The presence and distribution of alpha adrenergic receptors in human renal pelvis and calyces

Role of α- and β-adrenergic signaling in phenotypic targeting: significance in benign and malignant urologic disease

The urinary tract is highly innervated by autonomic nerves which are essential in urinary tract development, the production of growth factors, and the control of homeostasis. These neural signals may become dysregulated in several genitourinary (GU) disease states, both benign and malignant. Accordingly, the autonomic nervous system is a therapeutic target for several genitourinary pathologies including cancer, voiding dysfunction, and obstructing nephrolithiasis. Adrenergic receptors (adrenoceptors) are G-Protein coupled-receptors that are distributed throughout the body. The major function of α1-adrenoceptors is signaling smooth muscle contractions through GPCR and intracellular calcium influx. Pharmacologic intervention of α-and β-adrenoceptors is routinely and successfully implemented in the treatment of benign urologic illnesses, through the use of α-adrenoceptor antagonists. Furthermore, cell-based evidence recently established the antitumor effect of α1-adrenoceptor antagonists in prostate, bladder and renal tumors by reducing neovascularity and impairing growth within the tumor microenvironment via regulation of the phenotypic epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). There has been a significant focus on repurposing the routinely used, Food and Drug Administration-approved α1-adrenoceptor antagonists to inhibit GU tumor growth and angiogenesis in patients with advanced prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. In this review we discuss the current evidence on (a) the signaling events of the autonomic nervous system mediated by its cognate α- and β-adrenoceptors in regulating the phenotypic landscape (EMT) of genitourinary organs; and (b) the therapeutic significance of targeting this signaling pathway in benign and malignant urologic disease. Video abstract.

Alpha-blockers after shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones in adults

BACKGROUND

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a widely used method to treat renal and ureteral stone. It fragments stones into smaller pieces that are then able to pass spontaneously down the ureter and into the bladder. Alpha-blockers may assist in promoting the passage of stone fragments, but their effectiveness remains uncertain.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of alpha-blockers as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care compared to placebo and usual care or usual care alone in adults undergoing shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, several clinical trial registries and grey literature for published and unpublished studies irrespective of language. The date of the most recent search was 27 February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of adults undergoing SWL. Participants in the intervention group had to have received an alpha-blocker as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care. For the comparator group, we considered studies in which participants received placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion/exclusion, and performed data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. We conducted meta-analysis for the identified dichotomous and continuous outcomes using RevManWeb according to Cochrane methods using a random-effects model. We judged the certainty of evidence on a per outcome basis using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 studies with 4793 participants randomized to usual care and an alpha-blocker versus usual care alone. Only four studies were placebo controlled. The mean age of participants was 28.6 to 56.8 years and the mean stone size prior to SWL was 7.1 mm to 13.2 mm. The most widely used alpha-blocker was tamsulosin; others were silodosin, doxazosin, terazosin and alfuzosin.  Alpha-blockers may improve clearance of stone fragments after SWL (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.23; I² = 78%; studies = 36; participants = 4084; low certainty evidence). Based on the stone clearance rate of 69.3% observed in the control arm, an alpha-blocker may increase stone clearance to 80.4%. This corresponds to 111 more (62 more to 159 more) participants per 1000 clearing their stone fragments. Alpha-blockers may reduce the need for auxiliary treatments after SWL (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00; I² = 16%; studies = 12; participants = 1251; low certainty evidence), but also includes the possibility of no effect. Based on a rate of auxiliary treatments in the usual care arm of 9.7%, alpha-blockers may reduce the rate to 6.5%. This corresponds 32 fewer (53 fewer to 0 fewer) participants per 1000 undergoing auxiliary treatments. Alpha-blockers may reduce major adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.80; I² = 0%; studies = 7; participants = 747; low certainty evidence). Major adverse events occurred in 25.8% of participants in the usual care group; alpha-blockers would reduce this to 15.5%. This corresponds to 103 fewer (139 fewer to 52 fewer) major adverse events per 1000 with alpha-blocker treatment. None of the reported major adverse events appeared drug-related; most were emergency room visits or rehospitalizations. Alpha-blockers may reduce stone clearance time in days (mean difference (MD) -3.74, 95% CI -5.25 to -2.23; I² = 86%; studies = 14; participants = 1790; low certainty evidence). We found no evidence for the outcome of quality of life. For those outcomes for which we were able to perform subgroup analyses, we found no evidence of interaction with stone location, stone size or type of alpha-blocker. We were unable to conduct an analysis by lithotripter type. The results were also largely unchanged when the analyses were limited to placebo controlled studies and those in which participants explicitly only received a single SWL session.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low certainty evidence, adjuvant alpha-blocker therapy following SWL in addition to usual care may result in improved stone clearance, less need for auxiliary treatments, fewer major adverse events and a reduced stone clearance time compared to usual care alone. We did not find evidence for quality of life. The low certainty of evidence means that our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.

