The effect of perindopril on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes in the EUROPA study: results from the PERSUADE substudy

The Pivotal Role of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers in Hypertension Management and Cardiovascular and Renal Protection: A Critical Appraisal and Comparison of International Guidelines

Arterial hypertension is the main preventable cause of premature mortality worldwide. Across Latin America, hypertension has an estimated prevalence of 25.5-52.5%, although many hypertensive patients remain untreated. Appropriate treatment, started early and continued for the remaining lifespan, significantly reduces the risk of complications and mortality. All international and most regional guidelines emphasize a central role for renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis) in antihypertensive treatment. The two main RAASi options are angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). Although equivalent in terms of blood pressure reduction, ACEis are preferably recommended by some guidelines to manage other cardiovascular comorbidities, with ARBs considered as an alternative when ACEis are not tolerated. This review summarizes the differences between ACEis and ARBs and their place in the international guidelines. It provides a critical appraisal of the guidelines based on available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses, especially considering that hypertensive patients in daily practice often have other comorbidities. The observed differences in cardiovascular and renal outcomes in RCTs may be attributed to the different mechanisms of action of ACEis and ARBs, including increased bradykinin levels, potentiated bradykinin response, and stimulated nitric oxide production with ACEis. It may therefore be appropriate to consider ACEis and ARBs as different antihypertensive drugs classes within the same RAASi group. Although guideline recommendations only differentiate between ACEis and ARBs in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities, clinical evidence suggests that ACEis provide benefits in many hypertensive patients, as well as those with other cardiovascular conditions.

Comparing Cardiovascular Outcomes and Costs of Perindopril-, Enalapril- or Losartan-Based Antihypertensive Regimens in South Africa: Real-World Medical Claims Database Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Differences in class or molecule-specific effects between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors have not been conclusively demonstrated. This study used South African data to assess clinical and cost outcomes of antihypertensive therapy with the three most common RAAS inhibitors: perindopril, losartan and enalapril.

METHODS

Using a large, South African private health insurance claims database, we identified patients with a hypertension diagnosis in January 2015 receiving standard doses of perindopril, enalapril or losartan, alone or in combination with other agents. From claims over the subsequent 5 years, we calculated the risk-adjusted rate of the composite primary outcome of myocardial infarction, ischaemic heart disease, heart failure or stroke; rate of all-cause mortality; and costs per life per month (PLPM), with adjustments based on demographic characteristics, healthcare plan and comorbidity.

RESULTS

Overall, 32,857 individuals received perindopril, 16,693 losartan and 13,939 enalapril. Perindopril-based regimens were associated with a significantly lower primary outcome rate (205 per 1000 patients over 5 years) versus losartan (221; P < 0.0001) or enalapril (223; P < 0.0001). The risk-adjusted all-cause mortality rate was lower with perindopril than enalapril (100 vs. 139 deaths per 1000 patients over 5 years; P = 0.007), but not losartan (100 vs. 94; P = 0.650). Mean (95% confidence interval) overall risk-adjusted cost PLPM was Rands (ZAR) 1342 (87-8973) for perindopril, ZAR 1466 (104-9365) for losartan (P = 0.0044) and ZAR 1540 (77-10,546) for enalapril (P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSION

In South African individuals with private health insurance, a perindopril-based antihypertensive regimen provided better clinical and cost outcomes compared with other regimens.

Possible pathway for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction prevention and treatment: the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor effect on endothelial function in comorbid patients

Aim      To evaluate the effect of perindopril on the endothelial function and levels of endothelial dysfunction markers in groups of patients with heart failure with preserved (HFpEF) and mid-range (intermediate) left ventricular ejection fraction (HFmrEF).Material and methods  40 patients with HFpEF (n=20) and HFmrEF (n=20) were evaluated. At baseline, parameters of the morpho-functional state of large blood vessels and of microvessels were evaluated with photoplethysmography, and levels of E-selectin and endothelin-1 (ET-1) were measured. The patients were prescribed perindopril, and after 12 months of treatment, photoplethysmographic parameters and endothelial dysfunction markers were determined again.Results After 12 months of the perindopril treatment, improvements in the endothelial function of both large blood vessels and microvessels were noted. The phase shift increased from 10.1 to 10.9 ms in the HFpEF group (р=0.001) and from 8.35 to 9.65 ms in the HFmrEF group (р=0.002). Furthermore, the occlusion index increased from 1.45 to 1.75 in patients with HFpEF (р=0.004) and from 1.5 to 1.75 in patients with HFmrEF (р=0.010). The Е-selectin concentration decreased in both groups, from 57.25 to 42.4 ng/ml (р=0.00008) and from 40.5 to 35.7 ng/ml (р=0.010) in patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF, respectively. The ET-1 concentration decreased from pg/ml (р=0.010) in patients with HFpEF whereas in patients with HFmrEF, there was no significant change in the ET-1 concentration after 12 months of the perindopril treatment.Conclusion      At 12 months, the endothelial function improved and E-selectin and ET-1 levels decreased in patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF.

