Calcium channel blockers versus other antihypertensive therapies on progression of NIDDM associated nephropathy

Age-related markers and predictors of diabetic kidney disease progression in type 2 diabetes patients: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is characterized by reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria, which play a pivotal role in both diagnosing and determining the disease's progression. This study aimed to assess the trajectory of these markers concerning age in individuals with DKD and identify predictive factors for the decline in eGFR decline, variation in albuminuria, mortality, and progression to renal replacement therapy (RRT).

Design

This retrospective cohort encompassed patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), divided into two age categories: <75 and ⩾75 years old.

Methods

Over a 3-year span, the study evaluated eGFR (CKD-EPI) and 24-h albuminuria. Univariate and multivariate analyses were employed to pinpoint factors associated with deteriorating renal function and mortality. Significance was set at p < 0.05, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to illustrate renal and overall survival.

Results

The analysis comprised 304 patients. Comparable eGFR declines were evident in both age groups during the transition from the first to the second year and from the second to the third year. Nonetheless, a more pronounced rise in albuminuria was evident in the ⩾75 years group during the first to the second year. Multivariate analysis unveiled that systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurements in the first year positively forecasted eGFR decline. Age was associated with heightened albuminuria and mortality, while hospitalizations linked to cardiovascular causes robustly predicted mortality. Hospitalizations due to sepsis and cardiovascular reasons, coupled with first-year SBP measurements, served as predictive indicators for progression to RRT.

Conclusion

Both age groups experienced similar declines in eGFR, though the ⩾75 years group displayed a more significant increase in albuminuria during the first to the second year. Age, hospitalizations, and higher blood pressure levels were correlated with exacerbated renal function deterioration and/or elevated mortality in DKD. Timely intervention and tailored management strategies stand as critical components for enhancing outcomes among DKD patients.

Secular Trend in GFR Decline in Non-Dialysis CKD Based on Observational Data From Standard of Care Arms of Trials

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The standard of care (SoC) group of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is a useful setting to explore the secular trends in kidney disease progression because implementation of best clinical practices is pursued for all patients enrolled in trials. This meta-analysis evaluated the secular trend in the change of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline in the SoC arm of RCTs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) published in the last 30 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the SoC arms of RCTs analyzed as an observational study.

SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS

Adult patients with CKD enrolled in the SoC arm of RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Phase 3 RCTs evaluating GFR decline as an outcome in SoC arms.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers evaluated RCTs for eligibility and extracted relevant data.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

The mean of GFR declines extracted in the SoC arm of selected RCTs were pooled by using a random effects model. Meta-regression analyses were performed to identify factors that may explain heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The SoC arms from 92 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 32,202 patients. The overall mean GFR decline was-4.00 (95% CI, -4.55 to-3.44) mL/min/1.73m2 per year in the SoC arms with a high level of heterogeneity (I2, 98.4% [95% CI, 98.2-98.5], P<0.001). Meta-regression analysis showed an association between publication year (β estimate, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.032-0.148], P=0.003) and reduction in GFR over time. When evaluating publication decade categorically, GFR decline was-5.44 (95% CI, -7.15 to-3.73), -3.92 (95% CI, -4.82 to-3.02), and -3.20 (95% CI, -3.75 to -2.64) mL/min/1.73m2 per year during 1991-2000, 2001-2010, and 2011-2023, respectively. Using meta-regression, the heterogeneity of GFR decline was mainly explained by age and proteinuria.

LIMITATIONS

Different methods assessing GFR in selected trials and observational design of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

In the last 3 decades, GFR decline has decreased over time in patients enrolled in RCTs who received the standard of care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at PROSPERO with record number CRD42022357704.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

This study evaluated the secular trend in the change in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline in the placebo arms of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were studying approaches to protect the kidneys in the setting of chronic kidney disease. The placebo groups of RCTs are useful for examining whether the rate of progression of kidney disease has changed over time. We found an improvement in the slope of change in GFR over time. These findings suggest that adherence to standards of kidney care as implemented in clinical trials may be associated with improved clinical outcomes, and these data may inform the design of future RCTs in nephrology.

Risk Factors of Chronic Kidney Disease Progression: Between Old and New Concepts

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a condition characterized by the gradual loss of kidney function over time and it is a worldwide health issue. The estimated frequency of CKD is 10% of the world's population, but it varies greatly on a global scale. In absolute terms, the staggering number of subjects affected by various degrees of CKD is 850,000,000, and 85% of them are in low- to middle-income countries. The most important risk factors for chronic kidney disease are age, arterial hypertension, diabetes, obesity, proteinuria, dyslipidemia, and environmental risk factors such as dietary salt intake and a more recently investigated agent: pollution. In this narrative review, we will focus by choice just on some risk factors such as age, which is the most important non-modifiable risk factor, and among modifiable risk factors, we will focus on hypertension, salt intake, obesity, and sympathetic overactivity.

Inhibition of intrarenal PRR-RAS pathway by Ganoderma lucidum polysaccharide peptides in proteinuric nephropathy

Excessive proteinuria leads to renal dysfunction and damage. Ganoderma lucidum polysaccharide peptide (GL-PP) and Ganoderma lucidum polysaccharide peptide 2 (GL-PP2) are biologically active compounds extracted from Ganoderma lucidum. GL-PP has a relative molecular weight of 37,121 with 76.39 % polysaccharides and 16.35 % polypeptides, while GL-PP2 has a relative molecular weight of 31,130, composed of 64.14 % polysaccharides and 17.73 % polypeptides. The xylose: mannose: glucose monosaccharide ratios in GL-PP and GL-PP2 were 4.83:1:7.03 and 2.35:1:9.38, respectively. In this study, we investigated the protective effects of GL-PP and GL-PP2 on proteinuria-induced renal dysfunction and damage using rat and cell models. Both compounds reduced kidney injury, proteinuria, and inhibited the (pro)renin receptor (PRR)-renin-angiotensin system (RAS) pathway, inflammatory cell infiltration, oxidative stress, and fibrosis. GL-PP2 showed stronger inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 and inducible nitric oxide synthase proteins compared to GL-PP. In cell models, both compounds displayed anti-inflammatory properties and improved cellular viability by inhibiting the PRR-RAS pathway. GL-PP2 has higher feasibility and productivity than GL-PP in pharmacology and industrial production. It shows promise in treating proteinuria-induced renal disease with superior anti-inflammatory effects and economic, safe industrial application prospects. Further research is needed to compare efficacy, mechanisms, clinical applications, and commercial feasibility of GL-PP and GL-PP2.