Long-term prescription of α-blockers decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention-a nationwide population-based study

Purpose

α1 receptors and subtypes have been confirmed to distribute in human pelvis and calyces recently. As used in ureteral stones, α-blocker treatment may facilitate kidney stone passage and long-term prescription of α-blocker may decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis. The aim of this study is to determine if use of α-blockers 180 days or more can decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention.

Materials and Methods

A representative database of 1,000,000 patients from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance was analyzed. Eligible patients were those who had received the first-time procedure for upper urinary stone removal, including extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy, or both, between 2000 and 2010. After completing a 180-day treatment for first event, patients were prospectively followed-up until a second set of stone procedures was performed (proxy of stone recurrence), loss to follow-up, or end of study. The effect of percentage of total number of days of α-blocker use on need for second set of stone procedures within a post treatment 180-day follow-up period was analyzed by quartile. A nested case-control study was also performed.

Results

1,259 patients were eligible for final analyses. During 3,980 person-years follow-up, 167 patients had recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention. From first to fourth quartile of drug exposure, recurrence rates were 45.64, 47.19, 43.11, and 18.52 per 1,000 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.46 (95% CI = 0.24 to 0.89) for the fourth quartile (vs. quartile 1). In the nested case-control study, adjusted ORs was 0.23 (95% CI = 0.10 to 0.53) in the fourth quartile (vs. quartile 1). The results remained similar even in patients categorized by cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) quartiles and average cDDD per day quartiles.

Conclusion

Use of α-blockers for 180 days or more decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention. In patients at higher risk of recurrent urolithiasis, long term prescription of α-blockers might help them prevent further surgical intervention.

Alpha adrenergic receptors in renal pelvis and calyces: can rat models be used?

We aimed, in this study, to determine the distribution of α-1 AR subtypes in rat and human pelvis and calyces, and to evaluate, by comparing these two species, the possibility of rats to be used as models for humans. Twenty patients with renal carcinoma were included into the study. The patients underwent radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). After nephrectomy, specimens were evaluated and excisional biopsies from healthy pelvis and calyces tissues were performed. When pathology confirmed the non-invasion of RCC, specimen was included into the study. A total of 7 adult Wistar Albino (250-300 g) female rats were used in this study. Specimens included renal pelvis and calyces. All specimens were evaluated under light microscope histopathologically. The concentrations of the receptor densities did not differ between the two groups. With the demonstration of the α receptors in rat kidneys and calyces, many receptor-based studies concerning both humans and rats can take place. Novel medication targeting these subtypes -in this matter α1A and α1D for renal pelvis and calyces- may be helpful for expulsive therapy and/or pain relief. With the demonstration of similar receptor densities between human and rat tissues, rat model may be useful for α-receptor trials for renal pelvis and calyces.

Altered expression profile of renal α(1D)-adrenergic receptor in diabetes and its modulation by PPAR agonists

Alpha(1D)-adrenergic receptor (α(1D)-AR) plays important roles in regulating physiological and pathological responses mediated by catecholamines, particularly in the cardiovascular and urinary systems. The present study was designed to investigate the expression profile of α(1D)-AR in the diabetic kidneys and its modulation by activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs). 12-week-old Zucker lean (ZL) and Zucker diabetic fatty (ZD) rats were treated with fenofibrate or rosiglitazone for 8-10 weeks. Gene microarray, real-time PCR, and confocal immunofluorescence microscopy were performed to assess mRNA and protein expression of α(1D)-AR in rat kidney tissue. Using microarray, we found that α(1D)-AR gene was dramatically upregulated in 22-week-old ZD rats compared to ZL controls. Quantitative PCR analysis verified a 16-fold increase in α(1D)-AR mRNA in renal cortex from ZD animals compared to normal controls. Chronic treatment with fenofibrate or rosiglitazone reduced renal cortical α(1D)-AR gene. Immunofluorescence staining confirmed that α(1D)-AR protein was induced in the glomeruli and tubules of diabetic rats. Moreover, dual immunostaining for α(1D)-AR and kidney injury molecule-1 indicated that α(1D)-AR was expressed in dedifferentiated proximal tubules of diabetic Zucker rats. Taken together, our results show that α(1D)-AR expression is upregulated in the diabetic kidneys. PPAR activation suppressed renal expression of α(1D)-AR in diabetic nephropathy.