Understanding diabetes-induced cardiomyopathy from the perspective of renin angiotensin aldosterone system

Experimental and clinical evidence suggests that diabetic subjects are predisposed to a distinct cardiovascular dysfunction, known as diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM), which could be an autonomous disease independent of concomitant micro and macrovascular disorders. DCM is one of the prominent causes of global morbidity and mortality and is on a rising trend with the increase in the prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM). DCM is characterized by an early left ventricle diastolic dysfunction associated with the slow progression of cardiomyocyte hypertrophy leading to heart failure, which still has no effective therapy. Although the well-known "Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System (RAAS)" inhibition is considered a gold-standard treatment in heart failure, its role in DCM is still unclear. At the cellular level of DCM, RAAS induces various secondary mechanisms, adding complications to poor prognosis and treatment of DCM. This review highlights the importance of RAAS signaling and its major secondary mechanisms involving inflammation, oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, and autophagy, their role in establishing DCM. In addition, studies lacking in the specific area of DCM are also highlighted. Therefore, understanding the complex role of RAAS in DCM may lead to the identification of better prognosis and therapeutic strategies in treating DCM.

Cardiovascular disease in diabetes, beyond glucose

Despite the decades-old knowledge that diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, the reasons for this association are only partially understood. While this association is true for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, different pathophysiological processes may be responsible. Lipids and other risk factors are indeed important, whereas the role of glucose is less clear. This lack of clarity stems from clinical trials that do not unambiguously show that intensive glycemic control reduces cardiovascular events. Animal models have provided mechanisms that link diabetes to increased atherosclerosis, and evidence consistent with the importance of factors beyond hyperglycemia has emerged. We review clinical, pathological, and animal studies exploring the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis in humans living with diabetes and in mouse models of diabetes. An increased effort to identify risk factors beyond glucose is now needed to prevent the increased cardiovascular disease risk associated with diabetes.

Effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes: A meta-analysis focusing on the number needed to treat and minimal clinical effect

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) separately to prevent all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and heart failure (HF) in patients with diabetes considering the number needed to treat (NNT) and minimal clinical effect (MCE).

METHODS

Data from 17 morbidity-mortality trials in patients with diabetes were used to calculate NNTs and evaluate MCE to prevent all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure.

RESULTS

A total of 17 trials involving 42,037 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years. ACEIs significantly reduced the risk of all-cause mortality, MI and HF; the corresponding mean NNTBs were 48, 62 and 78, respectively, but ARBs were only associated with a reduction in heart failure. The clinical significance assessment of the included trials indicated that most of the statistically significant trial results had no definitive clinical significance, and only some of them had possible clinical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with diabetes, ACEIs reduced all-cause mortality, MI and HF, whereas ARBs could only prevent HF. However, none of the results of these trials had clear clinical significance, and most had only possible clinical significance.

Glucose and Blood Pressure-Dependent Pathways-The Progression of Diabetic Kidney Disease

The major clinical associations with the progression of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) are glycemic control and systemic hypertension. Recent studies have continued to emphasize vasoactive hormone pathways including aldosterone and endothelin which suggest a key role for vasoconstrictor pathways in promoting renal damage in diabetes. The role of glucose per se remains difficult to define in DKD but appears to involve key intermediates including reactive oxygen species (ROS) and dicarbonyls such as methylglyoxal which activate intracellular pathways to promote fibrosis and inflammation in the kidney. Recent studies have identified a novel molecular interaction between hemodynamic and metabolic pathways which could lead to new treatments for DKD. This should lead to a further improvement in the outlook of DKD building on positive results from RAAS blockade and more recently newer classes of glucose-lowering agents such as SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1 receptor agonists.

[Mechanisms for the Development of Blood Pressure Variability and the Potential of Antihypertensive Drugs in Their Correction]

Blood pressure variability (BPV) is the fluctuations of blood pressure over a certain period of time under the influence of various factors. The issue of increased BPV is of particular clinical importance due to high predictive value of this parameter as a risk factor for fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal events. It is proved that in the BPV increasing, the key role is played by impairments in arterial baroreflexes, which, in turn, are mediated by increased vascular stiffness, impact of angiotensin II and the sympathetic nervous system, endothelial dysfunction, nitric oxide deficiency and aging, including the vascular aging. Antihypertensive drugs that targeting largest amount of pathophysiological mechanisms in BPV increasing have a most advantages in correcting excessive pressure fluctuations. In this regard such drugs are perindopril and amlodipine, which can eliminate almost the entire spectrum of increased BPV causes and, therefore, optimally reduce the cardiovascular risk.

Searching for optimal blood pressure targets in type 2 diabetic patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Controversies exist regarding the optimal blood pressure (BP) level that is safe and provides cardiovascular protection in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coexistent coronary artery disease. Several new glucose-lowering agents have been found to lower BP as well, making the interaction between BP and T2DM even more complex.

METHODS

With the reference to recent literature, this review article describes the potential mechanisms of increased risk of hypertension in T2DM and outlines the possible optimal BP levels based upon recommendations on the management of hypertension by the current guidelines, in combination with our research findings, for type 2 diabetic patients with coronary artery disease.

