The effect of rosuvastatin on insulin sensitivity and pancreatic beta-cell function in nondiabetic renal transplant recipients

Effects of statin therapy on glycemic control and insulin resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To update the evidence about the diabetogenic effect of statins.

METHODS

We searched for randomized-controlled trials reporting the effects of statin therapy on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and/or homeostatic model insulin resistance (i.e., HOMA-IR) as indexes of diabetes. Studies were classified between the ones testing normal vs individuals with already altered glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%; and HOMA-IR ≥ 2.15). Furthermore, studies were separated by statin type and dosage prescribed. Data are presented as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies were included in the analysis (>25,000 individuals). In individuals with altered glycemic control, statins increased HbA1c levels (MD 0.21%, 95% CI 0.16-to-0.25) and HOMA-IR index (MD 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-to-0.38). In individuals with normal glycemic control, statin increased HbA1c (MD 1.33%, 95% CI 1.31-to-1.35) and HOMA-IR (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-to-0.58) in comparison to the placebo groups. The dose or type of statins did not modulate the diabetogenic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins, slightly but significantly raise indexes of diabetes in individuals with adequate or altered glycemic control. The diabetogenic effect does not seem to be influenced by the type or dosage of statin prescribed.

Comparing Glycaemic Benefits of Active Versus Passive Lifestyle Intervention in Kidney Allograft Recipients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

New-onset diabetes is common after kidney transplantation, but the benefit of lifestyle intervention to improve glucose metabolism posttransplantation is unproven.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, randomized controlled trial involving 130 nondiabetic kidney transplant recipients with stable function between 3 and 24 months post-transplantation. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive active intervention (lifestyle advice delivered by renal dietitians using behavior change techniques) versus passive intervention (leaflet advice alone). Primary outcome was 6-month change in insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity, and disposition index. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes, cardiometabolic parameters, clinical outcomes, and safety endpoints.

RESULTS

Between August 17, 2015 and December 18, 2017, 130 individuals were recruited, of whom 103 completed the study (drop-out rate 20.8%). Active versus passive intervention was not associated with any change in glucose metabolism: insulin secretion (mean difference, -446; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3184 to 2292; P = 0.748), insulin sensitivity (mean difference, -0.45; 95% CI, -1.34 to 0.44; P = 0.319), or disposition index (mean difference, -940; 95% CI, -5655 to 3775; P = 0.693). Clinically, active versus passive lifestyle intervention resulted in reduced incidence of posttransplantation diabetes (7.6% versus 15.6%, respectively, P = 0.123), reduction in fat mass (mean difference, -1.537 kg; 95% CI, -2.947 to -0.127; P = 0.033), and improvement in weight (mean difference, -2.47 kg; 95% CI, -4.01 to -0.92; P = 0.002). No serious adverse events were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Active lifestyle intervention led by renal dietitians did not improve surrogate markers of glucose metabolism. Further investigation is warranted to determine if clinical outcomes can be improved using this methodology.

Statin Use Is Prospectively Associated With New-Onset Diabetes After Transplantation in Renal Transplant Recipients

OBJECTIVE

New-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) is frequent and worsens graft and patient outcomes in renal transplant recipients (RTRs). In the general population, statins are diabetogenic. This study investigated whether statins also increase NODAT risk in RTRs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

From a prospective longitudinal study of 606 RTRs (functioning allograft >1 year, single academic center, follow-up: median 9.6 [range, 6.6-10.2] years), 95 patients using statins were age- and sex-matched to RTRs not on statins (all diabetes-free at inclusion).

RESULTS

NODAT incidence was 7.2% (73.3% of these on statins). In Kaplan-Meier (log-rank test, P = 0.017) and Cox regression analyses (HR 3.86 [95% CI 1.21-12.27]; P = 0.022), statins were prospectively associated with incident NODAT, even independent of several relevant confounders including immunosuppressive medication and biomarkers of glucose homeostasis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that statin use is prospectively associated with the development of NODAT in RTRs independent of other recognized risk factors.

