Anti-proteinuric effects of combination therapy with enalapril and losartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Combination Therapy Use and Associated Events in Clinical Practice Following Dissemination of Trial Findings: A De-Implementation Study Using Interrupted Time Series Analysis

PURPOSE

It takes 17 years, on average, for trial results to be implemented into practice. Using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), this study assessed the potential impact on clinical practice of the dissemination of findings from a randomized, controlled trial reporting harm with the use of combination therapy. Communication between research and VA Pharmacy Benefits Management Services (PBM)  provided the impetus for communication from the PBM about the findings of the trial in accordance with policy.

METHODS

In this de-implementation study, interrupted time series analysis was used for assessing prescribing patterns and adverse clinical events before and after the dissemination of the trial findings. The de-implementation strategy was multicomponent and multilevel. Strategies were aligned with categories outlined in the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change: train and educate stakeholders, use evaluative and iterative strategies, develop stakeholder inter-relationships, change infrastructure, provide interactive assistance, and engage consumers. VA patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease stages 1 to 3, and a moderate or severe albuminuria who received care between July 2008 and November 2017 were included. Patients were subgrouped according to treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor + angiotensin receptor blocker. The primary end point was the prevalence of combination therapy use. Secondary end points were the incidences of acute kidney injury and hyperkalemia.

FINDINGS

This study followed 712,245 patients, 9297 of whom used combination therapy. Data were available from 428,535 and 283,710 patients pre- and post-intervention, respectively; among these, 8324 and 973 patients used combination therapy, the median ages were 66 and 68 years, and 96.92% and 98.82% were men. One month following communication from the PBM, the reductions in combination therapy users, acute kidney injury events, and hyperkalemia were 331.94 (95% CI, 500.27-163.32), 36.58% (95% CI, 31.90%-41.95%), and 25.49% (95% CI, 14.17%-36.07%) per 100,000 patients per month, respectively (all, P < 0.001), whereas before the communication, these changes were +14.84 (95% CI, 10.27-19.42), -3.46% (95% CI, 3.18-3.74), and -3.27% (95% CI, 2.66%-3.87%) (all, P < 0.001).

IMPLICATIONS

The apparent speed and impact of the implementation of changes resulting from the dissemination of trial findings into VA clinical practice are encouraging. The speed of implementation was much faster than average for health care providers in the United States. Established communications between research and clinical practice, as well as established policy and communications between PBM and clinical practice, may be a model for other health care organizations.

Nephrotic Syndrome and Renin-angiotensin System: Pathophysiological Role and Therapeutic Potential

Idiopathic Nephrotic Syndrome (INS) is the most frequent etiology of glomerulopathy in pediatric patients and one of the most common causes of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in this population. In this review, we aimed to summarize evidence on the pathophysiological role and therapeutic potential of the Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS) molecules for the control of proteinuria and for delaying the onset of CKD in patients with INS. This is a narrative review in which the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Sci- ELO were searched for articles about INS and RAS. We selected articles that evaluated the pathophysiological role of RAS and the effects of the alternative RAS axis as a potential therapy for INS. Several studies using rodent models of nephropathies showed that the treatment with activators of the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) and with Mas receptor agonists reduces proteinuria and improves kidney tissue damage. Another recent paper showed that the reduction of urinary ACE2 levels in children with INS correlates with proteinuria and higher concentrations of inflammatory cytokines, although data with pediatric patients are still limited. The molecules of the alternative RAS axis comprise a wide spectrum, not yet fully explored, of potential pharmacological targets for kidney diseases. The effects of ACE2 activators and receptor Mas agonists show promising results that can be useful for nephropathies including INS.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Combined Treatment With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers: A Review of the Current Evidence

Several studies have shown that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers are useful in the treatment of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, chronic heart failure, and some types of nephropathy. In this context, dual renin-angiotensin system blockade with both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers may be more effective than treatment with each agent alone. Many clinical trials have demonstrated the beneficial effect of this combined treatment on proteinuria, hypertension, heart failure, and cardiovascular events. Moreover, these studies demonstrated that dual renin-angiotensin system blockade is generally safe and well tolerated. Long-term studies are under way to confirm these effects and also investigate the effectiveness of dual reninangiotensin system blockade on cerebrovascular disease and prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus. These studies are expected to define the optimal use of combination treatment in everyday clinical practice. This review considers the most important clinical trials that evaluated the effect of dual renin-angiotensin system blockade on blood pressure, heart failure, and renal function.

