
Published August 4, 2003Joshua Augustine, MDDepartment
of
|
Diabetes has become the number one cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States, and the incidence of type II diabetes mellitus continues to grow both in the United States and worldwide. Approximately 45% of new patients entering dialysis in the United States are diabetics. Early diagnosis of diabetes and early intervention are critical in preventing the normal progression to renal failure seen in many type I and a significant percentage of type II diabetics. |
|
DefinitionPrevalencePathophysiologyDiagnosisTherapy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diabetic nephropathy is typically defined by either macroalbuminuria that is, a urinary albumin excretion of greater than 300 mg in a 24-hour collection or by abnormal renal function as represented by an abnormality in serum creatinine, calculated creatinine clearance, or glomerular filtration rate (GFR). The common progression from microalbuminuria to overt nephropathy has led many to consider microalbuminuria to define early or incipient nephropathy. Renal disease is suspected to be secondary to diabetes in the clinical setting of long-standing diabetes. This is supported by the history of diabetic retinopathy, particularly in type I diabetics, where there is a strong correlation. Clinically, diabetic nephropathy is characterized by a progressive increase in proteinuria and decline in GFR, hypertension, and a high risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
The natural history of diabetic nephropathy is a process that progresses gradually over years. Early diabetes is heralded by glomerular hyperfiltration and an increase in GFR. This is thought to be related to increased cell growth and expansion in the kidney, possibly mediated by hyperglycemia itself. Microalbuminuria typically occurs after 5 years in type I diabetes. Overt nephropathy, with urinary protein excretion greater than 300 mg/day, often develops after 10 to 15 years. ESRD develops in 50% of type I diabetics, with overt nephropathy within 10 years' time.
Type II diabetes has
a more variable course. Patients often present at diagnosis with microalbuminuria
because of delays in diagnosis and other factors affecting protein excretion.
Fewer patients with microalbuminuria progress to advanced renal disease.
Without intervention, approximately 30% progress to overt nephropathy,
and after 20 years of nephropathy, approximately 20% develop ESRD. Because
of the high prevalence of type II compared to type I diabetes, however,
the majority of diabetics on dialysis are type II diabetics (Table
1).
| Table 1: | ||
Prevalence
of Type 1 and Type II Diabetes in the United States and Progression of Microalbuminaria and Diabectic Nephropathy |
||
Type
I Diabetes |
Type
II Diabetes |
|
| Prevalence
of disease* |
0.85-1.7
million |
15.3-16.2
million (estimated 5.9 million undiagnosed? |
| Prevalence
of microalbuminuria at 15 years |
21% |
28% |
| Prevalence
of macroalbuminuria at 15 years |
21% |
14% |
| Progression to end-stage renal disease 10 years after onset of macro-albuminaria | 50% |
10% |
| *
Data from www.diabetes.org/main/info/facts/facts.jsp (Accessed June 2003) Data from www.niddk.nih.gov/health/diabetes/dia/ (Accessed June 2003) Higher prevalence and progression in certain racial subgroups such as African Americans and Pima Indians |
||
In the United States, approximately 17 million people, or 6.2% of the population, are estimated to have diabetes, with a growing incidence. Roughly one third of this population is estimated to be undiagnosed with type II diabetes. The prevalence of diabetes is higher in certain racial and ethnic groups, affecting approximately 13% of African Americans, 10.2% of Hispanics, and 15.1% of Native Americans, primarily with type II diabetes. Approximately 20% to 30% of all diabetics will develop evidence of nephropathy, although a higher percentage of type I patients progresses to ESRD.
Ongoing research has
led to further understanding of the complex pathophysiology in diabetic
nephropathy. Increased glomerular capillary pressure occurs early in diabetes
and is associated with hyperfiltration at the glomerulus. The glomerular
mesangium expands, initially by cell proliferation and then by cell hypertrophy.
