I2 = 20%; low certainty), withdrawal from treatment (2 studies, 172 participants: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.86; I2 = 0%; low certainty), cardiovascular death (4 studies, 994 participants: RR 3.02, 95% CI 0.61 to 14.85; low certainty), kidney failure (3 studies, 880 participants: RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.32; I2 = 0%; low certainty), and doubling of SCr (2 studies, 813 participants: RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.85; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Compared to ACEi plus ARB, ARB alone has uncertain effects on all-cause death (7 studies, 2607 participants: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; low certainty), withdrawn from treatment (3 studies, 1615 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.24; I2 = 0%; low certainty), cardiovascular death (4 studies, 992 participants: RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.62 to 14.93; low certainty), kidney failure (4 studies, 2321 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.95; I2 = 29%; low certainty), and doubling of SCr (3 studies, 2252 participants: RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.64; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Comparative effects of different ACEi or ARB and low-dose versus high-dose ARB were rarely evaluated. No study compared different doses of ACEi. Adverse events of ACEi and ARB were rarely reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ACEi or ARB may make little or no difference to all-cause and cardiovascular death compared to placebo or no treatment in people with diabetes and kidney disease but may prevent kidney failure. ARB may prevent the doubling of SCr and the progression from microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria compared with a placebo or no treatment. Despite the international guidelines suggesting not combining ACEi and ARB treatment, the effects of ACEi or ARB monotherapy compared to dual therapy have not been adequately assessed. The limited data availability and the low quality of the included studies prevented the assessment of the benefits and harms of ACEi or ARB in people with diabetes and kidney disease. Low and very low certainty evidence indicates that it is possible that further studies might provide different results.

The association between dual RAAS inhibition and risk of acute kidney injury and hyperkalemia in patients with diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade involves dual therapy with a combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), direct renin inhibitors (DRIs), or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). It is hypothesized that dual RAAS blockade would result in a more complete inhibition of the RAAS cascade. However, large clinical trials on dual RAAS inhibition have shown increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia without additional benefit on mortality, cardiovascular events, or chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression compared to RAAS inhibitor monotherapy in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). The development of newer, more selective non-steroidal MRAs as cardiorenal protective therapies has created a new opportunity for dual RAAS inhibition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risks of AKI and hyperkalemia with dual RAAS blockade in patients with DKD.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from 1 January 2006 to 30 May 2022. The study population included adult patients with DKD receiving dual RAAS blockade. A total of 31 RCTs and 33 048 patients were included in the systematic review. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects.

RESULTS

There were 208 AKI events in 2690 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 170 in 4264 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.39). There were 304 hyperkalemia events in 2818 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 208 in 4396 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.32-2.94). A non-steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB showed no increase in the risk of AKI (pooled RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81-1.16) compared to ACEi or ARB monotherapy but had a 2-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 953 events in 7837 patients in dual therapy versus 454 events in 6895 patients in monotherapy (pooled RR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.84-2.28). A steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB had a 5-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 28 events in 245 at risk in dual therapy versus five events in 248 at risk in monotherapy (pooled RR 5.42 95% CI: 2.15-13.67).

CONCLUSION

Dual therapy with RAASi is associated with an increased risk of AKI and hyperkalemia compared to RAASi monotherapy. Conversely, dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and non-steroidal MRAs have no additional risk of AKI but a similar risk of hyperkalemia, which is lower than dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and steroidal MRAs.

Renal Effects of High-Dose Versus Low-Dose Lisinopril in Patients With Diabetic Nephropathy

