Association of serum galectin-3 levels with mortality and cardiovascular disease outcomes in hemodialysis patients: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Galectin-3 has been proposed as a candidate marker for cardiovascular risk stratification, although its role in kidney failure is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the association of serum galectin-3 levels with overall survival and cardiovascular outcomes among hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL were systematically searched from inception till Aug 20, 2023. Observational studies evaluating the association of serum galectin-3 with mortality, cardiovascular disease and arterial stiffness in hemodialysis patients were included. The exposure-response relationship between galectin-3 and mortality was explored by dose-response meta-analysis using restricted cubic splines in a one-stage approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 13 studies were included (9 cohort and 4 cross-sectional), comprising 6025 hemodialysis individuals. Increasing galectin-3 values were associated with greater all-cause mortality risk (χ2: 18.71, p-value < 0.001) and an insignificant trend toward higher cardiovascular mortality risk (χ2: 5.06, p-value: 0.079). Compared to a reference galectin-3 value of 10 ng/ml, all-cause mortality risk was significantly higher with levels of 20 ng/ml (Hazard ratio-HR: 2.62, 95% confidence intervals-CI: 1.66-4.15), 30 ng/ml (HR: 3.78, 95% CI: 2.05-6.97) and 40 ng/ml (HR: 4.01, 95% CI: 2.14-7.52). Qualitative synthesis of evidence indicated that serum galectin-3 may be linked to abdominal aortic calcification severity and progression, as well as to left ventricular systolic and diastolic dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that high serum galectin-3 levels are associated with greater all-cause mortality risk among patients on maintenance hemodialysis. Preliminary cross-sectional evidence indicates that serum galectin-3 may be associated with arterial stiffness and left ventricular dysfunction.

β-blocker dialyzability and the risk of mortality and cardiovascular events in patients undergoing hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

β-blocker (BB) dialyzability has been proposed to limit their efficacy among hemodialysis (HD) patients. We attempted to confirm this hypothesis by comparing health outcomes associated with the initiation of dialyzable or nondialyzable BBs in a nationwide cohort of HD patients.

METHODS

We created a prospective cohort study of 15 699 HD patients who initiated dialyzable BBs (atenolol, acebutolol, metoprolol and bisoprolol) and 20 904 hemodialysis patients who initiated nondialyzable BBs (betaxolol, carvedilol and propranolol) between 2004 and 2011 in Taiwan healthcare. We compared the risk of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs, a composite of the acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke and heart failure) between users of dialyzable versus nondialyzable BBs during a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

New users of dialyzable BBs were younger, more often men, with diabetes mellitus, hypertension and hyperlipidemia compared with users of nondialyzable BBs. Compared with nondialyzable BBs, initiation of dialyzable BBs was associated with lower all-cause mortality {hazard ratio [HR] 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.88]} and lower risk of MACEs [HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.93)]. Results were confirmed in subgroup analyses, censoring at BB discontinuation or switch, after 1:1 propensity score matching, reclassifying bisoprolol or excluding bisoprolol/carvedilol users.

CONCLUSIONS

This study does not offer support for the hypothesis that the dialyzability of BBs reduces their efficacy in HD patients.

Comparative effectiveness of bisoprolol and carvedilol among patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis

Background

Despite widespread use, there is no trial evidence to inform β-blocker's (BB) relative safety and efficacy among patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). We herein compare health outcomes associated with carvedilol or bisoprolol use, the most commonly prescribed BBs in these patients.

Methods

We created a cohort study of 9305 HD patients who initiated bisoprolol and 11 171 HD patients who initiated carvedilol treatment between 2004 and 2011. We compared the risk of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) between carvedilol and bisoprolol users during a 2-year follow-up.

Results

Bisoprolol initiators were younger, had shorter dialysis vintage, were women, had common comorbidities of hypertension and hyperlipidemia and were receiving statins and antiplatelets, but they had less heart failure and digoxin prescriptions than carvedilol initiators. During our observations, 1555 deaths and 5167 MACEs were recorded. In the multivariable-adjusted Cox model, bisoprolol initiation was associated with a lower all-cause mortality {hazard ratio [HR] 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.73]} compared with carvedilol initiation. After accounting for the competing risk of death, bisoprolol use (versus carvedilol) was associated with a lower risk of MACEs [HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.91)] and attributed to a lower risk of heart failure [HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.77-0.91)] and ischemic stroke [HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.72-0.97)], but not to differences in the risk of acute myocardial infarction [HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.93-1.15)]. Results were confirmed in propensity score matching analyses, stratified analyses and analyses that considered prescribed dosages or censored patients discontinuing or switching BBs.