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred management for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, it is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown. This is an update of a review first published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new onset diabetes in people who have undergone kidney transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 16 January 2020 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 Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (21 records, 603 randomised participants) were included - three additional studies (five records) since our last review. Four studies compared more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy; two studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; one study compared DPP-4 inhibitors to insulin glargine; one study compared sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; and two studies compared glitazones and insulin to insulin therapy alone. The majority of studies had an unclear to a high risk of bias. There were no studies examining the effects of biguanides, glinides, GLP-1 agonists, or sulphonylureas. Compared to less intensive insulin therapy, it is unclear if more intensive insulin therapy has an effect on transplant or graft survival (4 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.94; I2 = 49%; very low certainty evidence), delayed graft function (2 studies, 153 participants: RR 0.63, 0.42 to 0.93; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), HbA1c (1 study, 16 participants; very low certainty evidence), fasting blood glucose (1 study, 24 participants; very low certainty evidence), kidney function markers (1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty evidence), death (any cause) (3 studies, 208 participants" RR 0.68, 0.29 to 1.58; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), hypoglycaemia (4 studies, 301 participants; very low certainty evidence) and medication discontinuation due to adverse effects (1 study, 60 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is unclear whether DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on hypoglycaemia and medication discontinuation (2 studies, 51 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c and fasting blood glucose but not kidney function markers (1 study, 32 participants; low certainty evidence). Compared to insulin glargine, it is unclear if DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, hypoglycaemia or discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 45 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not affect kidney graft survival (1 study, 44 participants; moderate certainty evidence), but may reduce HbA1c without affecting fasting blood glucose and eGFR long-term (1 study, 44 participants, low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not increase hypoglycaemia, and probably have little or no effect on medication discontinuation due to adverse events. However, all participants discontinuing SGLT2 inhibitors had urinary tract infections (1 study, 44 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Compared to insulin therapy alone, it is unclear if glitazones added to insulin have an effect on HbA1c or kidney function markers (1 study, 62 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, glitazones may make little or no difference to fasting blood glucose (2 studies, 120 participants; low certainty evidence), and medication discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 62 participants; low certainty evidence). No studies of DPP-4 inhibitors, or glitazones reported effects on transplant or graft survival, delayed graft function or death (any cause).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in the treatment of pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is questionable. Evidence from existing studies examining the effect of intensive insulin therapy, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT inhibitors and glitazones is mostly of low to very low certainty. Appropriately blinded, larger, and higher quality RCTs are needed to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of contemporary glucose-lowering agents in the kidney transplant population.

Management of dyslipidaemia in patients with chronic kidney disease: a position paper endorsed by the Italian Society of Nephrology

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a major public health issue worldwide and entails a high burden of cardiovascular events and mortality. Dyslipidaemia is common in patients with CKD and it is characterized by a highly atherogenic profile with relatively low levels of HDL-cholesterol and high levels of triglyceride and oxidized LDL-cholesterol. Overall, current literature indicates that lowering LDL-cholesterol is beneficial for preventing major atherosclerotic events in patients with CKD and in kidney transplant recipients while the evidence is less clear in patients on dialysis. Lipid lowering treatment is recommended in all patients with stage 3 CKD or worse, independently of baseline LDL-cholesterol levels. Statin and ezetimibe are the cornerstones in the management of dyslipidaemia in patients with CKD, however alternative and emerging lipid-lowering therapies may acquire a central role in near future. This position paper endorsed by the Italian Society of Nephrology aims at providing useful information on the topic of dyslipidaemia in CKD and at assisting decision making in the management of these patients.