Background The present study was conducted to assess the renal effects of high dose versus low dose lisinopril in patients with diabetic nephropathy. Methodology A prospective observational study was conducted at the Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, between July 1, 2019, to January 1, 2020. Patients were divided into two groups. Group A patients were administered a low dose (5 mg per day) of Lisinopril and group B were administered a higher dose of therapy (20 mg/day) for three months. At the end of the study, baseline renal functions, electrolytes, and status of microalbuminuria were compared with follow-up values. The primary outcome was to assess the change in microalbuminuria levels in patients at baseline, one month, and three months of therapy. Results A total of 72 patients were included in group A (low dose) and 72 patients were enrolled in group B (high dose). The mean ages of group A and group B were 56.3 ± 12.9 years and 53.48 ± 12.2 years, respectively. The majority of the patients in the groups were male. At baseline, the mean microalbuminuria levels in the two groups were not significantly different however, at three months post treatment, the levels were significantly much lower in high dose patients as compared to patients who were on low dose lisinopril (146.06 ± 23.89 vs. 184.69 ± 26.27; p < 0.0001). The three-month urea levels were significantly lower in group A as compared to group B (38.91 ± 7.07 vs. 43.26 ± 3.02; p = 0.008). Three-month creatinine and potassium levels were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.7 and 0.12, respectively).  Conclusion Our study revealed that even though group B (high dose lisinopril) had significantly reduced microalbuminuria, the urea levels were found to be higher in this cohort of patients as compared to group A patients on low-dose lisinopril. Moreover, the majority of the patients in group B reported significant improvements in blood pressure control as compared to group A, which indicated that a high dose of lisinopril is more effective in patients with diabetic nephropathy than a low dose of lisinopril. The levels of creatinine after three months of treatment did not differ significantly. Further randomized trials are warranted in order to ascertain the effectiveness of high dose of lisinopril in patients with diabetic nephropathy.

Efficacy and safety of dual vs single renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in chronic kidney disease: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To lower albuminuria and to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals, dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are sometimes used in clinical practice for the treatment of CKD. However, the efficacy and safety of dual RAAS blockade therapy remains controversial.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched, and random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes of eligible studies. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected by meta-regression and subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

The present meta-analysis of 72 randomized controlled trials with 10,296 patients demonstrated that dual RAAS blockade therapy was superior to monotherapy in reducing the urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion, and BP. These beneficial effects were related to the decrease of glomerular filtration rate, the increase of serum potassium level, and higher rates of hyperkalemia and hypotension. Meanwhile, these effects did not lead to improvements in short-term or long-term outcomes, including doubling of serum creatinine, acute kidney injury, end-stage renal disease, mortality, and hospitalization. Compared with the single therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in combination with angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist in decreasing urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion and BP, and the combination was not associated with a lower glomerular filtration rate.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the single therapy, ACEI in combination with ARB was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist. Although ACEI in combination with ARB was associated with higher incidences of hyperkalemia and hypotension, careful individualized management and potassium binders may further expand its application (PROSPERO number CRD42020179398).

Efficacy and Safety of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in Combination with Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker in Chronic Kidney Disease Based on Dose: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the controversy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in combination with angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) in the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) based on dose.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to March 2020. The random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected using sensitivity analysis and meta-regression.

Results: This meta-analysis of 53 RCTs with 6,375 patients demonstrated that in patients with CKD, ACEI in combination with ARB was superior to low-dose ACEI or ARB in reducing urine albumin excretion (SMD, −0.43; 95% CI, −0.67 to −0.19; p = 0.001), urine protein excretion (SMD, −0.22; 95% CI, −0.33 to −0.11; p < 0.001), and blood pressure (BP), including systolic BP (WMD, −2.89; 95% CI, −3.88 to −1.89; p < 0.001) and diastolic BP (WMD, −3.02; 95% CI, −4.46 to −1.58; p < 0.001). However, it was associated with decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (SMD, −0.13; 95% CI, −0.24 to −0.02; p = 0.02) and increased rates of hyperkalemia (RR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.55 to 2.76; p < 0.001) and hypotension (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.54; p = 0.001). ACEI in combination with ARB was more effective than high-dose ACEI or ARB in reducing urine albumin excretion (SMD, −0.84; 95% CI, −1.26 to −0.43; p < 0.001) and urine protein excretion (SMD, −0.24; 95% CI, −0.39 to −0.09; p = 0.002), without decrease in GFR (SMD, 0.02; 95% CI, −0.12 to 0.15; p = 0.78) and increase in rate of hyperkalemia (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.37; p = 0.76). Nonetheless, the combination did not decrease the BP and increased the rate of hypotension (RR, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.13 to 13.84; p = 0.03) compared with high-dose ACEI or ARB.

Conclusion: ACEI in combination with ARB is superior in reducing urine albumin excretion and urine protein excretion. The combination is more effective than high-dose ACEI or ARB without decreasing GFR and increasing the incidence of hyperkalemia. Despite the risk of hypotension, ACEI in combination with ARB is a better choice for CKD patients who need to increase the dose of ACEI or ARB (PROSPERO CRD42020179398).

