Randomized placebo-controlled trial of perindopril in normotensive, normoalbuminuric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Distinct time courses of renal protective action of angiotensin receptor antagonists and ACE inhibitors in chronic renal disease. A 2-year pilot trial of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus intensive insulin therapy in patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes (IMDIAB 8). ACE inhibitors and persistent left ventricular hypertrophy after renal transplantation: a randomized clinical trial. Improved treatment satisfaction but no difference in metabolic control when using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion vs. multiple daily injections in children at onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Efficacy of ACE inhibitors and ATII receptor blockers in patients with microalbuminuria: a prospective study. Effective postponement of diabetic nephropathy with enalapril in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. Two-year experience with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in relation to retinopathy and neuropathy. ACE inhibitor versus beta-blocker for the treatment of hypertension in renal allograft recipients.
Diabetic nephropathy is one of the leading causes of end-stage renal disease. We examined whether ACE inhibitor treatment may have a nephroprotective effect in normotensive insulin-dependent diabetic patients without microalbuminuria and with normal glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and whether any effect was associated with the ACE genotype. In a prospective double-blind randomized study, normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus with normal serum creatinine and no microalbuminuria were treated with either placebo or perindopril, an ACE inhibitor. Urine albumine/creatinine ratio (ACR), mean blood pressure (MBP) and index of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) based on S-creatinine were determined. ACE genotype was determined by electrophoresis. ACR was higher in the placebo group than in the perindopril group after 4 months, and continued to increase during the study period. After 36 months of observation, ACR in the placebo group was 1.7+/-1.1 mg/mmol, and 0.6+/-0.2 mg/mmol in the ACE-inhibitor-treated group (p<0.001, Mann-Whitney test). During treatment, a significant increase in ACR in the placebo group (p=0.007), Wilcoxon matched paired test) was observed. There were no differences between the groups regarding MBP or GFR. The nephroprotective effects of ACE inhibitor treatment was not associated with the ACE genotype (II, ID, DD). Although the angiotensin receptor antagonist (ARB) shares the angiotensin-II-blocking activity with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I), pharmacological mechanisms of action of these agents differ. We evaluated the temporal profiles of action of ACE-I and ARB on urinary protein excretion and nitrate/nitrate (NO(x)) excretion in hypertensive (140 and/or 90 mmHg) patients with chronic renal disease (serum creatinine < 265 (range, 44-265) micromol/l or creatinine clearance > 30 (range, 30-121) ml/min). Patients with mild (<1 g/day; range, 0.4-1.0) and moderate proteinuria (>1 g/day; range, 1.1-6.9) were randomly assigned to ACE-I- and ARB-treated groups, and were treated with ACE-I (trandolapril or perindopril) or ARB(losartan or candesartan) for 48 weeks. In all groups, treatment with ACE-I or ARB decreased blood pressure to the same level, but had no effect on creatinine clearance. In patients with mild proteinuria, neither ACE-I nor ARB altered urinary protein excretion. In patients with moderate proteinuria, ACE-I caused 44 +/- 6% reduction in proteinuria (from 2.7 +/- 0.5 to 1.5 +/- 0.4 g/day, n = 14) at 12 weeks, and this beneficial effect persisted throughout the protocol (48 weeks, 1.2 +/- 0.2 g/day). In contrast, ARB did not produce a significant decrease in proteinuria at 12 weeks (23 +/- 8%, n = 13), but a 41 +/- 6% reduction in proteinuria was observed at 48 weeks. Similarly, although early (12 weeks) increases in urinary NO(x) excretion were observed with ACE-I (from 257 +/- 70 to 1111 +/- 160 micromol/day) and ARB (from 280 +/- 82 to 723 +/- 86 micromol/day), the ARB-induced increase in NO(x) excretion was smaller than that by ACE-I (P < 0.05). In conclusion, although both ACE-I and ARB reduce blood pressure similarly, the effect of these agents on proteinuria differs in chronic renal disease with moderate proteinuria. Relatively early onset of the proteinuria-reducing effect was observed with ACE-I, which paralleled the increase in urinary NO(x) excretion. Conversely, ARB decreased proteinuria and increased urinary NO(x) excretion gradually. These time course-dependent changes in proteinuria and urinary NO(x) may reflect the pharmacological property of ACE-I and ARB, with regard to the action on bradykinin. In a pilot study, the metabolic effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus intensive subcutaneous insulin therapy (ISIT) started at diagnosis in patients with Type 1 diabetes and continued for a 2-year period were evaluated and compared. Twenty-three patients (between 12 and 35 years old, mean +/- SD 18.4 +/- 9 years) were randomized into two treatment groups (CSII vs. ISIT), and both received supplemental nicotinamide (NA), 25 mg/kg of body weight. CSII was started immediately after admission to the hospital. Parameters of metabolic control [insulin dose, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and C-peptide] were evaluated for a 2-year follow-up period. Data are presented for a total of 19 patients who remained in the study for its duration. Two years after diagnosis, mean +/- SD HbA1c was 6.3 +/- 0.5% and 6.2 +/- 0.3% for the CSII and ISIT groups, respectively (p=not significant). Compared with baseline values, an increase of baseline C-peptide of 38% for the CSII group and 27% for the ISIT group was observed; however, the difference between the groups was not significant. The insulin requirement for the entire duration of the study, but not at entry and 3 months, was significantly higher in CSII compared with ISIT patients (0.62 +/- 0.4 IU/kg/day vs. 0.3 +/- 0.4 IU/kg/day, respectively; p<0.01). After trial completion patients on CSII continued with this mode of therapy. Implementation of CSII as well as ISIT at diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes and continuation for 2 years thereafter achieved similar and optimal metabolic control, but more insulin was required with the CSII group. Both types of intensive insulin therapy combined with NA are able to preserve C-peptide secretion or even increase baseline levels for up to 2 years after diagnosis. Interventional studies of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in renal transplant recipients are scarce and to date evaluated only patients immediately after renal transplantation.