Management of dyslipidemia in adult solid organ transplant recipients

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) has revolutionized treatment of end-stage disease. Improvements in the SOT continuum of care have unmasked a significant burden of cardiovascular disease, manifesting as a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Although several risk factors for development of post-transplant cardiovascular disease exist, dyslipidemia remains one of the most frequent and modifiable risks. An important contributor to dyslipidemia in SOT recipients is the off-target metabolic effects of immunosuppressive medications, which may alter lipoproteins and their metabolism. Dyslipidemia management is paramount as lipid-lowering therapy with statins has demonstrated reductions in graft vasculopathy, decreased rejection rates, and improved survival. Several nonstatin medication options are available, but data supporting their benefit in the SOT population are minimal, typically extrapolated from studies in the general population. Further compounding dyslipidemia management is the complex interplay of drug interactions between lipid-lowering and immunosuppressant medications, which can result in serious toxicity and/or therapeutic failure.

Plasma HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides, but not LDL-cholesterol, are associated with insulin secretion in non-diabetic subjects

OBJECTIVE

Experimental data support the notion that lipoproteins might directly affect beta cell function, however clinical data are sparse and inconsistent. We aimed at verifying whether, independently of major confounders, serum lipids are associated with alterations in insulin secretion or clearance non-diabetic subjects.

METHODS

Cross sectional and observational prospective (3.5yrs), multicentre study in which 1016 non-diabetic volunteers aged 30-60yrs. and with a wide range of BMI (20.0-39.9kg/m²) were recruited in a setting of University hospital ambulatory care (RISC study).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

baseline fasting lipids, fasting and OGTT-induced insulin secretion and clearance (measured by glucose and C-peptide modeling), peripheral insulin sensitivity (by the euglycemic clamp). Lipids and OGTT were repeated in 980 subjects after 3.5years.

RESULTS

LDL-cholesterol did not show independent associations with fasting or stimulated insulin secretion or clearance. After accounting for potential confounders, HDL-cholesterol displayed negative and triglycerides positive independent associations with fasting and OGTT insulin secretion; neither with insulin clearance. Low HDL-cholesterol and high triglycerides were associated with an increase in glucose-dependent and a decrease in non-glucose-dependent insulin secretion. Over 3.5years both an HDL-cholesterol decline and a triglycerides rise were associated with an increase in fasting insulin secretion independent of changes in body weight or plasma glucose.

CONCLUSIONS

LDL-cholesterol does not seem to influence any major determinant of insulin bioavailability while low HDL-cholesterol and high triglycerides might contribute to sustain the abnormalities in insulin secretion that characterize the pre-diabetic state.