Dencichine ameliorates renal injury by improving oxidative stress, apoptosis and fibrosis in diabetic rats

OBJECTIVE

To investigate protective efficacies and mechanisms of dencichine on diabetic kidney injury via in vitro and in vivo assays.

METHODS

Effects of dencichine on hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) induced oxidative damage in HK-2 renal cells were assessed by CCK-8 method. Forty streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic rats with kidney injury were randomly divided into negative control group, three doses of dencichine (40, 80 and 160 mg/kg) groups. Blood biochemical and kidney related indexes as well adrenal morphological changes, apoptosis and autophagy related markers of diabetic rats were measured.

RESULTS

Cell viability of HK-2 cells with oxidative damage induced by H₂O₂ was significantly improved by dencichine with 160 μg/mL for 43.7% and 320 μg/mL for 52.9% compared with control. Moreover, the decreased reactive oxygen species (ROS), and increased intracellular antioxidant enzymes including GPX1, SOD2 and GSH were showed in dencichine groups. In addition, incubation of dencichine in HK-2 cells promoted the increase of p-AMPK, BCL2, LC3, decreased activation of p-mTOR, BAX and Caspase 3. Chronic treatment of dencichine improved the STZ-induced diabetic characteristics of model rats. Further histopathological examination of renal tissues revealed 12-week treatment of dencichine effectively improved the morphology of nephropathy in diabetic rats. Moreover, dencichine also ameliorated excessive oxidation stress, down-regulated renal cell apoptosis and fibrosis related proteins, thereby protected renal tissues in diabetic rats.

CONCLUSION

Dencichine ameliorated STZ-induced kidney injury mainly through inhibiting oxidative stress, reducing renal fibrosis, increasing autophagy, and reducing the renal cell apoptosis related proteins to protect nephrocytes and decrease renal tissue damage.

Comparative proteinuria management of different angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers for normotensive patients with CKD: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are blood pressure-lowering agents, but they are also being used to control proteinuria in early chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. However, clinically, some patients present merely proteinuria without hypertension. No guidelines pointed out how to select treatments for proteinuria in normotensive patients. Thus, we conducted a Bayesian network analysis to evaluate the relative effects of different kinds of ACEI or ARB or their combination on proteinuria and blood pressure reduction.

Methods

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with ID CRD42017073721. A comprehensive literature database query was carried out systematically according to PICOS strategies. The primary outcome was reduction in proteinuria, and the secondary outcomes were eGFR reduction and blood pressure reduction. Random-effects pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses were used to estimate the effect of different regimens.

Results

A total of 14 RCTs with 1,098 patients were included in the analysis. All treatment strategies of ACEI, ARB or their combination had significantly greater efficacy in reducing proteinuria than placebo in normotensive CKD patients. The combination therapy of olmesartan+temocapril had the highest probability (22%) of being the most effective treatment to reduce proteinuria in normotensive CKD patients. Olmesartan and lisinopril ranked second (12%), and temocapril ranked third (15%) but reduced blood pressure less than placebo. For IgA nephropathy, the combination therapy of olmesartan+temocapril also had the highest probability (43%) of being the best antiproteinuric treatment, while enalapril had the highest probability (58%) of being the best antiproteinuric therapy for diabetic nephropathy.

Conclusions

The combination therapy of olmesartan plus temocapril appeared to be the most efficacious for reducing proteinuria in normotensive CKD patients and IgA nephropathy, but the clinical application should be balanced against potential harms. Temocapril can be an option when practitioners are searching for more proteinuria reduction but less blood pressure variation. In normotensive diabetic nephropathy, monotherapy with the ACEI enalapril seems to be the most efficacious intervention for reducing albuminuria. Future studies are required to give a more definitive recommendation.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Blockade of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, evidence suggests that the combined use of RAAS blockers may be associated with increased rates of adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to examine the efficacy and safety of dual blockade of the RAAS in patients with DKD.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1990 and January 2018 sourced via the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. RCTs were included if they investigated the efficacy and safety of dual blockade therapy compared with monotherapy in patients with DKD. Random effects models were used in meta-analysis to account for heterogeneities in effect sizes across the reviewed studies. Analyses were stratified by blood pressure and albuminuria. We further conducted subgroup analyses by considering various combinations of RAAS inhibitors.