Increased mesangial stretch and pressure can stimulate this expansion,
as can high glucose levels. Mediators of proliferation and expansion include
platelet-derived growth factor and transforming growth factor-ß
(TGF-ß). TGF-ß is particularly important in the mediation
of expansion and later fibrosis via the stimulation of collagen and fibronectin.
Glucose can bind irreversibly to proteins in the kidney and circulation
to form so-called advanced glycosylation end products (AGEs). AGEs can
form complex crosslinks over years of hyperglycemia and can contribute
to renal damage by stimulation of growth and fibrotic factors via receptors
for AGEs.
Angiotensin II (ATII)
itself contributes to the progression of diabetic nephropathy. ATII is
stimulated in diabetes despite the high-volume state typically seen with
the disease, and intra-renal ATII is typically high, even in the face
of lower systemic concentrations. ATII preferentially constricts the efferent
arteriole in the glomerulus, leading to higher glomerular capillary pressures.
In addition to its hemodynamic effects, ATII also stimulates renal growth
and fibrosis through ATII type 1 receptors, which secondarily upregulate
TGF-ß and other growth factors.
Diabetic nephropathy is also an inflammatory process with evidence of
macrophage infiltration in glomeruli with early diabetic sclerosis. There
is upregulation of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) in diabetes,
which stimulates macrophage infiltration both in the glomeruli and in
the renal interstitium. Macrophages enter from the circulation and release
inflammatory mediators and cytokines. MCP-1 is stimulated by ATII and
can be down-regulated by renin-angiotensin blockade in experimental models.
Tubulointerstitial
fibrosis is seen in advanced stages of diabetic nephropathy and is a better
predictor of renal failure than glomerular sclerosis. Hyperglycemia, ATII,
TGF-ß, and likely proteinuria itself all play a role in stimulating
this fibrosis. There is an epithelial-mesenchymal transition that takes
place in the tubules, with proximal tubular cell conversion to fibroblast-like
cells. These cells can then migrate into the interstitium and produce
collagen and fibronectin.
Thus, early expansion and proliferation, with high glomerular pressures and hyperglycemia, herald the development of diabetic nephropathy. After years of expansion, fibrosis begins to develop as TGF-ß upregulation leads to secondary collagen and fibronectin production. Inflammatory cells cause cellular damage and scarring through release of cytokines and oxygen radicals, and ultimately renal cells themselves may transform into fibroblasts and cause late tubulointerstitial fibrosis.
It is not uncommon
to find micro- or macroalbuminuria in a type II diabetic at or soon after
the initial diagnosis of diabetes. This may be because the patient has
had undiagnosed diabetes for many years, or it may relate to the contributions
of hypertension or other processes that may cause proteinuria independently
of diabetes, such as small-vessel atherosclerosis. Microalbuminuria is
now recognized as an independent cardiac risk factor even in the absence
of diabetes. Screening for microalbuminuria in non-diabetics may have
important implications for cardiac risk, and should lead to instituting
some of the same therapies used in diabetic nephropathy (Table
2).
Frequently the question
is raised as to whether proteinuria is from diabetes or from a primary
renal disease. Suspicion may arise in patients with significant proteinuria
without a long history of diabetes, or without other signs of end-organ
damage such as retinopathy or neuropathy. While the presence of retinopathy
supports a diabetic source of proteinuria, the lack of diabetic retinopathy
does not rule out diabetic nephropathy, particularly in type II diabetics.
Patients with diabetes can develop nephrotic-range proteinuria (greater
than 3.5 grams/24 hours), but typically only after long-standing diabetes.
A bland urine sediment supports the diagnosis of diabetes, although it
is not uncommon to have some microscopic hematuria with advanced diabetic
nephropathy. The presentation of an acute nephrotic syndrome, rapidly
rising urinary protein, or rapidly declining GFR should lead to the consideration
of renal biopsy. The finding of red cell or white cell casts in the urine
should also make one consider a biopsy.
Often a patient will
present without available history and may be frankly nephrotic in the
face of longstanding diabetes. In cases of uncertainty like this it is
not wrong to consider a renal biopsy, since the finding of a primary glomerular
disease could potentially change the course of management.