Effectiveness of nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in patients with diabetic kidney disease

Nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are a new class of drugs developed to address the medical need for effective and safer treatment to protect the kidney and the heart in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). There are several drugs within this class at varying stages of clinical development. Finerenone is the first nonsteroidal MRA approved in the US for treating patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D). In clinical studies, finerenone slowed CKD progression without inducing marked antihypertensive effects. Esaxerenone is a nonsteroidal MRA with proven blood pressure-lowering efficacy that is currently licensed in Japan for treating hypertension. There are also three other nonsteroidal MRAs in mid-to-late stages of clinical development. Here we overview evidence addressing pharmacological and clinical differences between the nonsteroidal MRAs and the steroidal MRAs spironolactone and eplerenone. First, we describe a framework that highlights the role of aldosterone-mediated pathological overactivation of the mineralocorticoid receptor and inflammation as important drivers of CKD progression. Second, we discuss the benefits and adverse events profile of steroidal MRAs, the latter of which are often a limiting factor to their use in routine clinical practice. Finally, we show that nonsteroidal MRAs differ from steroidal MRAs based on pharmacology and clinical effects, giving the potential to expand the therapeutic options for patients with DKD. In the recently completed DKD outcome program comprising two randomized clinical trials - FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD - and the FIDELITY analysis of both trials evaluating more than 13,000 patients, the nonsteroidal MRA finerenone demonstrated beneficial effects on the kidney and the heart across a broad spectrum of patients with CKD and T2D. The long-term efficacy of finerenone on cardiac and renal morbidity and mortality endpoints, along with the anti-hypertensive efficacy of esaxerenone, widens the scope of available therapies for patients with DKD.

Randomized Controlled Trials on Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3-5: Are They Robust? A Fragility Index Analysis

Inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is broadly recommended in many nephrological guidelines to prevent chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression. This work aimed to analyze the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the renal and cardiovascular outcomes in CKD stages 3-5 patients treated with RAAS inhibitors (RAASi). We searched for RCTs in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane register. Fragility indexes (FIs) for every primary and secondary outcome were calculated according to Walsh et al., who first described this novel metric, suggesting 8 as the cut-off to consider a study robust. Spearman coefficient was calculated to correlate FI to p value and sample size of statistically significant primary and secondary outcomes. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, including 80,455 patients. Sample size considerably varied among the studies (median: 1693.5, range: 73-17,276). The median follow-up was 38 months (range 24-58). The overall median of both primary and secondary outcomes was 0 (range 0-117 and range 0-55, respectively). The median of FI for primary and secondary outcomes with a p value lower than 0.05 was 6 (range: 1-117) and 7.5 (range: 1-55), respectively. The medians of the FI for primary outcomes with a p value lower than 0.05 in CKD and no CKD patients were 5.5 (range 1-117) and 22 (range 1-80), respectively. Only a few RCTs have been shown to be robust. Our analysis underlined the need for further research with appropriate sample sizes and study design to explore the real potentialities of RAASi in the progression of CKD.

The effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on continuous and binary kidney outcomes in subgroups of patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of kidney failure. Clinical practice guidelines recommend prescribing renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) to prevent diabetic nephropathy at any stage. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of RAASi with placebo and other antihypertensive agents in adults with diabetes on continuous and binary kidney outcomes to provide a comprehensive review of the class effect of RAASi on several subgroups.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search to identify randomized clinical trials of a duration of ≥ 12 months that recruited ≥ 50 adult participants with type 1 or 2 diabetes with any stage of chronic kidney disease and proteinuria was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane library with no language restriction. Studies were screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two reviewers independently.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, evidence was drawn from 26,551 patients with diabetes from 46 studies. Our analysis shows that RAASi were better than placebo in reducing SrCr (the raw mean difference [RMD] = -13.4 μmol/L; 95%CI: -16.78; -10.01) and albuminuria levels (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1; 95%CI: -1.57, -0.44, I2 = 96%). When compared to other active treatments, RAASi did not reduce SrCr (RMD = 0.03 μmol/L; 95%CI: -6.4, 6.10, I2 = 76%), caused a non-significant reduction of GFR levels (RMD = -1.21 mL/min; 95%CI: -4.52, 2.09, I2 = 86%), and resulted in modest reduction of albuminuria levels (SMD = -0.55; 95%CI: -0.95, -0.16, I2 = 90%). RAASi were superior to placebo in reducing the risks of kidney failure (OR = 0.74; 95%CI: 0.56, 0.97) and doubling of serum creatinine levels (SrCr; OR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.55, 0.91), but not in promoting the regression of albuminuria (OR = 3.00; 95%CI: 0.96, 9.37). RAASi, however, were not superior to other antihypertensives in reducing the risks of these outcomes. Patients with type 2 diabetes, macroalbuminuria and longer duration of diabetes had less risk of developing kidney failure in placebo-controlled trials, while longer duration of diabetes, normal kidney function, and hypertension increased the probability of achieving regression of albuminuria in active-controlled trials.

CONCLUSION

While our findings revealed the non-superiority of RAASi over other antihypertensives and portrayed a class effect on several subgroups of study participants, it raised a challenging question on whether RAASi deserve their place as first-line therapy in managing diabetic nephropathy.