RESULTS

Based on 42 RCTs with 14,576 patients, dual RAAS blockade therapy was associated with significant decreases in blood pressure, albuminuria, and proteinuria. However, dual therapy was not superior to monotherapy in terms of reductions in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Significant increases in serum potassium and rates of hyperkalemia and hypotension were more common in patients treated with dual therapy. However, glomerular filtration rates (GFR) did not decrease significantly with dual therapy. In subgroup analysis, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) plus an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) or a direct renin inhibitor (DRI) plus an ACEI/ARB did not significantly increase the risk of hyperkalemia, hypotension, and adverse events, and the risk of hypotension increased significantly within the normotensive subgroup but not within the hypertensive subgroup. The risk of hyperkalemia increased significantly in patients with DKD with macroalbuminuria but not in those with microalbuminuria.

CONCLUSION

Dual inhibition therapy is superior to monotherapy for blood pressure control and urine protein reduction, though such superiority does not translate into improvements in longer-term outcomes, such as reduced progression to ESRD, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. An ACEI plus an ARB or a DRI plus an ACEI/ARB may be a safe and effective therapy for patients with DKD, and combination therapy may be suitable for patients with DKD and hypertension and microalbuminuria.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Antihypertensive Agents for Adult Diabetic Patients with Microalbuminuric Kidney Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Antihypertensive treatment mitigates the progression of chronic kidney disease. Here, we comparatively assessed the effects of antihypertensive agents in normotensive and hypertensive diabetic patients with microalbuminuric kidney disease.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral antihypertensive agents in adult diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. The primary efficacy outcome was reduction in albuminuria, and the primary safety outcomes were dry cough, presyncope, and edema. Random-effects pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed to produce outcome estimates for all RCTs, only hypertensive RCTs, or only normotensive RCTs. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probability rankings were calculated for all outcomes. Sensitivity analyses on type 2 diabetes status, age, or follow-up duration were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 38 RCTs were included in the meta-analyses. The angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-calcium channel blocker (ACEI-CCB) combination therapy of captopril+diltiazem was most efficacious in reducing albuminuria irrespective of blood pressure status. However, the ACEI-angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEI-ARB) combination therapy of trandolapril+candesartan was the most efficacious in reducing albuminuria for normotensive patients, while the ACEI-CCB combination therapy of fosinopril+amlodipine was the most efficacious in reducing albuminuria for hypertensive patients. The foregoing combination therapies displayed inferior safety profiles relative to ACEI monotherapy with respect to dry cough, presyncope, and edema. With respect to type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria, the Chinese herbal medicine Tangshen formula followed by the ACEI ramipril were the most efficacious in reducing albuminuria.

CONCLUSIONS

Trandolapril+candesartan appears to be the most efficacious intervention for reducing albuminuria for normotensive patients, while fosinopril+amlodipine appears to be the most efficacious intervention for reducing albuminuria for hypertensive patients. For practitioners opting for monotherapy, our SUCRA analysis supports the use of trandolapril and fosinopril in normotensive and hypertensive adult diabetic patients with microalbuminuria, respectively.

Comparing the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on renal function decline in diabetes

AIM

To compare effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for protecting Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) patients from renal function decline in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of new ACEi/ARB users in 2007-2012 in an unselected primary care DM2 population. Outcome is decline in renal function stage (combining estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria). Patients were matched on a propensity score. Extended Cox models with time-varying covariates were used to estimate hazard ratios of outcome.

RESULTS

The time to renal function decline for ARB users was slightly, but not significantly longer than for ACEi users (hazard ratio: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.58-1.10; p = 0.166).

CONCLUSION

This study did not show significant differences between the classes in preventing renal function decline in DM2 patients in primary care.

Valsartan independent of AT₁ receptor inhibits tissue factor, TLR-2 and -4 expression by regulation of Egr-1 through activation of AMPK in diabetic conditions