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred form of kidney replacement therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. Management of hyperglycaemia is important to reduce post-transplant and diabetes-related complications. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in patients who have undergone kidney transplantation and have diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 April 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies that involved a total of 399 kidney transplant recipients. All included studies had observed heterogeneity in the patient population, interventions and measured outcomes or missing data (which was unavailable despite correspondence with authors). Many studies had incompletely reported methodology preventing meta-analysis and leading to low confidence in treatment estimates.Three studies with 241 kidney transplant recipients examined the use of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy in kidney transplant recipients with pre-existing type 1 or 2 diabetes. Evidence for the effects of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on transplant graft survival, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, all cause mortality and adverse effects including hypoglycaemia was of very low quality. More intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in no difference in transplant or graft survival over three to five years in one study while another study showed that more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in more rejection events over the three year follow-up (11 events in total; 9 in the more intensive group, P = 0.01). One study showed that more intensive insulin therapy resulted in a lower mean HbA1c (10 ± 0.8% versus 13 ± 0.9%) and lower fasting blood glucose (7.22 ± 0.5 mmol/L versus 13.44 ± 1.22 mmol/L) at 13 months compared with standard insulin therapy. Another study showed no difference between more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on all-cause mortality over a five year follow-up period. All studies showed either an increased frequency of hypoglycaemia or severe hypoglycaemia episodes.Three studies with a total of 115 transplant recipients examined the use of DPP4 inhibitors for new-onset diabetes after transplantation. Evidence for the treatment effect of DPP4 inhibitors on transplant or graft survival, HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels, all cause mortality, and adverse events including hypoglycaemia was of low quality. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo and another comparing sitagliptin to placebo showed no difference in transplant or graft survival over two to four months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed no significant change in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline (1.9 ± 10.3 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.48 and 2.1 ± 6.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.22) and no deaths, in either treatment group over three months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (6.3 ± 0.5% versus versus 6.7 ± 0.6%, P = 0.03) and trend towards a greater lowering of fasting blood glucose (-0.91 ± -0.92 mmol/L versus vs -0.19 ± 1.16 mmol/L, P = 0.08) with vildagliptin. One study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine showed an equivalent lowering of HbA1c (-0.6 ± 0.5% versus -0.6 ± 0.6%, P = NS) and fasting blood glucose (4.92 ± 1.42 versus 4.76 ± 1.09 mmol/L, P = NS) with sitagliptin. For the outcome of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing vildagliptin to placebo reported no episodes of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine reported fewer episodes of hypoglycaemia with sitagliptin (3/28 patients; 10.7% versus 5/28; 17.9%) and one cross-over study of sitagliptin and placebo reported two episodes of asymptomatic moderate hypoglycaemia (2 to 3.9 mmol/L) when sitagliptin was administered with glipizide. All three studies reported no drug interactions between DPP4 inhibitors and the immunosuppressive agents taken.Evidence for the treatment effect of pioglitazone for treating pre-existing diabetes was of low quality. One study with 62 transplant recipients compared the use of pioglitazone with insulin to insulin alone for treating pre-existing diabetes. Pioglitazone resulted in a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (-1.21 ± 1.2 versus 0.39 ± 1%, P < 0.001) but had no effects on fasting blood glucose (6.58 ± 2.71 versus 7.28 ± 2.78 mmol/L, P = 0.14 ), and change in creatinine (3.54 ± 15.03 versus 10.61 ± 18.56 mmol/L, P = 0.53) and minimal adverse effects (no episodes of hypoglycaemia, three dropped out due to mild to moderate lower extremity oedema, cyclosporin levels were not affected).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is limited. Existing studies examine more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy, and the use of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone. The safety and efficacy of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy is very uncertain and the safety and efficacy of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone is uncertain, due to data being limited and of poor quality. Additional RCTs are required to clarify the safety and efficacy of current glucose-lowering agents for kidney transplant recipients with diabetes.

Comparing glycaemic benefits of Active Versus passive lifestyle Intervention in kidney Allograft Recipients (CAVIAR): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Lifestyle modification is widely recommended to kidney allograft recipients post transplantation due to the cardiometabolic risks associated with immunosuppression including new-onset diabetes, weight gain and cardiovascular events. However, we have no actual evidence that undertaking lifestyle modification protects from any adverse outcomes post transplantation. The aim of this study is to compare whether a more proactive versus passive interventional approach to modify lifestyle is associated with superior outcomes post kidney transplantation.

Methods/design

We designed this prospective, single-centre, open-label, randomised controlled study to compare the efficacy of active versus passive lifestyle intervention for kidney allograft recipients early post transplantation. A total of 130 eligible patients, who are stable, nondiabetic and between 3 and 24 months post kidney transplantation, will be recruited. Randomisation is being undertaken by random block permutations into passive (n = 65, leaflet guidance only) versus active lifestyle modification (n = 65, supervised intervention) over a 6-month period. Supervised intervention is being facilitated by two dietitians during the 6-month intervention period to provide continuous lifestyle intervention guidance, support and encouragement. Both dietitians are accredited with behavioural intervention skills and will utilise motivational aids to support study recruits randomised to active intervention. The primary outcome is change in abnormal glucose metabolism parameters after 6 months of comparing active versus passive lifestyle intervention. Secondary outcomes include changes in a wide array of cardiometabolic parameters, kidney allograft function and patient-reported outcome measures. Long-term tracking of patients via data linkage to electronic patient records and national registries will facilitate long-term comparison of outcomes after active versus passive lifestyle intervention beyond the 6-month intervention period.