Chronic Kidney Disease Progression Risk in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Using Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers: A Nationwide, Population-Based, Propensity Score Matching Cohort Study

Background: Whether diabetes mellitus (DM) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) can glean individual renal benefit from dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (DCCBs) remains to be determined. We conducted a nationwide, population-based, propensity score matching cohort study to examine the effect of DCCBs on CKD progression in DM patients with CKD.

Methods: One million individuals were randomly sampled from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database. The study cohort consisted of DM patients with CKD who used DCCBs. The comparison cohort was propensity-matched for demographic characteristics and comorbidities. The endpoint was advanced CKD or end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate the risks.

Results: In total, 9,761 DCCB users were compared with DCCB nonusers at a ratio of 1:1. DCCB users had lower risk of advanced CKD and ESRD than nonusers—with adjusted hazard ratio [aHR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] of 0.64 (0.53–0.78) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.50–0.71) for advanced CKD and ESRD, respectively. DCCB users aged ≥65 years had the lowest incidence rates of advanced CKD and ESRD—with aHR (95% CI) of 0.47 (0.34–0.65) and 0.48 (0.35–0.65) for advanced CKD and ESRD, respectively. Finally, cumulative DCCB use for >1,100 days was associated with the lowest advanced CKD and ESRD risks [(aHR, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.19–0.44)].

Conclusion: DM patients with CKD who used DCCBs had lower risk of progression to advanced CKD and ESRD than nonusers did.

Calcium channel blockers versus other classes of drugs for hypertension

BACKGROUND

This is the first update of a review published in 2010. While calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are often recommended as a first-line drug to treat hypertension, the effect of CCBs on the prevention of cardiovascular events, as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes, is still debated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether CCBs used as first-line therapy for hypertension are different from other classes of antihypertensive drugs in reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events.

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up to 1 September 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted the authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work and checked the references of published studies to identify additional trials. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing first-line CCBs with other antihypertensive classes, with at least 100 randomised hypertensive participants and a follow-up of at least two years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risk of bias, and entered the data for analysis. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

This update contains five new trials. We included a total of 23 RCTs (18 dihydropyridines, 4 non-dihydropyridines, 1 not specified) with 153,849 participants with hypertension. All-cause mortality was not different between first-line CCBs and any other antihypertensive classes. As compared to diuretics, CCBs probably increased  major cardiovascular events (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.09, P = 0.03) and increased congestive heart failure events (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.51, moderate-certainty evidence). As compared to beta-blockers, CCBs reduced the following outcomes: major cardiovascular events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92), stroke (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88, moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99, low-certainty evidence). As compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, CCBs reduced stroke (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99, low-certainty evidence) and increased congestive heart failure (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, low-certainty evidence). As compared to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), CCBs reduced myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.94, moderate-certainty evidence) and increased congestive heart failure (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.36, low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of hypertension, there is moderate certainty evidence that diuretics reduce major cardiovascular events and congestive heart failure more than CCBs. There is low to moderate certainty evidence that CCBs probably reduce major cardiovascular events more than beta-blockers. There is low to moderate certainty evidence that CCBs reduced stroke when compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and reduced myocardial infarction when compared to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), but increased congestive heart failure when compared to ACE inhibitors and ARBs. Many of the differences found in the current review are not robust, and further trials might change the conclusions. More well-designed RCTs studying the mortality and morbidity of individuals taking CCBs as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes are needed for patients with different stages of hypertension, different ages, and with different comorbidities such as diabetes.

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in diabetic kidney disease - mechanistic and therapeutic effects

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the leading complication in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and current therapies that limit CKD progression and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) include angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. Despite the introduction of these therapeutics, an important residual risk of CKD progression and cardiovascular death remains in patients with T2D. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are a promising therapeutic option in diabetic kidney disease (DKD) owing to the reported effects of mineralocorticoid receptor activation in inflammatory cells, podocytes, fibroblasts, mesangial cells and vascular cells. In preclinical studies, MRAs consistently reduce albuminuria, CKD progression, and activation of fibrotic and inflammatory pathways. DKD clinical studies have similarly demonstrated that steroidal MRAs lead to albuminuria reduction compared with placebo, although hyperkalaemia is a major secondary effect. Non-steroidal MRAs carry a lower risk of hyperkalaemia than steroidal MRAs, and the large FIDELIO-DKD clinical trial showed that the non-steroidal MRA finerenone also slowed CKD progression and reduced the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with placebo in patients with T2D. Encouragingly, other non-steroidal MRAs have anti-albuminuric properties in DKD. Whether or not combining MRAs with other renoprotective drugs such as SGLT2 inhibitors might provide additive protective effects warrants further investigation.

Calcium channel blockers versus other classes of drugs for hypertension

BACKGROUND

This is the first update of a review published in 2010. While calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are often recommended as a first-line drug to treat hypertension, the effect of CCBs on the prevention of cardiovascular events, as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes, is still debated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether CCBs used as first-line therapy for hypertension are different from other classes of antihypertensive drugs in reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events.

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up to 1 September 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted the authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work and checked the references of published studies to identify additional trials. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing first-line CCBs with other antihypertensive classes, with at least 100 randomised hypertensive participants and a follow-up of at least two years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risk of bias, and entered the data for analysis. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

This update contains five new trials. We included a total of 23 RCTs (18 dihydropyridines, 4 non-dihydropyridines, 1 not specified) with 153,849 participants with hypertension. All-cause mortality was not different between first-line CCBs and any other antihypertensive classes. As compared to diuretics, CCBs probably increased  major cardiovascular events (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.09, P = 0.03) and increased congestive heart failure events (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.51, moderate-certainty evidence). As compared to beta-blockers, CCBs reduced the following outcomes: major cardiovascular events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92), stroke (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88, moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99, low-certainty evidence). As compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, CCBs reduced stroke (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99, low-certainty evidence) and increased congestive heart failure (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, low-certainty evidence). As compared to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), CCBs reduced myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.94, moderate-certainty evidence) and increased congestive heart failure (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.36, low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of hypertension, there is moderate certainty evidence that diuretics reduce major cardiovascular events and congestive heart failure more than CCBs. There is low to moderate certainty evidence that CCBs probably reduce major cardiovascular events more than beta-blockers. There is low to moderate certainty evidence that CCBs reduced stroke when compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and reduced myocardial infarction when compared to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), but increased congestive heart failure when compared to ACE inhibitors and ARBs. Many of the differences found in the current review are not robust, and further trials might change the conclusions. More well-designed RCTs studying the mortality and morbidity of individuals taking CCBs as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes are needed for patients with different stages of hypertension, different ages, and with different comorbidities such as diabetes.