RESULTS

The development of hypertension in T2DM involves multiple processes, including enhanced sympathetic output, inappropriate activation of renin-angiotensin- aldosterone system, endothelial dysfunction induced through insulin resistance, and abnormal sodium handling by the kidney. Both AGE-RAGE axis and adipokine dysregulation activate intracellular signaling pathways, increase oxidative stress, and aggravate vascular inflammation. Pancreatic β-cell specific microRNAs are implicated in gene expression and diabetic complications. Non-pharmacological intervention with lifestyle changes improves BP control, and anti-hypertensive medications with ACEI/ARB, calcium antagonists, β-blockers, diuretics and new hypoglycemic agent SGLT2 inhibitors are effective to decrease mortality and prevent major adverse cardiovascular events. For hypertensive patients with T2DM and stable coronary artery disease, control of BP < 130/80 mmHg but not < 120/70 mmHg is reasonable, whereas for those with chronic total occlusion or acute coronary syndromes, an ideal BP target may be somewhat higher (< 140/90 mmHg). Caution is advised with aggressive lowering of diastolic BP to a critical threshold (< 60 mmHg).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertension and T2DM share certain similar aspects of pathophysiology, and BP control should be individualized to minimize adverse events and maximize benefits especially for patients with T2DM and coronary artery disease.

Preventing and treating kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a huge burden in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). This review therefore has the aim of assessing the add-on value of new glucose-lowering agents compared or combined with inhibitors of the renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) on renal outcomes in T2DM patients.

AREAS COVERED

This article first summarizes the results reported with RAAS inhibitors, mainstay of nephroprotection in T2DM with albuminuria. Second, it describes the positive results with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and, even more impressive, sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is). Third, besides the potential of combined therapies, it briefly considers some new approaches currently in development.

EXPERT OPINION

RAAS inhibitors exert renoprotective effects beyond their blood pressure lowering effects while SGLT2is, and possibly GLP-1RAs, exert nephroprotection independently of their glucose-lowering activity. These effects were demonstrated not only on surrogate endpoints such as albuminuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, but also on hard endpoints, including progression to end-stage renal disease requiring replacement therapy. The underlying mechanisms are different and potentially complementary on glomerular hemodynamics, arguing for combined therapies. Nevertheless, there is still room for new emerging drugs to tackle CKD in T2DM.

Vascular legacy beyond blood pressure control: benefits of perindopril/indapamide combination in hypertensive patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVES

Much of the chronic care of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension involves the prevention of diabetic complications. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors are recommended as first-line therapies because of their nephroprotective properties. Their combination with metabolically neutral diuretics is recommended to reduce blood pressure, morbidity and mortality. Our objective was to review the mechanisms by which the combination of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, perindopril, and metabolically neutral thiazide-like diuretic, indapamide, targets the pathways involved in microvascular and macrovascular diabetic complications.

METHODS

For this narrative review, extensive literature searches were performed using PubMed/Medline. Articles published in English describing clinical trials and mechanism of action studies that were relevant to the treatment of patients with perindopril and/or indapamide were included.

RESULTS

Perindopril/indapamide treatment has been shown to reduce blood pressure and to have significant beneficial effects on arterial distensibility, kidney structure and function, and endothelial function. Recent data also suggests that perindopril may reduce the deleterious accumulation of advanced glycation end products in diabetic tissue. In the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation diabetes trial, perindopril/indapamide treatment significantly reduced the relative risk of microvascular and macrovascular events by 9%, cardiovascular mortality by 18%, and all-cause mortality by 14%. Interestingly, 6 years after the end of the double-blind period, follow-up data showed that the beneficial effects on mortality continued to be significant even though differences in blood pressure and glycated hemoglobin levels had not been significant for several years. Together this data suggests that treatment with perindopril/indapamide has microvascular and macrovascular effects that extend beyond blood pressure lowering and that this treatment might confer a long-lasting beneficial vascular legacy.

CONCLUSION

Moving forward, understanding the pathophysiological bases of the effects that extend beyond those of blood pressure control will help us differentiate between anti-hypertensive choices.

NOVEL COMBINATION OF THE ANGIOTENSIN CONVERTING ENZYME INHIBITOR PERINDOPRIL AND HIGHLY SELECTIVE β-ADRENOBLOCKER BISOPROLOL: PRIME AMONG THE EQUAL

The article is focused on a broad evidence of antihypertension efficacy of perindopril and bisoprolol. The issues considered, of the drugs usage in patients with arterial hypertension, ischemic heart disease and chronic heart failure according to the international and local clinical guidelines. Special attention is paid for the influence of perindopril and bisoprolol on prognosis — the risk of cardiovascular complications from the evidence based medicine perspective. The data provided on a novel unique combination of these medications, and the benefits are accounted, as the mechanism of complimentary interaction; the results of randomized trials, clinical trials provided, that point on the high potential of this sort of combinational treatment.

