Influence of microalbuminuria in achieving blood pressure goals:

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Lercanidipine valuable effect on urine protein losses: the RED LEVEL study

OBJECTIVE

The RED LEVEL study (REnal Disease: LErcanidipine Valuable Effect on urine protein Losses) directly compares, in an explorative fashion, the effects of lercanidipine + enalapril and amlodipine + enalapril combinations on renal parameters in hypertensive subjects.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a 1 year, prospective, multi-center, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint (PROBE) study in hypertensive patients with albuminuria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Renal function (albuminuria, serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria); blood pressure.

RESULTS

Albuminuria was significantly reduced, compared with baseline values, with the lercanidipine + enalapril combination over the entire study period; at month 3, month 6 and month 12, changes from baseline were: -162.5 (p-value = 0.0439), -425.8 (p-value = 0.0010), -329.0 (p-value = 0.0011) mg/24 h), respectively. On the other hand, this improvement was not observed with enalapril + amlodipine. Other parameters of renal function such as serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria did not change over the study. Both lercanidipine + enalapril and amlodipine + enalapril significantly reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure values from baseline all over the study period with no significant differences between groups. Safety outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results of this explorative study lend support to the anti-albuminuric effect of the lercanidipine + enalapril combination and to the long term renal-protective effects of this combination in patients with hypertension.

Microalbuminuria and hypertension in pregnancy: role of aldosterone and inflammation

Women with a history of hypertension in pregnancy are at increased risk of microalbuminuria later in life. Microalbuminuria is a marker of kidney dysfunction frequently related to an inflammatory event. Pregnancy is a dynamic process characterized by immune tolerance, angiogenesis, and hormonal regulation. Menstruation and pregnancy are associated with a physiological inflammation, which is altered in preeclampsia and probably in other hypertensive situations of pregnancy. An imbalance between pro-oxidant factors and the ability to scavenge these factors produces oxidative stress, which has been evaluated in many cells, but leukocytes are the main source of inflammatory cytokines and experimental and clinical evidence support a possible role of aldosterone as a mediator of placental and renal damage mediated by growth factors, reactive oxygen species, and cytokines. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and aldosterone receptor blockers are frequently effective in reducing the risk of progression of cardiovascular and renal disease.

Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Multiple laboratory tests are used to diagnose and manage patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these tests varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory testing for patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. Draft guidelines were posted on the Internet and presented at the 2007 Arnold O. Beckman Conference. The document was modified in response to oral and written comments, and a revised draft was posted in 2010 and again modified in response to written comments. The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and the Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry jointly reviewed the guidelines, which were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequently approved by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

In addition to long-standing criteria based on measurement of plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased blood hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) concentrations. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by self-monitoring of plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of HbA(1c). The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations that are based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes have minimal clinical value at present, and their measurement is not recommended.

Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Multiple laboratory tests are used to diagnose and manage patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these tests varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory testing for patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. Draft guidelines were posted on the Internet and presented at the 2007 Arnold O. Beckman Conference. The document was modified in response to oral and written comments, and a revised draft was posted in 2010 and again modified in response to written comments. The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC jointly reviewed the guidelines, which were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequently approved by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

In addition to long-standing criteria based on measurement of plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased blood hemoglobin A(1c) (Hb A(1c)) concentrations. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by self-monitoring of plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of Hb A(1c). The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations that are based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes have minimal clinical value at present, and their measurement is not recommended.

Should targeting albuminuria be part of a cardiovascular risk reduction paradigm?

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States as well as the rest of the world. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is considered a CVD risk equivalent. The development of albuminuria has been identified as an additional possible risk marker that is almost unique to patients with CKD and a marker for predicting CVD risk. This review focuses on clinical and epidemiologic evidence regarding the role of albuminuria in the context of CVD development. It reviews the association of albuminuria with other comorbidities associated with increased cardiovascular risk and the modalities aimed at the reduction of albuminuria and maximizing of cardiovascular risk reduction.

Renal outcomes with different fixed-dose combination therapies in patients with hypertension at high risk for cardiovascular events (ACCOMPLISH): a prespecified secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Avoiding Cardiovascular Events through Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH) trial showed that initial antihypertensive therapy with benazepril plus amlodipine was superior to benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We assessed the effects of these drug combinations on progression of chronic kidney disease.

METHODS

ACCOMPLISH was a double-blind, randomised trial undertaken in five countries (USA, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland). 11 506 patients with hypertension who were at high risk for cardiovascular events were randomly assigned via a central, telephone-based interactive voice response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive benazepril (20 mg) plus amlodipine (5 mg; n=5744) or benazepril (20 mg) plus hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg; n=5762), orally once daily. Drug doses were force-titrated for patients to attain recommended blood pressure goals. Progression of chronic kidney disease, a prespecified endpoint, was defined as doubling of serum creatinine concentration or end-stage renal disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m(2) or need for dialysis). Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00170950.

FINDINGS

The trial was terminated early (mean follow-up 2.9 years [SD 0.4]) because of superior efficacy of benazepril plus amlodipine compared with benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide. At trial completion, vital status was not known for 143 (1%) patients who were lost to follow-up (benazepril plus amlodipine, n=70; benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide, n=73). All randomised patients were included in the ITT analysis. There were 113 (2.0%) events of chronic kidney disease progression in the benazepril plus amlodipine group compared with 215 (3.7%) in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group (HR 0.52, 0.41-0.65, p<0.0001). The most frequent adverse event in patients with chronic kidney disease was peripheral oedema (benazepril plus amlodipine, 189 of 561, 33.7%; benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide, 85 of 532, 16.0%). In patients with chronic kidney disease, angio-oedema was more frequent in the benazepril plus amlodipine group than in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group. In patients without chronic kidney disease, dizziness, hypokalaemia, and hypotension were more frequent in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group than in the benazepril plus amlodipine group.

INTERPRETATION

Initial antihypertensive treatment with benazepril plus amlodipine should be considered in preference to benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide since it slows progression of nephropathy to a greater extent.

FUNDING

Novartis.