Comparative risk of new-onset hyperkalemia for antihypertensive drugs in patients with diabetic nephropathy: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the risk of hyperkalemia of antihypertensive drugs on diabetic nephropathy, yet the results are conflicting. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for RCTs investigating the risk of antihypertensive drugs on hyperkalemia in diabetic nephropathy from inception to May 31, 2020. Direct comparative meta-analysis showed that the proportion of patients with hyperkalemia was significantly higher in the ARB, aldosterone antagonist, renin inhibitor group than in the placebo group. Moreover, the risk of hyperkalemia in the ARB group was higher than that in the CCB group. Network meta-analysis showed the risk of hyperkalemia in the ARB, aldosterone antagonist, and renin inhibitor group was higher than in the placebo group, but there was no statistical difference between the CCB, ACEI, β blocker, endothelin inhibitor, and diuretic groups than in the placebo group. The possibility of antihypertensive drugs in risk of hyperkalemia being the worst treatment was aldosterone antagonist (98.8%), followed by ARB (73.8%), renin inhibitor (63.8%), diuretic (53.1%), ACEI (46.9%), β blocker (36.8%), endothelin inhibitor (35.2%), placebo (27.1%), and finally CCB (14.3.1%). Therefore, aldosterone antagonist seems worse than other antihypertensive drugs in the risk of hyperkalemia in patients with diabetic nephropathy.

ACE Inhibitor Benefit to Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes for Patients with Non-Dialysis Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3-5: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials

Background

The advantages of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing risk of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and delaying end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is well-known. However, the efficacy and safety of these agents in non-dialysis CKD stages 3–5 patients are still a controversial issue.

Methods

Two investigators (Yaru Zhang and Dandan He) independently searched and identified relevant studies from MEDLINE (from 1950 to October 2018), EMBASE (from 1970 to October 2018), and the Cochrane Library database. Randomised clinical trials in non-dialysis CKD3–5 patients treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors were included. We used standard criteria (Cochrane risk of bias tool) to assess the inherent risk of bias of trials. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome by random-effects model. A 2-sided p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and all statistical analyses were performed using STATA, version 15.0. This network meta-analysis was undertaken by the frequency model.

Results

Forty-four randomised clinical trials with 42,319 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. ACEIs monotherapy significantly decreased the odds of kidney events (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41–0.73), cardiovascular events (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64–0.84), cardiovascular death (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63–0.86) and all-cause death (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66–0.91) when compared to placebo. According to the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA), ACEI monotherapy had the highest probabilities of their protective effects on outcomes of kidney events (SUCRA 93.3%), cardiovascular events (SUCRA 77.2%), cardiovascular death (SUCRA 86%), and all-cause death (SUCRA 94.1%), even if there were no significant differences between ACEIs and other antihypertensive drugs, including calcium channel blockers (CCBs), β-blockers and diuretics on above outcomes except for kidney events. ARB monotherapy and combination therapy of an ACEI plus an ARB showed no more advantage than CCBs, β-blockers and diuretics in all primary outcomes. In the subgroup of non-dialysis diabetic kidney disease patients, no drugs, including ACEIs or ARBs, significantly lowered the odds of cardiovascular events and all-cause death. However, ACEIs were still better than other antihypertensive drugs including ARBs in all-cause death but not ARBs in cardiovascular events according to the SUCRA. Only ARBs had significant differences in preventing the occurrence of kidney events compared with placebo (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72–0.95). Both ACEI/ARB monotherapy and combination therapy had higher odds of hyperkalaemia. ACEIs had 3.81 times higher odds than CCBs (95% CI 1.58–9.20), ARBs had 2.08–5.10 times higher odds than placebo and CCBs and combination therapy of an ACEI and an ARB had 4.80–24.5 times higher odds than all other treatments. Compared with placebo, CCBs and β blockers, ACEI therapy significantly increased the odds of cough (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.76–4.77; OR 8.21, 95% CI 3.13–21.54 and OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.08–3.00). There were no statistical differences in hypotension among all comparisons except ACEIs versus placebo.

Conclusions

Although ACEIs increased the odds of hyperkalaemia, cough and hypotension, they were still superior to ARBs and other antihypertensive drugs and had the highest benefits for the prevention of kidney events, cardiovascular outcomes, cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality in non-dialysis CKD3–5 patients. In patients with advanced diabetic kidney disease, ACEIs were superior to ARBs in lowering risk of all-cause death but not in kidney events and cardiovascular events.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40265-020-01290-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

An updated overview of diabetic nephropathy: Diagnosis, prognosis, treatment goals and latest guidelines

Diabetic nephropathy (DN) is a major healthcare challenge. It occurs in up to 50% of those living with diabetes, is a major cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) that requires treatment with dialysis or renal transplantation, and is associated with significantly increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. DN is a clinical syndrome characterized by persistent albuminuria and a progressive decline in renal function, but it is increasingly recognized that the presentation and clinical course of kidney disease in diabetes is heterogeneous. The term diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is now commonly used to encompass the spectrum of people with diabetes who have either albuminuria or reductions in renal function. In this article, the clinical presentation and approach to diagnosis of DKD will be discussed, as will its prognosis. The general principles of management of DKD will also be reviewed with reference to current international guidelines.

Chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes: Implications for managing glycaemic control, cardiovascular and renal risk

This review examines the current literature relating to diabetes related kidney disease (DKD) and the optimal management of cardio-renal risk. DKD develops in approximately 40% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The mainstay of therapy is to reduce the progression of DKD by optimising hyperglycaemia, blood pressure, lipids and lifestyle. Evidence supports the role for renin-angiotensin system blockade in limiting the progression of DKD. Recent data from diabetes related cardiovascular outcome trials and renal specific trials have provided a novel insight on the additional benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in reducing the progression of DKD as well as cardiovascular risk. Lessons have been learnt from CREDENCE and there are expectations that DAPA-CKD and EMPA-KIDNEY will further support the benefits of SGLT2 inhibition in relation to DKD. As a consequence, international guidelines have been updated to reflect the positive benefits. In addition, novel steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists offer a potential role in future years. The review examines the current evidence and future approach to optimising outcomes for renal protection in patients with diabetes.

Pharmacotherapy of hypertension in patients with pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is the most common co-morbidity in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), with prevalence gradually increasing across CKD Stages to the extent that about 90% of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are hypertensives. Several factors contribute to blood pressure (BP) elevation and guide the therapeutic interventions that should be employed in these patients.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the existing data for the management of hypertension, regarding optimal BP targets and the use of major antihypertensive classes in patients with CKD.

EXPERT OPINION

Management of hypertension in CKD requires both lowering BP levels and reducing proteinuria to minimize the risk of both CKD progression and cardiovascular disease. In this respect, aggressive control of office BP to levels <130/80 mmHg has long been proposed for patients with proteinuric nephropathies. Following evidence from recent studies that confirmed significant reductions in renal and cardiovascular outcomes with strict BP control, most, but not all, of international guidelines, suggest such BP goals for all hypertensive patients, including those with CKD. Use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers is the treatment of choice for patients with proteinuric nephropathies, while, in most patients with CKD, combination treatment with two, three, or more antihypertensive agents is often required to control BP.

The Many Faces of Calcineurin Inhibitor Toxicity-What the FK?

Calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) are both the savior and Achilles' heel of kidney transplantation. Although CNIs have significantly reduced rates of acute rejection, their numerous toxicities can plague kidney transplant recipients. By 10 years, virtually all allografts will have evidence of CNI nephrotoxicity. CNIs have been strongly associated with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and new onset of diabetes after transplantation-significantly contributing to cardiovascular risk in the kidney transplant recipient. Multiple electrolyte derangements including hyperkalemia, hypomagnesemia, hypercalciuria, metabolic acidosis, and hyperuricemia may be challenging to manage for the clinician. Finally, CNI-associated tremor, gingival hyperplasia, and defects in hair growth can have a significant impact on the transplant recipient's quality of life. In this review, the authors briefly discuss the pharmacokinetics of CNI and discuss the numerous clinically relevant toxicities of commonly used CNIs, cyclosporine and tacrolimus.

Nondihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers for the Treatment of Proteinuria: A Review of the Literature

Objective: To review the use of nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (non-DHP CCBs) for the treatment of proteinuria in diabetic and nondiabetic kidney disease. Data Sources: A search using PubMed and MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar was performed from 1964 through February 2019 using the following search terms alone or in combination: verapamil, diltiazem, non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker, proteinuria, albuminuria, microalbuminuria, kidney disease, renal disease. Study Selection and Data Extraction: All prospective English-language trials examining one or more non-DHP CCB for the treatment of proteinuria were evaluated. Data Synthesis: A total of 13 clinical trials examining the use of non-DHP CCBs to treat proteinuria alone or in combination with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) were included in the evaluation. Most studies evaluated patients with macroalbuminuria secondary to diabetes and hypertension. Verapamil was the most common agent studied. Non-DHP CCBs were effective in reducing proteinuria in diabetic kidney disease but did not reduce renal or cardiovascular outcomes in the one trial that evaluated clinical end points. They were generally well tolerated, with the most common adverse effect reported being constipation. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review evaluates and summarizes the available evidence on non-DHP CCBs for treatment of proteinuria in patients with existing kidney disease. Conclusion: Non-DHP CCBs may be a reasonable therapeutic option for patients with diabetic kidney disease and persistent proteinuria despite maximum doses of ACE inhibitors or ARBs. Additionally, they may be reasonable alternatives to ACE inhibitors or ARBs if a contraindication or intolerance exists.

Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes and overt nephropathy: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in reducing cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes and overt nephropathy is still a controversial issue.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials containing 4638 patients with diabetes and overt nephropathy were included. Compared with controls, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker treatment did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.03, P=0.18; I²=0.0%, P=0.75). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker therapy reduced the odds of heart failure events by 29% (0.71, 0.61 to 0.83, P<0.001; I²=0%, P=0.78). The results indicated no significant differences between the two treatment regimens with regard to the frequency of MI (0.95, 0.76 to 1.19, P=0.64), stroke (1.20, 0.83 to 1.74, P=0.32), cardiovascular death (1.26, 0.96 to 1.65, P=0.09) and all-cause mortality (0.98, 0.86 to 1.12, P=0.73). Among all kinds of adverse effects, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker therapy increased the incidence of hyperkalemia (2.26, 1.42 to 3.61, P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers did not reduce cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes and overt nephropathy.

Comparative efficacy of individual renin-angiotensin system inhibitors on major renal outcomes in diabetic kidney disease: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are two drug classes with well-documented renal protective effects. However, whether there is any difference among individual drugs remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of individual ACEIs/ARBs on major renal outcomes in adults with diabetic kidney disease (DKD).

METHODS

We conducted a Bayesian-framework network meta-analysis with a random effects model. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical trials of ACEIs or ARBs as monotherapy compared with other conventional antihypertensive drugs or placebo. Primary outcomes were end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and albuminuria/proteinuria (including change in albuminuria/proteinuria, progression to macroalbuminuria and remission to normoalbuminuria). Secondary outcome was doubling of serum creatinine levels. We also assessed for hyperkalemia, cough and angioedema/edema. International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration CRD42016036997.