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines vary in determining optimal blood pressure targets in adults with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov in March 2018; conducted random effects frequentist meta-analyses of direct aggregate data; and appraised the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

From eligible 14 meta-analyses and 95 publications of randomized controlled trials (RCT), only 6 RCTs directly compared lower versus higher blood pressure targets; remaining RCTs aimed at comparative effectiveness of hypotensive drugs. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP), direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive target SBP <120-140 mmHg decreases the risk of diabetes-related mortality [relative risk (RR) =0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.92], fatal (RR =0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.84) or nonfatal stroke (RR =0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83), prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, macroalbuminuria, and non-spine bone fractures, with no differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or falls. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mmHg, direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive DBP target ≤80 versus 80-90 mmHg decreases the risk of major cardiovascular events. Published meta-analyses of aggregate data suggested a significant association between lower baseline and attained blood pressure and increased cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that in adults with diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension, in order to reduce the risk of stroke, clinicians should target blood pressure at 120-130/80 mmHg, with close monitoring for all drug-related harms.

Comparison of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers on cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies seem to show different effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on cardiovascular (CV) events in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Our objective was to analyze which are preferable on the incidence of all-cause mortality, CV death, and major CV events in hypertensive patients with T2DM.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to June 2016 with ACEI or ARBs as the intervention for hypertensive patients with T2DM. The primary end points were all-cause mortality and CV death. The secondary end points were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), and CV events. Two investigators extracted the information independently. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects model or a random-effects model if significant heterogeneity was present.

RESULTS

A total of 13 trials were included for analysis, 5 ACEI trials (24,976 patients) and 8 ARB trials (22,032 patients) followed for a mean of 3.8 years. Treatment with ACEI was associated with significantly reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.87; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.80-0.94], CV death (OR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.98), and other CV outcomes such as MI (0R 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.90), stroke (OR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99), HF (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.90), and CV events (OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95), whereas ARBs therapy had no significant reduction in the results of many primary and secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that treatment with ACEI showed a significant CV protection for all-cause mortality, CV death, and major CV events, whereas ARBs had no benefits on these outcomes except MI. In consideration of high mortality and morbidity, ACEI was preferable than ARBs on patients with hypertension and T2DM.

Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on outcome incidence in hypertension: 10 - Should blood pressure management differ in hypertensive patients with and without diabetes mellitus? Overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of hypertension, and cardiovascular and renal disease, and it has been recommended that management of hypertension should be more aggressive in presence than in absence of diabetes mellitus, but the matter is controversial at present.

OBJECTIVES

Meta-analysing all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effects on cardiovascular and renal outcomes of blood pressure BP lowering to different systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) levels or by different drug classes in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The database consisted of 72 BP-lowering RCTs (260 210 patients) and 50 head-to-head drug comparison RCTs (247 006). Among these two sets, RCTs or RCT subgroups separately reporting data from patients with and without diabetes mellitus were identified, and stratified by in-treatment achieved SBP and DBP, by drug class compared with placebo, and drug class compared with all other classes. Risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals, and absolute risk reductions of six fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular outcomes, all-cause death, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were calculated (random-effects model) separately for diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, and compared by interaction analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 41 RCTs providing data on 61 772 patients with diabetes mellitus and 40 RCTs providing data on 191 353 patients without diabetes mellitus. For achieved SBP at least 140 mmHg, relative and absolute reductions of most cardiovascular outcomes were significantly greater in diabetes mellitus than no diabetes mellitus, whereas for achieved SBP below 130 mmHg, the difference disappeared or reversed (greater outcome reduction in no diabetes mellitus). Significant ESRD reduction was found only in diabetes mellitus, but it was greatest when achieved SBP was at least 140 mmHg, and no further effect was found at SBP below 140 mmHg. All antihypertensive drug classes reduced cardiovascular risk vs. placebo in diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, but angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were the only class more effective in diabetes mellitus than in no diabetes mellitus. When compared to other classes, renin-angiotensin system blockers were equally effective in cardiovascular prevention in no diabetes mellitus, but moderately, though significantly, more effective in diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

BP-lowering treatment significantly and importantly reduces cardiovascular risk both in diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, but evidence for reduced ESRD risk is available only in diabetes. Contrary to past recommendations, in diabetes mellitus there is little or no further benefit in lowering SBP below 130 mmHg, whereas continuing benefit is seen in no diabetes mellitus also at SBP below 130 mmHg. Although all BP-lowering drugs can beneficially be prescribed in hypertensive patients with diabetes mellitus, the current recommendation to initiate or include a renin-angiotensin system blocker is supported by the evidence here presented.

Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetes Mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), the most common cause of death in T2D. Yet, <50% of U.S. adults with T2D meet recommended guidelines for CVD prevention. The burden of T2D is increasing: by 2050, approximately 1 in 3 U.S. individuals may have T2D, and patients with T2D will comprise an increasingly large proportion of the CVD population. The authors believe it is imperative that we expand the use of therapies proven to reduce CVD risk in patients with T2D. The authors summarize evidence and guidelines for lifestyle (exercise, nutrition, and weight management) and CVD risk factor (blood pressure, cholesterol and blood lipids, glycemic control, and the use of aspirin) management for the prevention of CVD among patients with T2D. The authors believe appropriate lifestyle and CVD risk factor management has the potential to significantly reduce the burden of CVD among patients with T2D.

