[In vitro and in vivo pharmacological profiles of a novel angiotensin type 1-receptor blocker, azilsartan]

Stronger Effect of Azilsartan on Reduction of Proteinuria Compared to Candesartan in Patients with CKD: A Randomized Crossover Trial

INTRODUCTION

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are preferably used in hypertensive patients with CKD. Azilsartan is a strong antihypertensive ARB, but its antiproteinuric effects are not well understood. We compared the antiproteinuric effect of azilsartan and candesartan in CKD patients in an open-label, randomized, crossover trial.

METHODS

A total of 111 patients were treated with 20 mg of azilsartan daily for 2 months as a run-in period. After the run-in period, patients were randomized into 2 arms and received either 20 mg of azilsartan or 8 mg of candesartan daily for 3 months in a crossover trial. The primary outcome was the percent change in urinary protein-to-Cr ratio (UPCR).

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients completed the trial. The mean age was 64.3 years. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and UPCR were 41.5 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 1.8 g/gCr, respectively. The baseline systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 131.4 and 71.0 mm Hg, respectively. The mean percent change in the UPCR was -3.8% in the azilsartan group and 30.8% in the candesartan group at the 1st endpoint (p = 0.0004), and 6.1% in the azilsartan group and 25.8% in the candesartan group at the 2nd (final) endpoint (p = 0.029). The incidence of adverse events, including eGFR levels and serum potassium levels, was not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

A 20 mg azilsartan dose had potent antiproteinuric effects compared with an 8 mg candesartan dose, without an increase in adverse events. Azilsartan may provide renal protection in addition to antihypertensive effects in CKD patients.

Examination of the effect of changing to azilsartan from candesartan in renal transplant patients

BACKGROUND

Azilsartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), was administered to renal transplant recipients to investigate the safety and antihypertensive effect in addition to its ARB-characteristic organ-protective effect.

METHODS

The subjects were 20 patients (18 males, 2 females; baseline serum creatinine 2.39 ± 1.33 mg/dL) responding poorly to candesartan, who suffered albuminuria (>0.3 g/g creatinine) and hypertension (>140/90 mm Hg) following renal transplantation. Three months after candesartan was switched to azilsartan 20 mg/d, blood pressure, creatinine-corrected urinary albumin excretion, urinary L-type acid binding protein, urinary 8-hydroxydeoxyguano-sine, serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were evaluated. Thirteen patients received cyclosporine (65.0%) and 7 received tacrolimus (35.0%). Another hypertensive (calcium antagonist) agent was combined in 7 (35.0%).

RESULTS

Systolic blood pressure significantly decreased from 139.5 mm Hg (baseline) from 128.7 mm Hg (at 3 months), whereas no significant changes were observed for diastolic blood pressure. The percentage of patients achieving the target level of antihypertensive effect (blood pressure < 130/80 mm Hg) significantly improved from 30.0% (baseline) to 70.0% (at 3 months). No significant changes were observed in renal graft function, oxidative stress marker level, or biochemical examination findings.

CONCLUSION

Sufficient antihypertensive effect was demonstrated soon after switching to azilsartan. However, no significant change was found in renal damage markers. Long-term study must be conducted to confirm the protective effect azilsartan on the transplanted kidney, as found with candesartan. The safety of azilsartan was demonstrated. If the transplanted kidney protection is demonstrated, this drug is expected to contribute to the improved long-term prognosis of renal transplant recipients.