Comparative clinical evaluation of Boerhavia diffusa root extract with standard Enalapril treatment in Canine chronic renal failure

BACKGROUND

Complementing herbal drugs with conservative modern treatment could improve renal condition in canine chronic renal failure (CRF).

OBJECTIVE

In this study, clinical evaluation of Boerhavia diffusa root extract was carried out in CRF in dogs in comparison with standard enalapril.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 20 dogs of mixed breeds suffering from CRF from 1 to 2 months were divided into two groups (n = 10) and treated as follows: Group I - Enalapril at 0.5 mg/kg p.o. once daily for 90 days + amoxicillin and cloxacillin at 25 mg/kg i.m. once daily for 1-week; Group II - B. diffusa root extract at 500 mg p.o per dog daily for 90 days. Both groups were maintained on a supportive fluid therapy. The data were analyzed using paired t-test and one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett's post-hoc test.

RESULTS

CRF caused a significant (P < 0.05) increase in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, serum creatinine, urea nitrogen, sodium, potassium, phosphorus, urinary protein, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and glutamyl transferase (GGT). A significant (P < 0.05) decrease in hemoglobin and total erythrocyte count (TEC) was also observed. Nephrosonography revealed indistinct corticomedullary junction, altered renal architecture, hyper-echoic cortex, medulla, and sunken kidneys. Both the treatments significantly (P < 0.05) reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure by day 30. Serum Creatinine, urea nitrogen, phosphorus, urinary protein, ALP, and GGT showed significant (P < 0.05) reduction by day 60 in both the treatments. However, potassium levels were normalized only by B. diffusa root extract treatment by day 30. Both the treatments failed to show a significant improvement in nephrosonographic picture even after 90 days posttreatment.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the efficacy of B. diffusa root extract was comparable to standard enalapril treatment of CRF in dogs.

Effect of pentoxifylline on microalbuminuria in diabetic patients: a randomized controlled trial

Background. Pentoxifylline is a nonspecific phosphodiesterase inhibitor with anti-inflammatory properties. Human studies have proved its antiproteinuric effect in patients with glomerular diseases, but this study was designed to assess the effects of add-on pentoxifylline to available treatment on reduction of microalbuminuria in diabetic patients without glomerular diseases. Methods. In a double-blind placebo-controlled, randomized study we evaluated the influence of pentoxifylline on microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetic patients. 40 diabetic patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of more than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in eight weeks and microalbuminuria were randomized to two groups which will receive pentoxifylline 1200 mg/day or placebo added to regular medications for 6 months. albuminuria; eGFR was evaluated at three- and six-month follow-up period. Results. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At six months, the mean estimated GFR and albuminuria were not different between two groups at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Trend of albumin to creatinine ratio, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and eGFR in both groups were decreased, but no significant differences were noted between two groups (P value > 0.05). Conclusion. Pentoxifylline has not a significant additive antimicroalbuminuric effect compared with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes with early stage of kidney disease; however, further clinical investigations are necessary to be done.

Meta-analysis: the efficacy and safety of combined treatment with ARB and ACEI on diabetic nephropathy

OBJECTIVE

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) reduce proteinuria in diabetic nephropathy (DN). Some studies have suggested that dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system provides additive benefits in DN but others showed increased adverse events. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy for DN.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and CNKI. All trials involved ACEI + ARB (combination therapy), and ACEI or ARB alone (monotherapy) for DN. The outcomes measured were urinary total proteinuria (UTP), urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER), serum creatinine, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), hyperkalemia, hypotension, and acute kidney injury (AKI).