Are targeted therapies for diabetic cardiomyopathy on the horizon?

Diabetes increases the risk of heart failure approximately 2.5-fold, independent of coronary artery disease and other comorbidities. This process, termed diabetic cardiomyopathy, is characterized by initial impairment of left ventricular (LV) relaxation followed by LV contractile dysfunction. Post-mortem examination reveals that human diastolic dysfunction is closely associated with LV damage, including cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, apoptosis and fibrosis, with impaired coronary microvascular perfusion. The pathophysiological mechanisms underpinning the characteristic features of diabetic cardiomyopathy remain poorly understood, although multiple factors including altered lipid metabolism, mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, inflammation, as well as epigenetic changes, are implicated. Despite a recent rise in research interrogating these mechanisms and an increased understanding of the clinical importance of diabetic cardiomyopathy, there remains a lack of specific treatment strategies. How the chronic metabolic disturbances observed in diabetes lead to structural and functional changes remains a pertinent question, and it is hoped that recent advances, particularly in the area of epigenetics, among others, may provide some answers. This review hence explores the temporal onset of the pathological features of diabetic cardiomyopathy, and their relative contribution to the resultant disease phenotype, as well as both current and potential therapeutic options. The emergence of glucose-optimizing agents, namely glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists and sodium/glucose co-transporter (SGLT)2 inhibitors that confer benefits on cardiovascular outcomes, together with novel experimental approaches, highlight a new and exciting era in diabetes research, which is likely to result in major clinical impact.

Blood pressure reduction in diabetes: lessons from ACCORD, SPRINT and EMPA-REG OUTCOME

In patients with diabetes mellitus, the presence of hypertension substantially increases the risk of cardiovascular events, and reductions in blood pressure (BP) can reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Following evidence from trials randomizing patients to diastolic BP levels, previous guidelines recommended an office BP target of <130/80 mmHg in individuals with diabetes mellitus. However, the evidence for this systolic BP (SBP) target was derived from observational studies. When the results of the ACCORD-BP study showed that those individuals with diabetes mellitus and a target BP of <120 mmHg had a cardiovascular risk that is similar to those with <140 mmHg, all guidelines returned to a recommended SBP of <140 mmHg. However, the ACCORD-BP trial was limited by the low number of cardiovascular events observed, whereas the mean SBP in the 'conventional' arm was 133 mmHg. The SPRINT study, showing cardiovascular benefits in hypertensive patients without diabetes mellitus randomized to SBP <120 mmHg versus those randomized to <140 mmHg, came in contrast with the ACCORD-BP, but a detailed evaluation reveals many similarities between the two trials. Finally, the EMPA-REG OUTCOME study, with impressive cardiovascular mortality reduction with empagliflozin, suggested that reduction of SBP to around 130 mmHg is safe and might explain part of these beneficial results. In this Review, we evaluate the implications of the ACCORD-BP, SPRINT and EMPA-REG OUTCOME trials and previous studies for the optimal BP target in diabetes mellitus.

Blood Pressure Management in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Insights From the Diabetes Mellitus Status in Canada (DM-SCAN) Survey

OBJECTIVES

Optimal treatment of blood pressure (BP) and other cardiovascular risk factors, including hyperglycemia, is integral to diabetes management. There are limited data from the primary care setting concerning the contemporary and comprehensive management of type 2 diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors in relation to guideline-recommended BP target achievement.

METHODS

The Diabetes Mellitus Status in Canada (DM-SCAN) survey included 5172 ambulatory patients with type 2 diabetes. Data were collected on patient demographics, medical histories, medication usage, BP levels and laboratory investigations. We stratified the study population based on their attainment of the BP target recommended by the Canadian Diabetes Association 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Diabetes in Canada and the Canadian Hypertension Education Program (<130/80 mmHg) and compared patient clinical characteristics and treatments.

RESULTS

Of the 5145 patients with available BP data, 36% achieved the BP target. Prevalence of smoking, known coronary artery disease, retinopathy, neuropathy and nephropathy were similar in the groups with BP 130/80 mmHg or higher and BP 130/80 mmHg or lower. Patients with BP 130/80 mmHg or higher were taking more antihypertensive agents and were more likely to be taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers, diuretics and calcium channel blockers. They also had significantly higher glycated hemoglobin and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels. Overall, these patients were also less likely to achieve guideline-recommended glycemic and lipid targets.

CONCLUSIONS

Only about one-third of patients with diabetes achieved the target BP of below 130/80 mmHg. Patients with BP 130/80 mmHg or higher were also less likely to achieve optimal guideline-recommended glycated hemoglobin and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol targets. Improved comprehensive management of all risk factors in patients with diabetes is warranted.