In screening for diabetic nephropathy, we recommend early testing for glucose intolerance and diabetes to identify patients who are at risk for developing microalbuminuria, particularly if they have other risks for type II diabetes such as hypertension, lipid abnormalities, or central obesity. As stated above, approximately one-third of type II diabetics are thought to be undiagnosed. Once the diagnosis of diabetes has been made, we routinely check urinary protein only to guide therapy and prognosis. We often do not wait to see microalbuminuria before instituting therapy with angiotensin blockade, especially if patients are not at goal for blood pressure.
Glycemic
Control
One keystone in the prevention and management of diabetic nephropathy
is tight glycemic control. In the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial,
type I diabetics were randomized to intensive or conventional insulin
treatments and followed for an average of 6.5 years.1 Average hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values were 7.2% versus 9.2%. There was
a 39% risk reduction in the development of microalbuminuria and a 54%
reduction in development of macroalbuminuria in the intensive treatment
group. Glycemic control in type II diabetics was also studied in the UK
Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS).2 3,867
patients with newly diagnosed type II diabetes were randomized to oral
or insulin therapy versus dietary control and followed for 11 years. The
difference in HbA1c was 7.0% versus 7.9%. After 9 years, there was a significant
risk reduction in the intensive group, with a relative risk of 0.76 for
the development of microalbuminuria. Finally, the complete correction
of hyperglycemia with pancreatic transplant in type I diabetics has led
to a dramatic resolution in glomerular and tubular expansion and fibrosis
over time.3 With a
drop in HbA1c from an average of 8.7% to 5.5% in eight transplanted patients,
there was a significant reduction in basement membrane thickening and
mesangial expansion on repeat biopsies over time. Even glomerular sclerosis
appeared to resolve, showing that renal fibrosis may be reversible, although
it took 10 years after transplant to see these significant changes.
Treatment of Blood Pressure
Control of blood pressure is the other keystone in prevention and treatment.
Blood pressure
control is critical in slowing the natural history of diabetic nephropathy
in both type I and type II diabetics. Parving et al studied 12 type I
diabetics and treated hypertension before angiotensin inhibitors were
available.4 Using metoprolol, hydralazine,
and diuretics, patients with macroalbuminuria and declining GFR were treated
to reduce mean arterial pressure from 120 to under 105 mm Hg. An initial
decline in GFR was noted in most patients immediately after blood pressure
lowering. However, 2-year subsequent follow-up showed a slowing in the
rate of reduction of GFR from an average of 0.91 ml/min/month to 0.39
ml/min/month, with significant preservation of GFR above that expected
from pretreatment measurements. The initial drop in GFR illustrated a
functional or hemodynamic effect of antihypertensive treatment, which
does not lead to permanent renal damage but rather to renal preservation.
A recent review has recommended maintaining antihypertensive therapy in
renal disease even if therapy causes some hemodynamic drop in GFR, providing
there is a stabilization in creatinine with an increase of less than 30%
of baseline.5
Blood pressure control has also been shown to reduce the risk of diabetic
complications in type II diabetics. The UKPDS studied 1,148 hypertensive
patients who had recently been diagnosed with type II diabetes.6 Patients were assigned to tight blood pressure control, achieving a mean
level of 144/82 mm Hg, or less tight control, with a mean pressure of
154/81 mm Hg. After a median follow-up of 8.4 years, there was significant
reduction in risk of death related to diabetes, stroke, and microvascular
disease in the tight control group. There was no difference in outcomes
within the tight control group in patients assigned to either atenolol
or captopril, although captopril was dosed only twice daily at 25-50 mg/dose.