RESULTS

In the 32 included trials, 2596 patients received combination therapy and 3947 received monotherapy. UTP and UAER were significantly reduced by combined treatment compared with monotherapy. It was notable that low doses of combination therapy reduced UTP more than high doses. Serum creatinine, GFR, and ESRD were not significantly different between the two groups. In severe DN, the occurrence of hyperkalemia and AKI were higher with combination therapy. However, in mild DN, the prevalence of hyperkalemia and AKI were the same in both the groups. In mild DN, the occurrence of hypotension was higher with combination therapy; however, in severe DN, it was not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that combination therapy can be used on DN with proteinuria, but should be used with caution in those with decreased renal function, especially with severe renal failure.

Novel effective drugs for diabetic kidney disease? or not?

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus is increasingly common worldwide and is expected to affect 592 million people by 2035. The kidney is often involved. A key goal in treating diabetes is to reduce the risk of development of kidney disease and, if kidney disease is already present, to delay the progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). This represents a social and ethical issue, as a significant proportion of patients reaching ESRD in developing countries do not have access to renal replacement therapy.

AREAS COVERED

The present review focuses on novel therapeutic approaches for diabetic nephropathy (DN), implemented on the basis of recent insights on its pathophysiology, which might complement the effects of single inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), the cornerstone of renoprotective interventions in diabetes, along with glycemic and blood pressure control.

EXPERT OPINION

Although a plethora of new treatment options has arisen from experimental studies, the number of novel renoprotective molecules successfully implemented in clinical practice over the last two decades is disappointingly low. Thus, new investigational strategies and diagnostic tools - including the appropriate choice of relevant renal end points and the study of urinary proteome of patients - will be as important as new therapeutic interventions to fight DN. Finally, in spite of huge financial interests in replacing the less expensive ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers with newer drugs, any future therapeutic approach has to be tested on top of - rather than instead of - optimal RAAS blockade.

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Therapeutic approaches to slowing the progression of diabetic nephropathy - is less best?

OBJECTIVE

Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are known to reduce proteinuria and have been the first-line agents in the management of diabetic nephropathy for the past 20 years. This review covers recent studies that compare the benefit of additional blockage of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system through combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and ARB, or a direct renin inhibitor (DRI), to monotherapy.

DESIGN

Primary and review articles that addressed the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and therapeutic options for attenuating the progression of diabetic nephropathy were retrieved through a MEDLINE search (January 1990 to December 2012) and the bibliographies of identified articles were reviewed. English language sources were searched using the following search terms: diabetes mellitus, nephropathy, proteinuria, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and DRIs.

SETTING

Randomized, placebo-controlled, short- and long-term studies published in peer-reviewed journals that were determined to be methodologically sound, with appropriate statistical analysis of the results, were selected for inclusion in this review.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult (≥18 years) patients with diabetic nephropathy.

MEASUREMENTS

Serum creatinine level was used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). GFR was calculated using the four-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula. The urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio was measured at baseline and at the conclusion of each study. A value between 3.4 mg/mmol and below 33.9 mg/mmol was defined as microalbuminuria. A value of 33.9 mg/mmol or more (approximately 300 mg/g creatinine) was defined as macroalbuminuria.

RESULTS

ACE inhibitors and ARBs are now the mainstay of treatment for diabetic nephropathy. However, combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and an ARB, or DRI, has not been found to be more effective than monotherapy with an ACE inhibitor or ARB, and may increase the risk of hyperkalemia or acute kidney injury.

CONCLUSION

Both ACE inhibitors and ARBs remain the first-line agents in attenuating the progression of diabetic nephropathy; however, recent studies suggest that combining an ACE inhibitor with an ARB, or combining a DRI with an ACE inhibitor or ARB, may increase adverse events without clinical benefits to offset them.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Fifteen years of losartan: what have we learned about losartan that can benefit chronic kidney disease patients?