Vascular Complications of Diabetes

Over the last several decades, the global incidence and prevalence of diabetes mellitus has increased significantly. The raised incidence rate is projected to continue as greater numbers of persons adopt a Western lifestyle and diet. Patients with diabetes mellitus are at heightened risk of both adverse microvascular and cardiovascular events. Moreover, once cardiovascular disease develops, diabetes mellitus exacerbates progression and worsens outcomes. The medical management of patients with diabetes mellitus mandates comprehensive risk factor modification and antiplatelet therapy. Recent clinical trials of new medical therapies continue to inform the care of patients with diabetes mellitus to reduce both cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Review: Managing cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes

The increasingly large number of patients with diabetes in the UK are at greatly increased risk of cardiovascular disease, including coronary heart disease and stroke, compared to the general population. Many diabetes patients exhibit metabolic syndrome and these additional risk factors, such as raised hypertension and cholesterol, multiply the overall risk. Reducing these risk factors to target levels is essential and requires a multifactorial approach. Lifestyle changes, tight glycaemic control, antiplatelet drugs (aspirin) and control of lipid levels, e.g. using statins, can all have significant beneficial effects. Blood pressure control is another vital aspect in reducing risk and a number of recent studies have provided evidence supporting the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors as first-line treatment in patients with diabetes.

Review: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and coronary heart disease prevention

A number of large randomised controlled trials have shown that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, compared with placebo or other blood pressure-lowering drugs, improve coronary heart disease outcomes (fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularisation) in diverse patient groups, e.g. in primary and secondary prevention, those with and without left ventricular dysfunction, and among hypertensive and non-hypertensive subjects. An updated meta-regression analysis which included five major trials in patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD) (EUROPA, INVEST, ACTION, PEACE and CAMELOT) concluded that ACE inhibitor (ACE-I) therapy has clear benefits in secondary prevention, but there are important and unexplained differences between trials in clinical outcome, baseline cardiovascular risk, blood pressure changes and trial design which deserve further discussion of the underlying mechanisms and clinical interpretation. For example, in placebo-controlled trials the biggest (20—22%) reductions in primary end points (including mortality) have been observed with perindopril and ramipril, whereas trials using trandolapril and quinapril had no effect on survival or recurrent CAD events. This review summarises and compares the major findings of these recent trials, and provides further analysis of the underlying mechanisms and clinical significance of secondary CAD prevention with ACE-I therapy.

Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade in Adult Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND

Medications aimed at inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) have been used extensively for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications in patients with diabetes, but data that compare their clinical effectiveness are limited. We aimed to compare the effects of classes of RAS blockers on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with diabetes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Eligible trials were identified by electronic searches in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1 January 2004 to 17 July 2014). Interventions of interest were angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and direct renin (DR) inhibitors. The primary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke-singly and as a composite endpoint, major cardiovascular outcome-and end-stage renal disease [ESRD], doubling of serum creatinine, and all-cause mortality-singly and as a composite endpoint, progression of renal disease. Secondary endpoints were angina pectoris and hospitalization for heart failure. In all, 71 trials (103,120 participants), with a total of 14 different regimens, were pooled using network meta-analyses. When compared with ACE inhibitor, no other RAS blocker used in monotherapy and/or combination was associated with a significant reduction in major cardiovascular outcomes: ARB (odds ratio [OR] 1.02; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.90-1.18), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.79-1.19), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (1.32; 95% CrI 0.96-1.81), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.00; 95% CrI 0.73-1.38). For the risk of progression of renal disease, no significant differences were detected between ACE inhibitor and each of the remaining therapies: ARB (OR 1.10; 95% CrI 0.90-1.40), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.72-1.29), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (0.99; 95% CrI 0.65-1.57), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.18; 95% CrI 0.78-1.84). No significant differences were showed between ACE inhibitors and ARBs with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, hospitalization for heart failure, ESRD, or doubling serum creatinine. Findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the included studies. Potential inconsistency was identified in network meta-analyses of stroke and angina pectoris, limiting the conclusiveness of findings for these single endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with diabetes, comparisons of different RAS blockers showed similar effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on major cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Compared with monotherapies, the combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB failed to provide significant benefits on major outcomes. Clinicians should discuss the balance between benefits, costs, and potential harms with individual diabetes patients before starting treatment.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42014014404.

Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels in patients with diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of antihypertensive treatment on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus, at different blood pressure levels.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, and BIOSIS were searched using highly sensitive search strategies. When data required according to the protocol were missing but trials were potentially eligible, we contacted researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and authorities.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including 100 or more people with diabetes mellitus, treated for 12 months or more, comparing any antihypertensive agent against placebo, two agents against one, or different blood pressure targets.