                Randomized controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in regressing persistent LVH after successful transplantation.
                70 renal transplant recipients (47 men; age, 30 to 68 years) without diabetes previously randomly assigned to either cyclosporine or tacrolimus therapy, with LVH persisting 3 to 6 months after transplantation.
                Subjects were randomly assigned to either lisinopril (ACE-inhibitor group; 36 patients) or no therapy (control group; 34 subjects).
                Main outcome was change in left ventricular mass index (LVMi) at month 18.
                A consistent decrease in both systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was observed in both groups (between-group differences, -1.7 +/- 3.3 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.8 to 8.2; P = 0.6 for SBP; 0.3 +/- 2.2 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.8 to 4.1; P = 0.9 for DBP), whereas LVMi regressed more in the ACE-inhibitor group (between-group difference, 10.1 +/- 16.3 g/m(2.7); 95% CI, 4.2 to 16.1; P < 0.01). A significant interaction of ACE inhibitors with cyclosporine in affecting LVMi change was shown by means of post hoc multiple regression analysis (P < 0.01; differences between cyclosporine and tacrolimus group, 13.3 +/- 3.9 g/m(2.7); 95% CI, 5.3 to 21.2; P < 0.01 in the ACE-inhibitor group; 3.7 +/- 4.2 g/m(2.7); 95% CI, -4.7 to 12.2; P = 0.4 in the control group).
                Single-center study with small sample size. Interaction of ACE inhibitors with cyclosporine treatment emerged from post hoc analysis.
                A prolonged course of ACE-inhibitor therapy is effective in regressing the persistent LVH of renal transplant recipients by mechanisms independent of effects on BP. This regression seems to be at least in part the effect of an interaction between ACE inhibitors and cyclosporine. The aim of this study was to compare safety, metabolic control, and treatment satisfaction in children/adolescents at onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus who were treated with either continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or multiple daily injections (MDI).
                Seventy-two children/adolescents (7-17 yr of age) were enrolled in this open, randomized, parallel, multicenter study. Approximately half of the patients were treated with MDI (natural protamine hagedorn [NPH] insulin twice daily and rapid-acting insulin three to -four times daily, n = 38) by pen, and the other half received CSII (n = 34). The patients were followed for 24 months with clinical visits at the entry of the study and after 1, 6, 12, and 24 months. During these visits, hemoglobin A1c, insulin doses, weight, and height were registered. Severe episodes of hypoglycemia and ketoacidosis as well as technical problems were recorded. In addition, the patients/parents answered the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire.
                There was no significant difference in metabolic control between the treatment groups. Treatment satisfaction was significantly higher in the group treated with CSII compared with the MDI group (p <or= 0.01 at all screening visits). There were no episodes of ketoacidosis and there was no significant difference regarding severe hypoglycemia between the treatment groups.
                CSII treatment proved to be a safe therapy in children/adolescents followed for 24 months after onset of their diabetes. Treatment satisfaction was higher in the CSII group, although there was no difference in metabolic control compared with the MDI group. We compared the efficacy of treatment protocols with an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor alone (enalapril, 5 mg) or angiotensin II (ATII) receptor blocker (losartan, 50 mg) or both enalapril plus losartan in patients with microalbuminuria in a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Normotensive type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria documented by at least 3 consecutive urinary albumin excretion analyses were recruited for the study. Patients were grouped randomly into one of the protocols which consisted of treatment with 5 mg enalapril daily (group 1; n=12), 50 mg losartan daily (group 2; n=12) or both drugs (group 3; n=10). They were reevaluated with regard to HbA1c levels, lipid profiles, blood pressure and urinary albumin excretion rates (UAER) at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Mean age, duration of diabetes, body mass index, plasma lipid profiles and blood pressure levels were similar at the initial visit. In group 1, UAER returned to normal levels in 10 patients. Normalization of UAER occurred in 8 and 7 patients in groups 2 and 3, respectively. Percentage of reduction in UAERs at the end of 12 months were 58%, 59% and 60% (p=0.0001; p=0.0002; p=0.0003, respectively). The amount of reduction in UAER did not differ significantly among the three groups (p=0.346). ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers have similar efficacy in treating diabetic microalbuminuria, and the combination of the two drugs does not add any further benefit. This study determines the long-term efficacy of the ACE inhibitor, enalapril, in reducing the progression of microalbuminuria to clinical albuminuria in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes.