RESULTS

A total of 100 studies with data for 22 365 DKD patients, the majority of whom had type 2 diabetes, were included. Individual ACEIs and ARBs at goal doses showed no significant differences in ESRD and doubling of serum creatinine levels. They also shared similar effects on albuminuria/proteinuria reduction and progression or remission of albuminuria. When combining three outcomes of albuminuria/proteinuria as a single endpoint, most ACEIs/ARBs consistently showed favorable antiproteinuric effect, with little difference in the possibility of being the superior treatment for improving albuminuria/proteinuria. Primary outcomes did not change substantially in meta-regressions and sensitivity analyses. Findings were limited by lack of dose equivalence and paucity of data for some outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, individual ACEIs and ARBs at goal doses appeared to have no or little differences in their effect on major renal outcomes.

Effect of Sympatholytic Therapy on Circadian Cardiac Autonomic Activity in Non-Diabetic Chronic Kidney Disease

Although beta-blockade itself is not a first choice for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, alpha-beta-blockers (ABB) do improve their prognoses. This study's aim was to evaluate the effect of beta-selective-blockers (BSB) and ABB on circadian cardiac autonomic activity in CKD patients.The study consisted of 496 non-diabetic individuals who underwent 24-hour Holter monitoring (149 CKD patients and 347 controls without CKD). Using heart rate variability analysis, we evaluated the proportion of NN50 and the high-frequency component (reflecting parasympathetic activity), and low- to high-frequency ratio (reflecting sympathovagal balance). These indices were evaluated by regression analysis incorporating gender, age, related comorbidities, and medications. BSB increased vagal activity only in the day-time and not the night-time in controls. In CKD patients, BSB was significantly related to higher vagal activity throughout the day and with lower sympathovagal balance at night. The night sympathovagal balance of CKD patients taking ABB was significantly higher than that of CKD patients taking BSB, which was the only significant difference between the effects of BSB and ABB.The sympatholytic therapy effect is different depending on CKD presence and whether patients are treated with BSB or ABB. In CKD patients without severe heart failure, BSB could be associated with higher parasympathetic activity and lower sympathovagal balance compared to ABB.

THE IMPACT OF CARDIOVASCULAR DRUGS ON GLYCEMIC CONTROL: A REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) is steadily rising in the U.S., both in the general population and among those with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Understanding how to treat a patient with both conditions is becoming increasingly important. With multiple therapeutic options for CVD management, some medications will invariably impact glycemia in this group of patients. The concept of "DM-friendly" management of CVD is based on a treatment approach of selecting medications that do not impair glycemic control and provide equivalent cardioprotective effects. This article reviews the glycemic effects of various classes of medications commonly used to treat CVD.

METHODS

Data sources were all PubMed- and Google Scholar-referenced articles in English-language peer-reviewed journals from 1980 through April 2016. Studies selected could include observational studies or prospective clinical trials. Prospective clinical trials included in this review focused on investigating the association of the medication of interest with glycemic outcomes. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews were also included.

RESULTS

The data on glycemic effects were lacking for many of the medication classes and individual medications examined. However, in our review, certain beta-blockers and renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors, and select calcium channel blockers were consistently shown to have favorable glycometabolic profiles when compared with other commonly used cardiovascular therapies.

CONCLUSION

Several commonly prescribed medications for the treatment of CVD, such as certain beta-blockers and renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibiting agents, are associated with favorable glycometabolic effects. As clinicians are more often faced with the challenge of treating patients with DM and concomitant CVD, consideration of how common cardiovascular medications may affect glycemia should be incorporated into the clinical decision making process.

ABBREVIATIONS

A1C = hemoglobin A1C ACE = angiotensin-converting enzyme ARB = angiotensin II receptor blocker CCB = calcium channel blocker CI = confidence interval CVD = cardiovascular disease DM = diabetes mellitus MI = myocardial infarction RR = relative risk.

Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Correlates of Therapeutic Pharmacological Interventions in Essential Arterial Hypertension

Treating arterial hypertension (HT) remains a hard task. The hypertensive patient is often a subject with several comorbidities and metabolic abnormalities. Clinicians everyday have to choose the right drug for the single patient among the different classes of antihypertensives. Apart from lowering blood pressure, a main therapeutic target should be that of counteracting all the possible pathophysiological mechanisms involved in HT itself and in existing/potential comorbidities. All the ancillary positive and negative effects of the administered drugs should be considered: in particular, since hypertensive patients are often glucose intolerant/diabetic, carrier of serum lipids disorder, have already developed atherosclerotic diseases and endothelial dysfunction, they should not be treated with drugs negatively interfering with these conditions but with molecules that, if possible, improve them. The main pathophysiological mechanisms and correlates of therapeutic pharmacological interventions in essential HT are reviewed here.

Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With CKD: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

There is much uncertainty regarding the relative effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in populations with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

SETTING & POPULATION

Patients with CKD treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Randomized trials in patients with CKD treated with RAS inhibitors.

PREDICTOR

ACE inhibitors and ARBs compared to each other and to placebo and active controls.

OUTCOME

Primary outcome was kidney failure; secondary outcomes were major cardiovascular events, all-cause death.

RESULTS

119 randomized controlled trials (n = 64,768) were included. ACE inhibitors and ARBs reduced the odds of kidney failure by 39% and 30% (ORs of 0.61 [95% credible interval, 0.47-0.79] and 0.70 [95% credible interval, 0.52-0.89]), respectively, compared to placebo, and by 35% and 25% (ORs of 0.65 [95% credible interval, 0.51-0.80] and 0.75 [95% credible interval, 0.54-0.97]), respectively, compared with other active controls, whereas other active controls did not show evidence of a significant effect on kidney failure. Both ACE inhibitors and ARBs produced odds reductions for major cardiovascular events (ORs of 0.82 [95% credible interval, 0.71-0.92] and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.62-0.89], respectively) versus placebo. Comparisons did not show significant effects on risk for cardiovascular death. ACE inhibitors but not ARBs significantly reduced the odds of all-cause death versus active controls (OR, 0.72; 95% credible interval, 0.53-0.92). Compared with ARBs, ACE inhibitors were consistently associated with higher probabilities of reducing kidney failure, cardiovascular death, or all-cause death.