Losartan, the first AT1 receptor blocker (ARB), was FDA approved 15 years ago. During those years, researchers and clinicians have developed a growing base of knowledge on the benefits of losartan, particularly for hypertension and renal disease. These benefits include decreasing proteinuria, slowing the progression of diabetic nephropathy, controlling hypertension, and decreasing stroke risk in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Although many of the benefits of losartan represent a class effect for ARBs, losartan has pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics and effects that are unique and are not a class effect. For example, a shorter duration of action is seen with this first ARB compared with other more recently approved ARBs. Losartan also has a uricosuric effect not seen in other ARBs and attenuates platelet aggregation, which is not seen or is seen to a lesser extent with the other ARBs. This review presents the physiological effects of losartan on the kidney and discusses relevant clinical outcomes.

ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and direct renin inhibitors in combination: a review of their role after the ONTARGET trial

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have shown organ-protective effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs); however, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity rates, and decline in renal function remain high. In the ONTARGET trial in patients with hypertension at high cardiovascular risk, ACE inhibitor/ARB combination therapy provided no significant clinical outcome benefits over monotherapy, and was associated with a worse safety and tolerability profile. These results raise the question of whether ACE inhibitor/ARB, direct renin inhibitor (DRI)/ACE inhibitor and DRI/ARB combinations are of clinical value.

SCOPE

Using PubMed and EMBASE databases, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials published before June 2008 evaluating dual intervention with ACE inhibitors and ARBs, and compared these with trials of DRI/ACE inhibitor or DRI/ARB combinations.

FINDINGS

A total of 70 studies met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. In patients with hypertension, ACE inhibitor/ARB combinations provided limited additional reductions in blood pressure (BP) over monotherapy. Outcomes benefits were unclear: VALIANT and ONTARGET demonstrated no enhanced outcome benefit of combination therapy over monotherapy; Val-HeFT and CHARM-Added showed reduced morbidity/mortality in patients with heart failure, but at the expense of poorer tolerability. Combination therapy with the DRI aliskiren and an ACE inhibitor or ARB provided significant additional BP reductions over monotherapy in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, and reduced surrogate markers of organ damage in patients with heart failure or diabetic nephropathy, with generally similar safety and tolerability to the component monotherapies. No morbidity and mortality data for DRI/ACE inhibitor or DRI/ARB combinations are currently available.

CONCLUSIONS

ACE inhibitor/ARB combinations showed equivocal effects on clinical outcomes. DRI/ACE inhibitor and DRI/ARB combinations reduced markers of organ damage, but longer-term trials are required to establish whether more complete renin--angiotensin--aldosterone system control with aliskiren-based therapy translates into improved outcome benefits.

Design of combination angiotensin receptor blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor for treatment of diabetic nephropathy (VA NEPHRON-D)

Both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) can slow the progression of diabetic nephropathy. Even with ACEI or ARB treatment, the proportion of patients who progress to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains high. Interventions that achieve more complete blockade of the renin-angiotensin system, such as combination ACEI and ARB, might be beneficial. This approach may decrease progression of nondiabetic kidney disease. In diabetic nephropathy, combination therapy decreases proteinuria, but its effect in slowing progression is unknown. In addition, the potential for hyperkalemia may limit the utility of combined therapy in this population. VA NEPHRON-D is a randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial to assess the effect of combination losartan and lisinopril, compared with losartan alone, on the progression of kidney disease in 1850 patients with diabetes and overt proteinuria. The primary endpoints are time to (1) reduction in estimated GFR (eGFR) of > 50% (if baseline < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); (2) reduction in eGFR of 30 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (if baseline > or = 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); (3) progression to ESRD (need for dialysis, renal transplant, or eGFR < 15 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); or (4) death. The secondary endpoint is time to change in eGFR or ESRD. Tertiary endpoints are cardiovascular events, slope of change in eGFR, and change in albuminuria at 1 yr. Specific safety endpoints are serious hyperkalemia (potassium > 6 mEq/L, requiring admission, emergency room visit, or dialysis), all-cause mortality, and other serious adverse events. This paper discusses the design and key methodological issues that arose during the planning of the study.