The importance of blood pressure control, no matter what agent is used,
cannot be emphasized enough in diabetes, both for slowing progression
of nephropathy and for preventing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
Currently, the recommendation from the most recent Joint National Committee
guidelines is that blood pressure in diabetics be reduced to less than
130/80 mm Hg.7 Some studies of hypertension
treatment in diabetics have shown benefit with lowering blood pressure
even further. For example, in the Hypertension Optimal Treatment trial,
diabetics with a target diastolic pressure of 80 mm Hg had half of the
cardiovascular events seen in patients with a target of 90 mm Hg.8 Furthermore, the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study found
value in further reduction in a diverse group of patients with renal disease
and proteinuria.9 In patients with 24-hour
urinary protein greater than 1 gram, a blood pressure at or below 125/75
was shown to slow the decline in GFR. Based on the above data, we recommend
a target blood pressure of < 130/80 in all diabetics, with a
further goal of 125-130/75-80 in diabetics with macroalbuminuria (Table
3). These blood pressure goals may seem difficult to accomplish in
some patients, but within clinical trials preset goals have been consistently
achieved. It is important for clinicians and patients to be aware early
on that three or more agents may be required to achieve the blood pressure
goal, and these agents will likely be needed long term.
It is important to emphasize that diuretics are extremely beneficial adjuncts in blood pressure control and are often missing in patients who are not close to meeting blood pressure goals. Diuretics are first-line agents for many hypertensives, and we routinely add a diuretic as a second-line agent after angiotensin blockade in diabetics. Thiazide diuretics work well even at low dosages for patients with normal renal function. For example, just 12.5 to 25 mg/day of hydrochlorothiazide is often effective. When GFR is below 60, we often institute loop diuretics for a better natriuretic effect. Short-acting loops such as furosemide work better when dosed at least twice daily to avoid rebound sodium retention.
Angiotensin
II Blocking Agents
Specific use of agents that block the renin-angiotensin system appears
to be particularly beneficial in the prevention or slowing of progression
of diabetic nephropathy. ATII can increase glomerular capillary pressure
by preferentially constricting the renal efferent arteriole. ATII also
stimulates renal cell growth and fibrosis independent of hemodynamic effects.
Even with blood pressure at goal and without microalbuminuria, we consider
initiation of low dosages of angiotensin blocking agents, with titration
up as tolerated. Other antihypertensives may not offer this antiproliferative
effect and may cause adverse hemodynamic effects. For example, the calcium
channel blockers, in particular the dihydropyridines, cause afferent dilation
and thus may increase glomerular capillary pressure. Dihydropyridines
may best be reserved as third- or fourth-line agents in patients with
diabetes, only after angiotensin blockade and diuretics have already been
instituted.
The benefits of angiotensin
converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) were shown by the Collaborative Study
Group using captopril compared with placebo in 409 patients with type
I diabetes and macroalbuminuria.10 Patients
with a creatinine greater than 1.5 mg/dl had a significant reduction in
risk of doubling serum creatinine and of the composite of death, dialysis,
or transplantation when treated with captopril, even after controlling
for changes in blood pressure. Second, a substudy of the Heart Outcomes
Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) looked at 3,577 patients age 55 or older
with diabetes and randomized to ramipril 10 mg/day or placebo.11 All patients had at least one other cardiac risk factor in addition to
diabetes, including lipid abnormalities, hypertension, microalbuminuria,
or current smoking. Patients with dipstick-positive proteinuria and overt
nephropathy were excluded, as were patients with congestive heart failure.
The ramipril group had a reduction in blood pressure of 2.5 mm Hg systolic
and 1 mm Hg diastolic. When corrected for blood pressure, there was a
significant reduction in risk of stroke and cardiovascular morbidity and
mortality. There was also a relative risk reduction of 24% in the progression
to diabetic nephropathy in all patients, although this was not controlled
for the minor change in blood pressure. In subgroup analysis, the diabetics
who had significant benefit were those who already had either coronary
disease or microalbuminuria.
Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have also shown renal protection
recently in type II diabetics. Two studies looking at the prevention of
progression in patients with microalbuminuria have recently been published.12,13 Both irbesartan and valsartan were shown to lower albumin excretion and
prevent development of diabetic nephropathy, even when controlling for
changes in blood pressure. The effects of irbesartan appeared to be dosage
dependent, with greater protection at 300 mg/day versus 150 mg/day. The
study using valsartan did not stratify for dosage, and the average dosage
was 122 mg/day. Two trials of ARBs in patients with overt diabetic nephropathy
have also shown a decline in rate of progression of disease.14,15 Both studies showed a slowing in the rate of progression to doubling
of creatinine or to ESRD using irbesartan titrated to 300 mg/day or losartan
at an average dosage of 85.5 mg/day. The benefit in both studies was impressive,
although importantly the treatment only decreased the rate of progression
of disease but did not halt it. The average patient had a delay in progression
to ESRD of about 2 years.
Angiotensin blockade should be started early and may have its greatest
benefit in prevention or reversal of early kidney disease. Extrapolating
from nondiabetic renal disease, the Ramipril Efficacy in Nephropathy trial
demonstrated that even patients with very mild renal disease and high
GFR benefited from ACE inhibition.16 Patients
with GFR ranging from 51.7 to 100.9 and averaging 71.1 were shown to have
similar slowing in reduction of GFR over time with ramipril as patients
with lower GFR. There may even be some reversal of kidney disease early
on with angiotensin blockade. In both trials of irbesartan and valsartan
in type II diabetics with microalbuminuria, a significant percentage of
treated patients had albumin excretion decrease into the normal range.
Irbesartan at 300 mg/day led to a 34% incidence of normalization of protein
excretion compared to 21% in the placebo group. Similarly, valsartan treatment
led to an approximately 30% normalization compared to 14.5% in the placebo
group. Early treatment is important to prevent and possibly even reverse
diabetic nephropathy.
The combination of an ACEI and an ARB has been tried in one study.17 Lisinopril 20 mg/day and candesartan 16 mg/day were given individually and then in combination in patients with type II diabetes, hypertension, and microalbuminuria. Any patient with a diastolic blood pressure less than 80 mm Hg was not eligible to receive the combination, thus excluding one-quarter of the original participants. In the remaining patients receiving the combination, there was a further lowering in blood pressure and in urinary protein excretion compared to either agent alone, and the treatment was well tolerated.
We recommend attempting to maximize angiotensin blockade as much as patients will tolerate, especially given the dosage-related benefits shown in some studies. The benefit of using an ACEI/ARB combination over a higher dosage of a single agent alone has not been proven, but regardless of the agent used, more seems to be better. If the maximal dosage of one agent has been achieved, it is certainly reasonable to introduce the second agent. Some are recommending adding an ARB to an ACEI once a moderate dosage of the ACEI is achieved. There may be ATII formation independent of ACE, and blocking the receptor should block this ATII activity. Angiotensin blockade may reach a threshold above which further benefit will not be gained, and animal studies at supramaximal dosages of ACEIs and ARBs show incomplete blockage of TGF-ß. However, many patients are underdosed and could gain more benefit from maximal therapy.
At this point it is
difficult to recommend one type of ARB over another for initial treatment
in diabetics. There are ample data supporting ACEIs for type I diabetics.
Based on data from the HOPE trial, it would seem acceptable to also choose
an ACEI in type II diabetics with coronary artery disease, although beta-blockers
remain first line agents. Similarly, in patients with congestive heart
failure, trials of ARBs are in progress but ACEIs remain first-line agents.
Patients with type II diabetes and either microalbuminuria or overt nephropathy
but no known cardiac disease should probably receive an ARB as first-line
treatment based on recent data reviewed above (Table
3).
It is important to treat with angiotensin blockade even in patients with baseline renal insufficiency. Even patients with a high serum creatinine are candidates for angiotensin blockade, although patients need close follow-up with cautious titration. As stated above, GFR often drops some at initiation of therapy, and close monitoring of renal function should take place within a week or two of starting medication. Providing there is a bump of no more than 30% in serum creatinine and it remains stable, therapy may be continued.5
ACEIs and ARBs are generally both very well tolerated. However, attempting to institute and titrate either agent must be done while monitoring for side effects such as symptomatically low blood pressure or hyperkalemia. We often tolerate a potassium level in the mid-five range if it remains stable, just as we tolerate a mild, stable bump in serum creatinine. Patients should be monitored for hyperkalemia within 1 week of starting or changing the dosage of either agent, and should be counseled on limiting potassium in the diet. Diuretics such as thiazides or loop diuretics are often useful and necessary adjunctive treatments for blood pressure control, and can have the added benefit of offsetting a rise in serum potassium. The side effect of cough secondary to bradykinin accumulation with an ACEI may necessitate conversion to an ARB. Whether bradykinins themselves have any benefit in hypertension or heart disease is debated.