LIMITATIONS

Trials with RAS inhibitor therapy were included; trials with direct comparisons of other active controls with placebo were not included.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ACE inhibitors or ARBs in people with CKD reduces the risk for kidney failure and cardiovascular events. ACE inhibitors also reduced the risk for all-cause mortality and were possibly superior to ARBs for kidney failure, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality in patients with CKD, suggesting that they could be the first choice for treatment in this population.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Blockade in Diabetic Nephropathy. Present Evidences

Diabetic Kidney Disease (DKD) is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease in developed countries and its prevalence has increased dramatically in the past few decades. These patients are at an increased risk for premature death, cardiovascular disease, and other severe illnesses that result in frequent hospitalizations and increased health-care utilization. Although much progress has been made in slowing the progression of diabetic nephropathy, renal dysfunction and the development of end-stage renal disease remain major concerns in diabetes. Dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) results in progressive renal damage. RAAS blockade is the cornerstone of treatment of DKD, with proven efficacy in many arenas. The theoretically-attractive option of combining these medications that target different points in the pathway, potentially offering a more complete RAAS blockade, has also been tested in clinical trials, but long-term outcomes were disappointing. This review examines the “state of play” for RAAS blockade in DKD, dual blockade of various combinations, and a perspective on its benefits and potential risks.

Diabetic nephropathy - complications and treatment

Diabetic nephropathy is a significant cause of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal failure globally. Much research has been conducted in both basic science and clinical therapeutics, which has enhanced understanding of the pathophysiology of diabetic nephropathy and expanded the potential therapies available. This review will examine the current concepts of diabetic nephropathy management in the context of some of the basic science and pathophysiology aspects relevant to the approaches taken in novel, investigative treatment strategies.

Blood pressure, hypertension, RAAS blockade, and drug therapy in diabetic kidney disease

Type 2 diabetes is the most common cause of CKD and ESRD in the United States and the Western world. Hypertension is prevalent in this cohort, and control of blood pressure is perhaps the most important risk factor to reduce CKD progression. The most recent blood pressure target recommended by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes and Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative guideline committees is less than 140/90 mmHg for all patients with CKD. There is some evidence for those with 1 g or more of albuminuria, albeit weak, to support a blood pressure target of less than 130/80 mmHg. Multiple studies demonstrate that renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers are important in reducing cardiovascular risk and progression of CKD in those with advanced proteinuric nephropathy. However, there is no evidence that they prevent nephropathy or that reduction in microalbuminuria alone is associated with slowed nephropathy progression. The purpose of this article is to review the major studies that have evaluated cardiovascular and kidney endpoints in patients with diabetes and the role of RAAS blockers in the treatment of this disease.

Clinical challenges in diagnosis and management of diabetic kidney disease

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a major and increasing worldwide public health issue. There is a great need for implementing treatments that either prevent or significantly slow the progression of DKD. Although there have been significant improvements in management, the increasing numbers of patients with DKD illustrate that current management is not wholly adequate. The reasons for suboptimal management include the lack of early diagnosis, lack of aggressive interventions, and lack of understanding about which interventions are most successful. There are a number of challenges and controversies regarding the current management of patients with DKD. Understanding of these issues is needed in order to provide the best care to patients with DKD. This article describes some of the clinically important challenges associated with DKD: the current epidemiology and cost burden and the role of biopsy in the diagnosis of DKD. Treatment controversies regarding current pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches are reviewed and recommendations based on the published literature are made.

Beta-Blockers in the Management of Hypertension and/or Chronic Kidney Disease

This minireview provides current summaries of beta-blocker use in the management of hypertension and/or chronic kidney disease. Accumulated evidence suggests that atenolol is not sufficiently effective as a primary tool to treat hypertension. The less-than-adequate effect of beta-blockers in lowering the blood pressure and on vascular protection, and the unfavorable effects of these drugs, as compared to other antihypertensive agents, on the metabolic profile have been pointed out. On the other hand, in patients with chronic kidney disease, renin-angiotensin system blockers are the drugs of first choice for achieving the goal of renal protection. Recent studies have reported that vasodilatory beta-blockers have adequate antihypertensive efficacy and less harmful effects on the metabolic profile, and also exert beneficial effects on endothelial function and renal protection. However, there is still not sufficient evidence on the beneficial effects of the new beta-blockers.

Comparison between the effect of glibenclamide and captopril on experimentally induced diabetic nephropathy in rats

HYPOTHESIS

This study aimed to elucidate the role of glibenclamide in the prevention of diabetic nephropathy and to compare it with a reference drug captopril in rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There were two main groups of rats. Control group (I) was subdivided into four subgroups which received distilled water, vehicle of streptozotocin, glibenclamide or captopril. The streptozotocin-diabetic Group (II) was subdivided into three subgroups: untreated, glibenclamide or captopril treated. Measurement of arterial blood pressure, serum glucose and creatinine levels, 24 h urinary protein and albumin/creatinine ratio, kidney weight and its histological examination were done after 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

In treated diabetic rats captopril reduced blood pressure significantly, while no significant change in the mean arterial blood pressure or blood glucose level was recorded with glibenclamide treatment. Glibenclamide and captopril-treated diabetic rats showed significant decrease in serum creatinine level, urine volume, urinary protein excretion, albumin:creatinine ratio and kidney:body weight ratio compared with the diabetic non-treated group. Histological examination of diabetic kidneys treated with either glibenclamide or captopril showed reduced glomerular hypertrophy, glomerulosclerosis, tubular degeneration and interstitial fibrosis compared with untreated diabetic rats.