Renal effects of dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in patients with diabetic nephropathy

Evidence from recent studies indicates that in patients with diabetic nephropathy combined therapy with ACE inhibitors (ACEI) and AT1-receptor antagonists (ARB) results in more complete blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS) than monotherapy, and reduces proteinuria. Most of these trials, however, had short follow-up, included a small number of patients, and were heterogeneous, so the opportunity to start this treatment in these patients remains unclear. This review summarizes the results of these studies, describing the renal effects of dual RAS blockade in both type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients.

Effects of monotherapy of temocapril or candesartan with dose increments or combination therapy with both drugs on the suppression of diabetic nephropathy

We examined the effects of increasing the recommended initial doses of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or of switching to combination therapy with both drugs, on diabetic nephropathy. Hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with urinary albumin excretion (ACR) between 100 and 300 mg/g creatinine (Cre) were assigned to the following five groups in which an antihypertensive drug was administered at a recommended initial dose for 48 weeks, and then either the dose was doubled or an additional drugs was added to regimen for the following 48 weeks: N, nifedipine-CR (N) 20 mg/day (initial dose); T, ACEI temocapril (T) 2 mg/day; C, ARB candesartan (C) 4 mg/day; T+C, T first and then addition of C; C+T, C first and then addition of C. ACR decreased in the T (n=34), C (n=40), T+C (n=37) and C+T (n=35) groups, but not in the N group (n=18). However, the anti-proteinuric effect was less in the T than in the C, T+C or C+T groups, while no differences existed among the latter three. In each group, there were significant linear relationships between attained BP and ACR; however, the regression lines were shifted toward lower ACR level in the renin-angiotensin system-inhibition groups compared with the N group. These results indicate that an ACEI and/or ARB is superior to a CCB in retarding diabetic nephropathy, while the combination of low doses of ACEI and ARB has effects similar to those of high-dose ARB. Even among patients treated with an ACEI and/or ARB, lowering BP is important.

Combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker for diabetic nephropathy: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) prevent the progression of diabetic nephropathy (DN). Studies suggest that combination renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS)-inhibiting therapy provides additive benefit in DN. However, these studies are small in size. We performed a meta-analysis of studies investigating combination therapy for DN.

METHODS

Studies were identified through a search of medline, embase, cinahl and the Cochrane Database. All trials involving combined ACEI and ARB for slowing progression of DN were included. The primary end point was 24-h urinary protein excretion. Blood pressure, serum potassium and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were secondary end points.

RESULTS

In the 10 included trials, 156 patients received ACEI + ARB and 159 received ACEI only. Most studies were 8-12 weeks in duration. Proteinuria was reduced with ACEI + ARB (P = 0.01). This was associated with significant statistical heterogeneity (P = 0.005). ACEI + ARB was associated with a reduction in GFR [3.87 ml/min (7.32-0.42); P = 0.03] and a trend towards an increase in serum creatinine (6.86 micromol/l 95% CI -0.76-13.73; P = 0.09). Potassium was increased by 0.2 (0.08-0.32) mmol/l (P < 0.01) with ACEI + ARB. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were reduced by 5.2 (2.1-8.4) mmHg (P < 0.01) and 5.3 (2.2-8.4) mmHg (P < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that ACEI + ARB reduces 24-h proteinuria to a greater extent than ACEI alone. This benefit is associated with small effects on GFR, serum creatinine, potassium and blood pressure. These results should be interpreted cautiously as most of the included studies were of short duration and the few long-term studies (12 months) have not demonstrated benefit.

Managing diabetic nephropathy: recent studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes recent studies designed to identify improved treatments for diabetic nephropathy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent data support the concept that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers have similar renoprotective effects. Aggressive blockade of the renin-angiotensin system appears to have benefits beyond those achieved with conventional doses of single agents. Dual blockade using angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers is effective. Aldosterone receptor antagonists may potentiate the effect of these two classes of compounds. It remains unclear, however, whether maximum benefit can be obtained by the combination of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers or aldosterone receptor antagonists as compared to larger doses of single agents. Not enough data are available currently to recommend thiazolidinedione hypoglycemic agents for renal protection. Trials are being conducted with several new classes of agents.