                There were 103 normotensive type 2 diabetic patients with persistent albumin excretion rate (AER) 20-200 micrograms/min and normal renal function followed for 5 years in a prospective randomized single-blind placebo-controlled trial. AER, blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose, and HbA1 were measured very 3-4 months and glomerular filtration rate (GFR), renal plasma flow (RPF), and urinary urea every 12 months.
                In the patients treated with enalapril, AER decreased from 55 +/- 33 to 20 +/- 59 micrograms/min (geometric mean +/- SD), whereas in the placebo group, AER increased from 53 +/- 31 to 85 +/- 90 micrograms/min after 5 years. Within 5 years, 7.7% (4/52) of enalapril-treated subjects and 23.5% (12/51) of placebo-treated subjects progressed to clinical albuminuria defined as AER > 200 micrograms/min and at least 34% above baseline (risk reduction = 66.7%, P < 0.001). AER increased at an annual rate of 12.3% (95% CI 9.8-14.9) in the placebo group, while it declined by 16.7% (95% CI -18.3 to -15.2) in the enalapril group (P < 0.001). In addition, 8 of the 12 placebo-treated patients had evidence of coronary artery disease. The rest of the parameters remained practically unchanged in the two groups.
                After 5 years of therapy with enalapril, compared with placebo, normotensive subjects with type 2 diabetes experienced significantly less progression of microalbuminuria to clinical albuminuria, reduced AER, and preserved GFR. Thirty patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) who had advanced background retinopathy were randomized to unchanged conventional treatment (UCT) or to continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). They were followed prospectively for 2 yr. The mean blood glucose and hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) were significantly lower in the CSII group than in the UCT group. The mean blood glucose and HbA1C did not change from the first to the second year in either of the treatment groups in spite of less frequent home-monitoring of blood glucose and less frequent outpatient visits during the second year. Four patients in the CSII group and five in the UCT group developed proliferative retinopathy. However, a marginally significant trend was found toward more frequent improvement of retinal morphology in the CSII group (47%) than in the UCT group (13%). Beat-to-beat variation was found to deteriorate significantly with UCT compared with a nonsignificant improvement with CSII therapy. Vibration sense was unchanged in both treatment groups. It is concluded that near-normal blood glucose levels can be maintained with CSII therapy in spite of less frequent home-monitoring of blood glucose and outpatient visits. Furthermore, established background retinopathy may progress to proliferative retinopathy in spite of 2 yr of near-normal blood glucose levels. However, a marginally significant trend toward more frequent improvement of retinal morphology was found among CSII-treated patients compared with conventionally treated patients. Large-scale, prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm these results. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have been shown to slow the progression of chronic renal failure. However, the value of ACE inhibitors for the treatment of hypertension in renal allograft recipients has not been established. ACE inhibitors dilate the efferent glomerular arteriole, an effect that may aggravate the decrease in glomerular filtration rate resulting from cyclosporine-induced vasoconstriction at the afferent glomerular arteriole. Therefore, the goal of this double-blind, randomized study was to compare the antihypertensive and renal effects of the ACE inhibitor quinapril with those of the beta-blocker atenolol in renal allograft recipients in whom hypertension developed 6 to 12 weeks after transplantation. All patients received cyclosporine as an immunosuppressant and had stable graft function (serum creatinine concentration, <220 micromol/L) at entry into the study. Twenty-nine patients who received quinapril (daily dose titrated between 2.5 and 20 mg) and 30 patients who received atenolol (daily dose titrated between 12.5 and 100 mg) completed the 24-month study. The two groups did not differ in age, sex ratio, height, and weight before entry into the study. Quinapril decreased diastolic blood pressure from 96+/-1 to 84+/-1 mm Hg (average throughout treatment period), and atenolol decreased diastolic blood pressure from 96+/-1 to 83+/-1 mm Hg. The serum creatinine concentration did not change significantly in either group after 24 months (129+/-8 micromol/L at entry and 148+/-19 micromol/L after 24 months in the quinapril group and 131+/-6 micromol/L at entry and 152+/-15 micromol/L after 24 months in the atenolol group; P=NS for both groups). After 24 months, the change in urinary albumin excretion from baseline was -10+/-15 mg/d in the quinapril group and 52+/-32 mg/d in the atenolol group (P=0.03). These results show that quinapril and atenolol are effective antihypertensive drugs when used after renal transplantation. Moreover, compared with atenolol, quinapril has no adverse effects on graft function. The relative reduction in albuminuria observed with quinapril as compared with atenolol could indicate a beneficial effect of quinapril on long-term graft function.
Our review demonstrated that there is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus. We have identified an area of significant uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those labelled as having CKD.