Patients suffering from diabetes mellitus (DM) are at a severe risk of atherothrombosis. Early growth response (Egr)-1 is well characterized as a central mediator in vascular pathophysiology. We tested whether valsartan independent of Ang II type 1 receptor (AT1R) can reduce tissue factor (TF) and toll-like receptor (TLR)-2 and -4 by regulating Egr-1 in THP-1 cells and aorta in streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice. High glucose (HG, 15 mM) increased expressions of Egr-1, TF, TLR-2 and -4 which were significantly reduced by valsartan. HG increased Egr-1 expression by activation of PKC and ERK1/2 in THP-1 cells. Valsartan increased AMPK phosphorylation in a concentration and time-dependent manner via activation of LKB1. Valsartan inhibited Egr-1 without activation of PKC or ERK1/2. The reduced expression of Egr-1 by valsartan was reversed by either silencing Egr-1, or compound C, or DN-AMPK-transfected cells. Valsartan inhibited binding of NF-κB and Egr-1 to TF promoter in HG condition. Furthermore, valsartan reduced inflammatory cytokine (TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-1β) production and NF-κB activity in HG-activated THP-1 cells. Interestingly, these effects of valsartan were not affected by either silencing AT1R in THP-1 cells or CHO cells, which were devoid of AT1R. Importantly, administration of valsartan (20 mg/kg, i.p) for 8 weeks significantly reduced plasma TF activity, expression of Egr-1, TLR-2, -4 and TF in thoracic aorta and improved glucose tolerance of streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice. Taken together, we concluded that valsartan may reduce atherothrombosis in diabetic conditions through AMPK/Egr-1 regulation.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor blockers for end-stage renal disease/mortality in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To compare angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) development and all-cause mortality in veterans with macroalbuminuria and with newly documented type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study utilizing data from the national Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) databases. The study followed 5166 subjects without a history of use of ACEIs or ARBs. To control for differences in baseline characteristics between groups, comparisons of subjects ACEIs and ARBs were made by incorporating propensity scores analysis into multivariate logistic regression. This resulted in adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for ESRD development and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The sample was followed up to five years with a mean follow-up of three years. Subjects taking ACEIs has lower odds of ESRD development (OR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.13-0.82]) and all-cause mortality (OR, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.04-0.21]) than ARBs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that ACEIs are associated with lower ESRD development and all-cause mortality than ARBs. This may have implications for guidelines which currently suggest that these two therapeutic classes provide similar benefits in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes and macroalbuminuria.

The effects of chronic candesartan treatment on cardiac and hepatic adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase in rats submitted to surgical stress

INTRODUCTION

adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) plays a prominent role as a metabolic stress sensor, and it has recently been suggested that the renin-angiotensin system, in addition to its role in stress regulation, may play a significant role in regulating the AMPK system. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of candesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, on cardiac and hepatic AMPK activity basally as well as after surgical stress under general anesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Male Wistar rats were treated with 5 mg/kg/day candesartan in their drinking water for two weeks. Levels of cardiac and hepatic AMPK activity were determined, using a kinase activity assay, basally and after surgical stress under general anesthesia.

RESULTS

Chronic administration of candesartan increased hepatic AMPK activity approximately 4 times (p<0.05) while no significant change was demonstrated in cardiac AMPK. Cardiac and hepatic AMPK activities were not significantly increased by surgical stress alone performed under anesthesia. However, chronic treatment with candesartan decreased AMPK activity in both liver and heart after surgical stress under anesthesia (p<0.01 for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

While chronic candesartan treatment may stimulate AMPK activity in certain organs such as the liver, when combined with surgical stress under anesthesia it inhibits pathways regulating AMPK activity.

Efficacy and safety of combined vs. single renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) has gained popularity for the treatment of kidney disease, its benefits and potential risks have not been fully elucidated. We conducted a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of combined vs. single RAAS blockade therapy in chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

We performed a literature search using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, scientific abstracts from meetings, and bibliographies of retrieved articles. We used random-effects models to compute net changes and rate differences in variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine (25 crossover and 34 parallel-arm) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of combined vs. single RAAS blockade therapy in CKD were identified (4,975 patients). Combined RAAS blockade therapy was associated with a significant net decrease in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (-1.8ml/min or ml/min/1.73 m(2); P = 0.005), albuminuria (-90mg/g of creatinine; P = 0.001 or -32mg/day; P = 0.03), and proteinuria (-291mg/g; P = 0.003 or -363mg/day; P < 0.001). Combined RAAS blockade therapy was associated with a 9.4% higher rate of regression to normoalbuminuria and a 5% higher rate of achieving the blood pressure (BP) goal (as defined in individual trials). However, combined RAAS blockade therapy was associated with a significant net increase in serum potassium level, a 3.4% higher rate of hyperkalemia, and a 4.6% higher rate of hypotension. There was no effect on doubling of the serum creatinine level, hospitalization, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Although combined RAAS blockade therapy in CKD is associated with a decrease in albuminuria and proteinuria, it is associated with a decrease in GFR and a higher incidence of hyperkalemia and hypotension relative to monotherapy. The potential long-term kidney benefits of combined RAAS blockade therapy require further study.