SUMMARY

Evidence from short-term studies favors aggressive blockade of the renin-angiotensin system. Long-term studies, however, remain to be performed. A multifactorial approach that incorporates established interventions affords our best means to retard the progression of diabetic nephropathy.

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

The goal of this study was to compare the effects of lisinopril, losartan, and their combination on microalbuminuria in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups: group 1 (n=9), group 2 (n=9), and group 3 (n=8) received 10 mg lisinopril, 50 mg losartan, and 10 mg lisinopril plus 50 mg losartan, respectively, each day. For 12 mo, the 24-h urine albumin excretion rate was assessed at 3-mo intervals. At study completion, the urine albumin excretion rate had been reduced significantly in each group (P=.001); however, no significant differences were noted among groups (P=.587). Investigators in the present study have concluded that lisinopril, losartan, and their combination have similar effects on microalbuminuria in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and that combination therapy does not provide additional benefit.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers for prevention and treatment of nephropathy associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Renal complications resulting from type 2 diabetes mellitus are costly and common. Finding optimal therapy is important for the prevention and management of diabetic nephropathy. Research has focused on antihypertensive agents that modify the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Because of their effects on the glomerulus, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have been studied as interventions at various stages of diabetic nephropathy. The ACE inhibitors may delay the progression to microalbuminuria and then clinical albuminuria. The ARBs decrease albuminuria in patients with microalbuminuria and decrease adverse renal events, specifically the progression to end-stage renal disease in patients with clinical albuminuria and hypertension. Limited data suggest that combination therapy with ACE inhibitors and ARBs may slow the progression of microalbuminuria to clinical albuminuria. Because of the variability in degree of albuminuria evaluated and in study designs (numbers of patients, study duration, drug dosages, and outcomes measured), a detailed review of the available literature about ACE inhibitors and ARBs in the prevention or treatment of diabetic nephropathy may provide insight to clinicians.

Additive antiproteinuric effect of pentoxifylline in patients with type 2 diabetes under angiotensin II receptor blockade: a short-term, randomized, controlled trial

Despite the beneficial effects of blockade of the renin-angiotensin system in diabetic nephropathy (DN), albuminuria and progression of renal disease are not completely halted by these agents. Therefore, it is necessary to explore potential antiproteinuric and renoprotective effects of innovative therapeutic approaches. This study tested the hypothesis that the combination of pentoxifylline (PTF) with angiotensin II receptor blockers in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes produces an additive antiproteinuric effect. Sixty-one patients with DN and residual albuminuria despite treatment with the recommended doses of ARB for >1 yr were randomly assigned to receive the addition of 1200 mg of PTF daily (n = 30) or to a control group (n = 31). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, and correlation analysis showed a significant association between urinary albumin excretion (UAE) and urinary TNF-alpha (R = 0.53, P < 0.001). After 4 mo, albuminuria showed a significant decrease in patients who received PTF, from 900 mg/24 h (466 to 1542 mg/d) to 791 mg/24 h (309 to 1400 mg/d; P < 0.001), whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group: 920 mg/24 h (450 to 1489 mg/d) at baseline, and 900 mg/24 h (428 to 1800 mg/d) at the end of the study. The mean percentage variation of UAE in the treatment and control groups was -16.7 and 5.5%, respectively (between-group comparison, P < 0.001). This additive antiproteinuric effect was not dependent on changes in BP or metabolic control. However, both serum and urinary levels of TNF-alpha also decreased in patients who received PTF, from 6.4 pg/ml (2.1 to 9.7) and 16 pg/mg (8 to 29) at baseline to 4.6 pg/ml (0.4 to 9) and 14.2 pg/mg (3 to 26) at the end of the study, respectively (P < 0.01), without significant variations in control patients. Moreover, regression analysis at the end of the study showed a correlation between the change in UAE and the change in urinary TNF-alpha in patients who were treated with PTF (R = 0.49, P < 0.001). In conclusion, administration of PTF to patients who have type 2 diabetes and are under long-term treatment with an ARB produces a significant additive antiproteinuric effect associated with a reduction of urinary TNF-alpha excretion.