RESULTS

49 trials, including 73,738 participants, were included in the meta-analyses. Most of the participants had type 2 diabetes. If baseline systolic blood pressure was greater than 150 mm Hg, antihypertensive treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.99), cardiovascular mortality (0.75, 0.57 to 0.99), myocardial infarction (0.74, 0.63 to 0.87), stroke (0.77, 0.65 to 0.91), and end stage renal disease (0.82, 0.71 to 0.94). If baseline systolic blood pressure was 140-150 mm Hg, additional treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (0.87, 0.78 to 0.98), myocardial infarction (0.84, 0.76 to 0.93), and heart failure (0.80, 0.66 to 0.97). If baseline systolic blood pressure was less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment increased the risk of cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.00 to 1.32), with a tendency towards an increased risk of all cause mortality (1.05, 0.95 to 1.16). Metaregression analyses showed a worse treatment effect with lower baseline systolic blood pressures for cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.03 to 1.29 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure) and myocardial infarction (1.12, 1.03 to 1.22 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure). Patterns were similar for attained systolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Antihypertensive treatment reduces the risk of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus and a systolic blood pressure more than 140 mm Hg. If systolic blood pressure is less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death, with no observed benefit.

Update on RAAS Modulation for the Treatment of Diabetic Cardiovascular Disease

Since the advent of insulin, the improvements in diabetes detection and the therapies to treat hyperglycemia have reduced the mortality of acute metabolic emergencies, such that today chronic complications are the major cause of morbidity and mortality among diabetic patients. More than half of the mortality that is seen in the diabetic population can be ascribed to cardiovascular disease (CVD), which includes not only myocardial infarction due to premature atherosclerosis but also diabetic cardiomyopathy. The importance of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) antagonism in the prevention of diabetic CVD has demonstrated the key role that the RAAS plays in diabetic CVD onset and development. Today, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers represent the first line therapy for primary and secondary CVD prevention in patients with diabetes. Recent research has uncovered new dimensions of the RAAS and, therefore, new potential therapeutic targets against diabetic CVD. Here we describe the timeline of paradigm shifts in RAAS understanding, how diabetes modifies the RAAS, and what new parts of the RAAS pathway could be targeted in order to achieve RAAS modulation against diabetic CVD.

Change in daily ambulatory activity and cardiovascular events in people with impaired glucose tolerance

Patients with pre-diabetes have a tenfold higher risk of developing Type 2 DM and a twofold higher risk of developing coronary heart disease compared to non-diabetics. Interventions targeted at those in an early stage of impaired glucose metabolism can delay or prevent diabetes. Effects of these interventions on cardiovascular outcome are unknown. This article aims to review current and available data on lifestyle intervention, specifically physical activity, on cardiovascular outcomes in populations at risk for diabetes. We searched PubMed database from 1990 to present with focus on more recent literature published over the last 2 years. Various permutations of keywords used included glucose intolerance, pre-diabetes, diabetes, lifestyle modifications, physical activity, and cardiovascular disease. Intensive glycemic control, specific medications, and lifestyle intervention including increase in physical activity have been evaluated in diabetes and pre-diabetes. Most studies we reviewed showed that these interventions prevented progression of pre-diabetes to diabetes and improved cardiovascular risk surrogate measures. Direct decrease in cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal stroke, and non-fatal myocardial infarctions was shown in one recent trial. Increase in physical activity has a positive effect on decreasing cardiovascular risk by modifying several important risk factors and may decrease risk of events in pre-diabetics. More randomized high power trials are needed to verify and characterize these effects.

Possible prevention of dialysis-requiring congestive heart failure by angiotensin-II receptor blockers in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Preventive medications for dialysis-requiring congestive heart failure (CHF) in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) are unknown. Our aim was to explore which CKD medication was associated with a reduced prevalence of dialysis-requiring CHF in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

METHODS

The present multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional study examined the association between CKD medications and the prevalence of dialysis-requiring CHF in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

RESULTS

There were 1536 Japanese Stage 5 CKD patients who satisfied our inclusion criteria. We had 309 (20.1%) patients whom had developed dialysis-requiring CHF and 940 patients (60.8%) whom had been using angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) before initiating dialysis. In our multivariate analysis, only ARB use was significantly associated with a lower risk of CHF (Odds ratio (OR): 0.680, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.516-0.897; p = 0.0064), of the CKD treatments examined in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that ARB use during the pre-dialysis period is associated with a lower prevalence of CHF in the non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD, suggesting a possible prevention of dialysis-requiring CHF by ARBs, in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

Pharmacological interventions for preventing or delaying onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Prevention or delay of onset of type 2 diabetes in individuals at varying risk across the dysglycaemia continuum before overt diabetes becomes clinically manifest constitutes a leading objective of global disease prevention schemes. Pharmacological intervention has been suggested as a means to help prevent diabetes and reduce the global burden of this chronic condition. However, there is no credible evidence that early pharmacological intervention leads to long-term benefit in reducing diabetes-related complications or preventing early mortality, compared to treating people with diagnosed diabetes who have crossed the glycaemic threshold. In this review, we examine published evidence from trials using pharmacological agents to delay or prevent progression to diabetes. We also explore the benefit/risk impact of such therapies, safety issues and relevant off-target effects. Current evidence suggests none of the drugs currently available sustainably lower cumulative diabetes incidence, none provides a durable delay in diabetes diagnosis and none provides a convincing concomitant excess benefit for microvascular or macrovascular risk.