Discussion

This is the first randomised controlled study to investigate the benefits of active versus passive lifestyle intervention in kidney allograft recipients for the prevention of abnormal cardiometabolic outcomes. In addition, this is the first example of utilising behaviour therapy intervention post kidney transplantation to achieve clinically beneficial outcomes, which has potential implications on many spheres of post-transplant care.

Trial registration

This study was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry on 27 August 2014 (ClinicalTrials.org Identifier: NCT02233491).

Post-transplantation diabetes-state of the art

With increasing success in overcoming the immunological and infectious challenges accompanying solid organ transplantation, susceptibility to post-transplant diabetes and cardiovascular disease has assumed increasing importance. Although some guidance is available from diabetes-related literature pertaining to the general population, some aspects are unique to solid organ allograft recipients. Both insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction are generally agreed to contribute to development and manifestation of post-transplant diabetes, but controversy continues about which is most important and to what extent post-transplant diabetes is a distinct entity or simply a variant of type 2 diabetes with transplant-specific components. The optimum method and timing for detection and diagnosis of post-transplant diabetes remains an area of uncertainty. However, the greatest needs are to: address the absence of contemporary data for incidence and clinical outcomes associated with post-transplant diabetes; establish the role of glycaemic control; and assess the role of new diabetic therapies in prevention and management of post-transplant diabetes. We place the present knowledge base in the context of other advances in transplantation, challenge some existing ideas, and examine the potential role of emerging diabetes therapies. In highlighting existing deficiencies, we hope to provide direction for future research that will ultimately reduce incidence and improve management of post-transplant diabetes.

New-onset diabetes mellitus after kidney transplantation: Current status and future directions

A diagnosis of new-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) carries with it a threat to the renal allograft, as well as the same short- and long-term implications of type 2 diabetes seen in the general population. NODAT usually occurs early after transplantation, and is usually diagnosed according to general population guidelines. Non-modifiable risk factors for NODAT include advancing age, African American, Hispanic, or South Asian ethnicity, genetic background, a positive family history for diabetes mellitus, polycystic kidney disease, and previously diagnosed glucose intolerance. Modifiable risk factors for NODAT include obesity and the metabolic syndrome, hepatitis C virus and cytomegalovirus infection, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitor drugs (especially tacrolimus), and sirolimus. NODAT affects graft and patient survival, and increases the incidence of post-transplant cardiovascular disease. The incidence and impact of NODAT can be minimized through pre- and post-transplant screening to identify patients at higher risk, including by oral glucose tolerance tests, as well as multi-disciplinary care, lifestyle modification, and the use of modified immunosuppressive regimens coupled with glucose-lowering therapies including oral hypoglycemic agents and insulin. Since NODAT is a major cause of post-transplant morbidity and mortality, measures to reduce its incidence and impact have the potential to greatly improve overall transplant success.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have higher risks of cardiovascular disease compared to the general population. Specifically, cardiovascular deaths account most deaths in kidney transplant recipients. Statins are a potentially beneficial intervention for kidney transplant patients given their established benefits in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease in the general population. This is an update of a review first published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the benefits (reductions in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction and stroke, and progression of CKD to requiring dialysis) and harms (muscle or liver dysfunction, withdrawal, cancer) of statins compared to placebo, no treatment, standard care, or another statin in adults with CKD who have a functioning kidney transplant.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 29 February 2012 through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, standard care, or statins on mortality, cardiovascular events, kidney function and toxicity in kidney transplant recipients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Treatment effects were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes (lipids, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), proteinuria) and relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (major cardiovascular events, mortality, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal or non-fatal stroke, elevated muscle or liver enzymes, withdrawal due to adverse events, cancer, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), acute allograft rejection) together with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 22 studies (3465 participants); 17 studies (3282 participants) compared statin with placebo or no treatment, and five studies (183 participants) compared two different statin regimens.From data generally derived from a single high-quality study, it was found that statins may reduce major cardiovascular events (1 study, 2102 participants: RR 0.84, CI 0.66 to 1.06), cardiovascular mortality (4 studies, 2322 participants: RR 0.68, CI 0.45 to 1.01), and fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (1 study, 2102 participants: RR 0.70, CI 0.48 to 1.01); although effect estimates lack precision and include the possibility of no effect.Statins had uncertain effects on all-cause mortality (6 studies, 2760 participants: RR 1.08, CI 0.63 to 1.83); fatal or non-fatal stroke (1 study, 2102 participants: RR 1.18, CI 0.85 to 1.63); creatine kinase elevation (3 studies, 2233 participants: RR 0.86, CI 0.39 to 1.89); liver enzyme elevation (4 studies, 608 participants: RR 0.62, CI 0.33 to 1.19); withdrawal due to adverse events (9 studies, 2810 participants: RR 0.89, CI 0.74 to 1.06); and cancer (1 study, 2094 participants: RR 0.94, CI 0.82 to 1.07).Statins significantly reduced serum total cholesterol (12 studies, 3070 participants: MD -42.43 mg/dL, CI -51.22 to -33.65); low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (11 studies, 3004 participants: MD -43.19 mg/dL, CI -52.59 to -33.78); serum triglycerides (11 studies, 3012 participants: MD -27.28 mg/dL, CI -34.29 to -20.27); and lowered high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (11 studies, 3005 participants: MD -5.69 mg/dL, CI -10.35 to -1.03).Statins had uncertain effects on kidney function: ESKD (6 studies, 2740 participants: RR 1.14, CI 0.94 to 1.37); proteinuria (2 studies, 136 participants: MD -0.04 g/24 h, CI -0.17 to 0.25); acute allograft rejection (4 studies, 582 participants: RR 0.88, CI 0.61 to 1.28); and GFR (1 study, 62 participants: MD -1.00 mL/min, CI -9.96 to 7.96).Due to heterogeneity in comparisons, data directly comparing differing statin regimens could not be meta-analysed. Evidence for statins in people who have had a kidney transplant were sparse and lower quality due to imprecise effect estimates and provided limited systematic evaluation of treatment harm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins may reduce cardiovascular events in kidney transplant recipients, although treatment effects are imprecise. Statin treatment has uncertain effects on overall mortality, stroke, kidney function, and toxicity outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. Additional studies would improve our confidence in the treatment benefits and harms of statins on cardiovascular events in this clinical setting.