Modifications in basal and stress-induced hypothalamic AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activity in rats chronically treated with an angiotensin II receptor blocker

5' adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) plays a prominent role as a metabolic stress sensor. The role of hypothalamic AMPK in response to restraint and surgical stress has not been previously investigated. It has been recently suggested that the renin-angiotensin system, in addition to its role in stress regulation, may play a significant role in regulating metabolic pathways including the regulation of the AMPK system. This study was thus aimed to evaluate the effects of candesartan, an angiotensin II AT1 receptor blocker drug, on hypothalamic AMPK activity under basal conditions and after restraint in conscious rats or after surgical stress under general anesthesia. Male Wistar rats were treated with 5 mg/kg/day candesartan in the drinking water for 2 weeks. The hypothalamic AMPK activity was determined under basal and stress conditions, using a kinase activity assay. Chronic administration of candesartan significantly increased hypothalamic AMPK activity. Hypothalamic AMPK activity was also increased by restraint stress whereas no change was observed during surgical stress under anesthesia. The high levels of hypothalamic AMPK activation observed in candesartan-treated rats were not changed by restraint stress but were reduced to control levels by anesthesia and surgery. In conclusion, chronic candesartan treatment and restraint stress in conscious rats stimulate the hypothalamic AMPK activity, whereas surgical stress under anesthesia inhibits pathways regulating the AMPK activity even in candesartan-treated rats.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and combined therapy in patients with micro- and macroalbuminuria and other cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

A recent clinical trial showed harmful renal effects with the combined use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARB) in people with diabetes or vascular disease. We examined the benefits and risks of these agents in people with albuminuria and one or more cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Renal Health Library were searched for trials comparing ACEI, ARB or their combination with placebo or with one another in people with albuminuria and one or more cardiovascular risk factor.

RESULTS

Eighty-five trials (21,708 patients) were included. There was no significant reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality or fatal cardiac-cerebrovascular outcomes with ACEI versus placebo, ARB versus placebo, ACEI versus ARB or with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy. There was a significant reduction in the risk of nonfatal cardiovascular events with ACEI versus placebo but not with ARB versus placebo, ACEI versus ARB or with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy. Development of end-stage kidney disease and progression of microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria were reduced significantly with ACEI versus placebo and ARB versus placebo but not with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

ACEI and ARB exert independent renal and nonfatal cardiovascular benefits while their effects on mortality and fatal cardiovascular disease are uncertain. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of combination therapy. A comparative clinical trial with ACE, ARB and its combination in people with albuminuria and a cardiovascular risk factor is warranted.

Valsartan in combination with lisinopril versus the respective high dose monotherapies in hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria: the VALERIA trial

OBJECTIVES

Microalbuminuria is known as an independent predictor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and death. The purpose of the VALERIA trial was a comparison of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy of valsartan and lisinopril with valsartan and lisinopril high-dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, interventional, parallel-group study. After a washout/placebo-run-in phase of 3 weeks, 133 patients were randomized to treatment (1: 1:1) with either lisinopril 40 mg, valsartan 320 mg, or a combination of valsartan/lisinopril 320/20 mg for 30 weeks.

RESULTS

At baseline, the urine albumin creatinine ratio was similar for the three treatment groups (geometric means, lisinopril 9.6 mg/mmol, valsartan 9.1 mg/mmol, and valsartan/lisinopril 9.5 mg/mmol). After 30 weeks of treatment, the geometric mean urine albumin creatinine ratio had decreased in all three groups by 41, 51, and 62% to 5.7 mg/mmol (lisinopril), 4.5 mg/mmol (valsartan), and 3.6 mg/mmol (valsartan/lisinopril). The decrease for valsartan/lisinopril was statistically significantly greater compared with lisinopril [adjusted ratio 60%, confidence interval (38-94%), P = 0.029]. Normalization of microalbuminuria was greatest with valsartan and valsartan/lisinopril (lisinopril 17%, valsartan 31%, and valsartan/lisinopril 38% of patients) and was statistically significant for lisinopril in contrast with valsartan/lisinopril (P = 0.034). Differences in blood pressure reduction between the groups were not statistically significant. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The combination of valsartan and lisinopril provided a significantly better reduction of urine albumin creatinine ratio and more than doubled the rate of patients with normalized urine albumin creatinine ratio compared with lisinopril alone. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.