Heart failure: a cardiovascular outcome in diabetes that can no longer be ignored

In patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, glycaemic exposure assessed as HbA1c correlates strongly with risk of future microvascular and macrovascular complications. Improved glucose control substantially reduces the risk of microvascular complications and, with extended follow-up, modestly reduces the risk of atherosclerotic events. The lowering of HbA1c concentrations by newly developed glucose-lowering drugs (alone or when added to other glucose-lowering drugs) has been used, until recently, as a surrogate measure of their potential to lower cardiovascular risk. This assumption is no longer acceptable, and now demonstration of cardiovascular safety has been mandated by regulatory authorities. A major concern, however, is the universal absence in any large-scale trials of new glucose-lowering drugs of hospital admission for heart failure as a prespecified component of the primary composite cardiovascular outcomes. This omission is important because hospital admission for heart failure is a common and prognostically important cardiovascular complication of diabetes. Moreover, it is the one cardiovascular outcome for which the risk has been shown unequivocally to be increased by some glucose-lowering therapies. As such, we believe that heart failure should be systematically evaluated in cardiovascular outcome trials of all new glucose-lowering drugs.

Heart failure in the diabetic population - pathophysiology, diagnosis and management

Evidence from clinical trials repeatedly confirms the association of diabetes with heart failure, independent of hypertension, atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease and valvular heart disease. However, the importance of coexistence of diabetes and heart failure is not universally recognized, despite the fact that it may significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality of the diabetic population. It seems that prevention of heart failure, early diagnosis, and appropriate management could improve the outcome. Unfortunately, the etiology of heart failure in diabetic patients is still to be elucidated. It is multifactorial in nature and several cellular, molecular and metabolic factors are implicated. Additionally, there are still no definite guidelines on either the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure in diabetic patients or on the therapy of diabetes in subjects with heart failure. This review focuses on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and prevention of heart failure in the diabetic population as well as management of both comorbidities.

Treating the metabolic syndrome

The metabolic syndrome (MS), a cluster of metabolic abnormalities with insulin resistance as its central component, is increasing in prevalence and is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Current evidence supports an aggressive intervention approach that comprises lifestyle modification in conjunction with drug treatment of the MS components. Healthier eating and regular exercise greatly reduce waistline and body mass index, lower blood pressure and improve lipid profile. Lifestyle modification has been proven to prevent T2DM development. Nevertheless, appropriate treatment of MS components often requires pharmacologic intervention with insulin-sensitizing agents, such as metformin and thiazolidinediones, while statins and fibrates, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers are the first-line lipid-modifying or antihypertensive drugs. Only severely obese patients require specific drug treatments. Very often, drug combinations will be necessary to manage multiple risk factors. As we progress in the understanding of the pathophysiology of the MS, new targets for therapies will probably be identified and new treatments will prove to be even more efficacious than those currently available for the management of this life-threatening condition.

Effects of renin-angiotensin system blockades on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To determine whether renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade is beneficial for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) using meta-analysis.

METHODS

The MEDLINE and Cochrane library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to June 2010. We also reviewed reference lists from identified trials and review articles to identify any other relevant studies, and the ClinicalTrials.gov website to identify randomized controlled trials that were registered as completed but not yet published. A random-effects model was used to combine the estimates for risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (including post hoc analyses) assessing the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers on cardiovascular events compared to controls in patients with DM. Nineteen clinical trials with 41,042 patients and 6039 cardiovascular events were identified. RAS blockade significantly reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events (RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.00, I(2) statistic 53%) and myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.94, I(2)=55%). There were trends towards fewer strokes and lower all-cause mortality but these were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence shows that treatment with RAS blockade can routinely be considered for diabetic patients to reduce major cardiovascular events.

Diabetes-specific nutrition algorithm: a transcultural program to optimize diabetes and prediabetes care

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and prediabetes have a major global impact through high disease prevalence, significant downstream pathophysiologic effects, and enormous financial liabilities. To mitigate this disease burden, interventions of proven effectiveness must be used. Evidence shows that nutrition therapy improves glycemic control and reduces the risks of diabetes and its complications. Accordingly, diabetes-specific nutrition therapy should be incorporated into comprehensive patient management programs. Evidence-based recommendations for healthy lifestyles that include healthy eating can be found in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) from professional medical organizations. To enable broad implementation of these guidelines, recommendations must be reconstructed to account for cultural differences in lifestyle, food availability, and genetic factors. To begin, published CPGs and relevant medical literature were reviewed and evidence ratings applied according to established protocols for guidelines. From this information, an algorithm for the nutritional management of people with T2D and prediabetes was created. Subsequently, algorithm nodes were populated with transcultural attributes to guide decisions. The resultant transcultural diabetes-specific nutrition algorithm (tDNA) was simplified and optimized for global implementation and validation according to current standards for CPG development and cultural adaptation. Thus, the tDNA is a tool to facilitate the delivery of nutrition therapy to patients with T2D and prediabetes in a variety of cultures and geographic locations. It is anticipated that this novel approach can reduce the burden of diabetes, improve quality of life, and save lives. The specific Southeast Asian and Asian Indian tDNA versions can be found in companion articles in this issue of Current Diabetes Reports.