Benefits and harms of statin therapy for persons with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Statins have uncertain benefits in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) because individual trials may have insufficient power to determine whether treatment effects differ with severity of CKD.

PURPOSE

To summarize the benefits and harms of statin therapy for adults with CKD and examine whether effects of statins vary by stage of kidney disease.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane and EMBASE databases (inception to February 2012).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials comparing the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, or another statin on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eighty trials comprising 51099 participants compared statin with placebo or no treatment. Treatment effects varied with stage of CKD. Moderate- to high-quality evidence indicated that statins reduced all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74 to 0.88]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.78 [CI, 0.68 to 0.89]), and cardiovascular events (RR, 0.76 [CI, 0.73 to 0.80]) in persons not receiving dialysis. Moderate- to high-quality evidence indicated that statins had little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR, 0.96 [CI, 0.88 to 1.04]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.94 [CI, 0.82 to 1.07]), or cardiovascular events (RR, 0.95 [CI, 0.87 to 1.03]) in persons receiving dialysis. Effects of statins in kidney transplant recipients were uncertain. Statins had little or no effect on cancer, myalgia, liver function, or withdrawal from treatment, although adverse events were evaluated systematically in fewer than half of the trials.

LIMITATION

There was a reliance on post hoc subgroup data for earlier stages of CKD.

CONCLUSION

Statins decrease mortality and cardiovascular events in persons with early stages of CKD, have little or no effect in persons receiving dialysis, and have uncertain effects in kidney transplant recipients.