Conclusions

Relative to carvedilol, bisoprolol initiation by HD patients was associated with a lower 2-year risk of death and MACEs, mainly attributed to lower heart failure and ischemic stroke risk.

High-sensitivity Troponin T in hemodialysis patients: a randomized placebo-controlled sub-study investigating angiotensin-II-blockade, variation over time and associations with clinical outcome

Background

Troponin T (TnT) is a well-known risk factor for negative outcome in hemodialysis (HD) patients, but little is known about variation over time, and the impact of clinical and dialysis specific factors. This study investigated the effect of angiotensin II receptor blockade (ARB), short and long-term variation in TnT and associations with clinical parameters.

Methods

In this analysis based on the SAFIR-cohort (Clinical Trials ID: NCT00791830) 81 HD patients were randomized double-blind for placebo (n = 40) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) treatment (n = 41) with irbesartan (150–300 mg) and followed for 12 months with six serial measurements of TnT using a high-sensitivity assay.

Results

Fifty-four patients (67%) completed follow-up. Baseline TnT-medians (min-max) were (placebo/ARB): 45(14–295)/46(10–343) ng/L. ARB-treatment did not significantly affect mean TnT-levels over the 12-month study period. Median week-to-week and one-year TnT-variation (5th–95th-percentile range) using all samples regardless of intervention were: 0(− 14–10) ng/L (week-to-week) and 3(− 40–71) ng/L (12 months). Median TnT-amplitude, capturing the change from the lowest to the highest TnT-value observed during the one-year study period was 38% or 20.5 ng/L. Median ratios with 95% limits of agreement were: 1.00(0.73–1.37); P = 0.92 (1 week/baseline; n = 77) and 1.07(0.52–2.25); P = 0.19 (12 months/baseline; n = 54). Baseline TnT was positively correlated with diabetes, ultrafiltration volume, arterial stiffness, change in intradialytic total peripheral resistance and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and negatively correlated with hematocrit, residual renal function and change in intradialytic cardiac output. High baseline TnT was associated with a higher risk of admission and cardiovascular (CV) events during follow-up. Increase in TnT over time (ΔTnT = 12-months-baseline) was significantly associated with increase in left ventricular (LV) mass and NT-proBNP and decrease in LV ejection fraction and late intradialytic stroke volume. ΔTnT was not significantly associated with admissions, CV or intradialytic hypotensive events during follow-up. Admissions were significantly more likely with a high (TnT-amplitude> 20.5 ng/L) than a low TnT-amplitude. Peaks in TnT were less frequent in aspirin-treated patients.

Conclusion

ARB-treatment had no significant effect on TnT-levels. Week-to-week variation was generally low, yet over 12 months individual patients had considerable TnT fluctuations. Rise in TnT over time was significantly correlated with markers of cardiac deterioration.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00791830. Date of registration: November 17, 2008. EudraCT no: 2008–001267-11.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12882-020-02103-1.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and 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

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I² = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I² = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I² = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I² = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

β-Adrenoceptor activation affects galectin-3 as a biomarker and therapeutic target in heart disease

Myocardial fibrosis is a key histopathological component that drives the progression of heart disease leading to heart failure and constitutes a therapeutic target. Recent preclinical and clinical studies have implicated galectin-3 (Gal-3) as a pro-fibrotic molecule and a biomarker of heart disease and fibrosis. However, our knowledge is poor on the mechanism(s) that determine the blood level or regulate cardiac expression of Gal-3. Recent studies have demonstrated that enhanced β-adrenoceptor activity is a determinant of both circulating concentration and cardiac expression of Gal-3. Pharmacological or transgenic activation of β-adrenoceptors leads to increased blood levels of Gal-3 and up-regulated cardiac Gal-3 expression, effect that can be reversed with the use of β-adrenoceptor antagonists. Conversely, Gal-3 gene deletion confers protection against isoprenaline-induced cardiotoxicity and fibrogenesis. At the transcription level, β-adrenoceptor stimulation activates cardiac mammalian sterile-20-like kinase 1, a pivotal kinase of the Hippo signalling pathway, which is associated with Gal-3 up-regulation. Recent studies have suggested a role for the β-adrenoceptor-Hippo signalling pathway in the regulation of cardiac Gal-3 expression thereby contributing to the onset and progression of heart disease. This implies a therapeutic potential of the suppression of Gal-3 expression. In this review, we discuss the effects of β-adrenoceptor activity on Gal-3 as a biomarker and causative mediator in the setting of heart disease and point out pivotal knowledge gaps. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed section on Adrenoceptors-New Roles for Old Players. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v176.14/issuetoc.