CONCLUSION

Glibenclamide attenuated some biochemical and histological changes produced by diabetic nephropathy, despite persistent hyperglycemia and hypertension.

Therapeutic Modalities in Diabetic Nephropathy: Future Approaches

Diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of end stage renal disease and is responsible for more than 40% of all cases in the United States. Several therapeutic interventions for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy have been developed and implemented over the past few decades with some degree of success. However, the renal protection provided by these therapeutic modalities is incomplete. More effective approaches are therefore urgently needed. Recently, several novel therapeutic strategies have been explored in treating DN patients including Islet cell transplant, Aldose reductase inhibitors, Sulodexide (GAC), Protein Kinase C (PKC) inhibitors, Connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) inhibitors, Transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) inhibitors and bardoxolone. The benefits and risks of these agents are still under investigation. This review aims to summarize the utility of these novel therapeutic approaches.

Therapeutic modalities in diabetic nephropathy: standard and emerging approaches

Diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of end stage renal disease and is responsible for more than 40% of all cases in the United States. Current therapy directed at delaying the progression of diabetic nephropathy includes intensive glycemic and optimal blood pressure control, proteinuria/albuminuria reduction, interruption of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system through the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin type-1 receptor blockers, along with dietary modification and cholesterol lowering agents. However, the renal protection provided by these therapeutic modalities is incomplete. More effective approaches are urgently needed. This review highlights the available standard therapeutic approaches to manage progressive diabetic nephropathy, including markers for early diagnosis of diabetic nephropathy. Furthermore, we will discuss emerging strategies such as PPAR-gamma agonists, Endothelin blockers, vitamin D activation and inflammation modulation. Finally, we will summarize the recommendations of these interventions for the primary care practitioner.

Reno-protective effects of renin-angiotensin system blockade in type 2 diabetic patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the renal outcomes between ACE inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) and other antihypertensive drugs or placebo in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Publications were identified from Medline and Embase up to July 2011. Only randomised controlled trials comparing ACEI/ARB monotherapy with other active drugs or placebo were eligible. The outcome of end-stage renal disease, doubling of serum creatinine, microvascular complications, microalbuminuria, macroalbuminuria and albuminuria regression were extracted. Risk ratios were pooled using a random-effects model if heterogeneity was present; a fixed-effects model was used in the absence of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of 673 studies identified, 28 were eligible (n = 13-4,912). In direct meta-analysis, ACEI/ARB had significantly lower risk of serum creatinine doubling (pooled RR = 0.66 [95% CI 0.52, 0.83]), macroalbuminuria (pooled RR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.50, 1.00]) and albuminuria regression (pooled RR 1.16 [95% CI 1.00, 1.39]) than other antihypertensive drugs, mainly calcium channel blockers (CCBs). Although the risks of end-stage renal disease and microalbuminuria were lower in the ACEI/ARB group (pooled RR 0.82 [95% CI 0.64, 1.05] and 0.84 [95% CI 0.61, 1.15], respectively), the differences were not statistically significant. The ACEI/ARB benefit over placebo was significant for all outcomes except microalbuminuria. A network meta-analysis detected significant treatment effects across all outcomes for both active drugs and placebo comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Our review suggests a consistent reno-protective effect of ACEI/ARB over other antihypertensive drugs, mainly CCBs, and placebo in type 2 diabetes. The lack of any differences in BP decrease between ACEI/ARB and active comparators suggest this benefit is not due simply to the antihypertensive effect.

Hypertension and CKD

Hypertension is found in more than 50% of pediatric patients with CKD. However, its prevalence varies according to the cause of CKD. It is relatively infrequent in children with structural disorders. Acquired renal disorders are associated with an increased prevalence of hypertension, similar to that of adults. Recent studies using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring indicate that children with CKD also have a high prevalence of masked hypertension. Similar to adults, long-standing and uncontrolled hypertension in children is associated with the progression of CKD and development of end-organ damage including early cardiomyopathy and premature atherosclerosis. Aggressive treatment of hypertension should be an essential part of pediatric CKD care, not just to prevent the development of symptomatic cardiovascular disease but also to delay progression of CKD. Recent findings from the European Effect of Strict Blood Pressure Control and ACE Inhibition on Progression of Chronic Renal Failure in Pediatric Patients (ESCAPE) trial have shown that the aggressive treatment of blood pressure, to below the 50th percentile, has even greater benefit in children with CKD, unlike results seen in adult studies.

Renal denervation and hypertension

Essential hypertension remains one of the biggest challenges in medicine with an enormous impact on both individual and society levels. With the exception of relatively rare monogenetic forms of hypertension, there is now general agreement that the condition is multifactorial in nature and hence requires therapeutic approaches targeting several aspects of the underlying pathophysiology. Accordingly, all major guidelines promote a combination of lifestyle interventions and combination pharmacotherapy to reach target blood pressure (BP) levels in order to reduce overall cardiovascular risk in affected patients. Although this approach works for many, it fails in a considerable number of patients for various reasons including drug-intolerance, noncompliance, physician inertia, and others, leaving them at unacceptably high cardiovascular risk. The quest for additional therapeutic approaches to safely and effectively manage hypertension continues and expands to the reappraisal of older concepts such as renal denervation. Based on the robust preclinical and clinical data surrounding the role of renal sympathetic nerves in various aspects of BP control very recent efforts have led to the development of a novel catheter-based approach using radiofrequency (RF) energy to selectively target and disrupt the renal nerves. The available evidence from the limited number of uncontrolled hypertensive patients in whom renal denervation has been performed are auspicious and indicate that the procedure has a favorable safety profile and is associated with a substantial and presumably sustained BP reduction. Although promising, a myriad of questions are far from being conclusively answered and require our concerted research efforts to explore the full potential and possible risks of this approach. Here we briefly review the science surrounding renal denervation, summarize the current data on safety and efficacy of renal nerve ablation, and discuss some of the open questions that need to be addressed in the near future.