Impending hyperglycemia in normoglycemic renal transplant recipients--an experimental predictive surrogate

BACKGROUND

beta-Cell dysfunction and insulin resistance combine to cause new-onset diabetes after transplantation. The product of these two parameters, quantitatively measured as disposition index (DI), is a mathematical constant in normoglycemia and declines in advance of impending hyperglycemia. The aim of this study was to derive a simple surrogate for the DI to expose predysglycemic abnormalities posttransplantation.

METHODS

First-phase insulin secretion and sensitivity were determined by mathematical minimal model analysis of 58 frequently sampled, intravenous glucose tolerance tests in 58 non-diabetic renal transplant recipients and correlated against surrogate indexes based on fasting blood samples. Products of insulin secretion/resistance indexes were correlated against calculated DI, regression analysis performed for hyperbolic compatibility, autocorrelation studies conducted, and surrogates tested in various subgroups of renal transplant recipients to ensure robustness in a heterogeneous group.

RESULTS

The best correlation was achieved with "HOMA(sec) (first-phase insulin secretion)xMcAuley's index (insulin resistance)" (r=0.594, P<0.001). Regression analysis was consistent with a mathematical hyperbola (ln HOMA(sec) vs. ln McAuley's index, r=-0.639 [95% confidence interval, -1.772 to -0.950]), statistical autocorrelation was excluded (in a subset of 20 patients with repeat metabolic investigations), and the surrogate remained valid in different subgroups of transplant recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our surrogate "HOMA(sec)xMcAuley's index," requiring only fasting glucose, insulin, and triglycerides, is a simple and noninvasive surrogate for the DI. Its predictive utility for identifying impending hyperglycemia posttransplantation should be investigated further to ascertain whether its experimental nature can translate to clinical validity.

Risk factors for new-onset diabetes after kidney transplantation

New-onset diabetes after transplantation, a common complication following kidney transplantation, is associated with adverse patient and graft outcomes. Our understanding of the risk factors associated with this metabolic disorder is improving and both transplantation-specific and nonspecific factors are clearly involved. Knowledge of these risk factors is important so that clinicians can implement pre-emptive risk stratification strategies and to guide therapeutic, risk-attenuation approaches in patients who develop transplant-associated hyperglycemia. In this Review, we explore the current understanding of the diverse range of risk factors that contribute to abnormal glucose metabolism after transplantation, with the aim of helping to guide clinical decision-making using appropriate risk stratification.

Insulin resistance indexes in renal transplant recipients maintained on tacrolimus immunosuppression

BACKGROUND

Insulin resistance is common posttransplantation and contributes to both new onset diabetes after transplantation and the metabolic syndrome. Insulin resistance indexes have never been validated in transplant recipients on tacrolimus compared with cyclosporine, although it is more diabetogenic. We aimed to assess these indexes in renal transplant recipients on tacrolimus as primary immunosuppressant.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 76 frequently sampled, intravenous glucose tolerance tests (for insulin sensitivity) in 38 nondiabetic renal transplant recipients on tacrolimus-centered immunosuppression. Indexes tested were fasting glucose/insulin ratio, homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index, 1/HOMA, log (HOMA), quantitative insulin sensitivity check index, and the McAuley's index. Indexes were also compared against waist/hip ratio and C-reactive protein (CRP). Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to determine independent variables predictive for insulin resistance.

RESULTS

Insulin sensitivity successfully correlated with all indexes: fasting glucose/insulin ratio (r=0.246, P=0.033), HOMA index (r=-0.240, P=0.038), 1/HOMA (r=0.282, P=0.014), log (HOMA) (r=-0.316, P=0.006), quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (r=0.320, P=0.005), and McAuley's index (r=0.323, P=0.005). McAuley's index also correlated strongest with waist/hip ratio (r=-0.425, P<0.001). All indexes failed to correlate with CRP. Variables independently associated with insulin sensitivity were HbA1c (r=0.189, P=0.019), pulse pressure (r=0.146, P=0.021), and CRP (r=0.210, P=0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin resistance indexes are valid in transplant recipients taking tacrolimus, with McAuley's index the strongest surrogate.