Rarely, severe, life-threatening angioedema can occur with either ACEIs or ARBs. This side effect has been reported even months or years after starting an ACEI. The incidence of angioedema appears to be less frequent with ARBs. In a patient with history of ACEI-induced angioedema, an ARB may be started cautiously at a low dosage if there is a strong indication such as diabetes and microalbuminuria, but should probably be held if there is no abnormal urinary albumin excretion.18 ACEIs and ARBs are also both contraindicated in pregnancy, and should be used with caution in women of childbearing potential.
Dietary
Changes
A common question
from patients and primary care providers is whether the reduction of dietary
protein is beneficial in diabetic nephropathy. Many animal studies of
glomerulopathies have shown reduction in decline in renal function by
restricting dietary protein. The data in humans remain inconclusive, however.
We currently counsel patients to avoid protein supplements such as protein
shakes or powders, but do not otherwise restrict protein from the diet.
Others recommend a restriction of 0.8 g/kg/day in patients with overt
nephropathy, or even 0.6 g/kg/day in the face of a falling GFR.
It is important to maintain a low-sodium diet in diabetic nephropathy. Many diabetics with renal disease are salt sensitive, and minimizing salt intake can help in reaching blood pressure goals, with secondary benefits of decreased stroke risk, regression of left ventricular hypertrophy, and reduction in proteinuria. We advocate a low-sodium diet of equal or less than 2.3 grams (5.8 grams of NaCl) or 100 mEq daily in patients with diabetes and either hypertension or any degree of proteinuria.
Avoidance
of Nephrotoxins
It is important
to avoid nephrotoxic agents if possible in patients with diabetic nephropathy.
Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause a significant drop
in GFR in patients with diabetic nephropathy, particularly when used with
angiotensin-blocking agents. Daily low-dosage aspirin is safe in diabetics,
and the cardiac benefits greatly outweigh any risk. However, aspirin at
higher dosages and other NSAIDs should be avoided if possible. Cyclooxygenase
2 (COX-2) inhibitors are similar to other NSAIDs in their potential for
renal toxicity.
Radiocontrast media
are also particularly nephrotoxic in diabetics. Even with normal serum
creatinine, patients with diabetes and proteinuria should be volume loaded
with normal saline 12 hours before and after exposure to contrast if possible.
Diuretics should be temporarily discontinued, and hyperglycemia should
be controlled. Other agents such as dopamine-like agonists and acetylcysteine
may help prevent contrast nephropathy in diabetics but require further
study.
Other
Pharmacologic Agents
There are other
classes of agents currently under study for diabetic nephropathy that
may show hope for the future. Aldosterone receptor antagonists decrease
proteinuria further in patients with diabetes on ACE inhibitors.19 Eplerenone, a new aldosterone blocking agent, has recently been approved
by the Food and Drug Administration. It is similar to spironolactone but
lacks the sex steroid side effects such as impotence and gynecomastia.
It is currently under study in diabetics with proteinuria who are already
being treated with ACEIs. One side effect that must be monitored is hyperkalemia,
which may be increased with this combination.
HMG coenzyme-A reductase inhibitors, or statins, are also being studied. There are already recommendations for tight lipid control in diabetics because of the high cardiac risk in these patients. Statins may have additional unique benefits independent of lipid lowering. In animal models of diabetic nephropathy, statin treatment blocks intracellular signaling and decreases the mRNA expression of TGF-ß.20
Agents that directly inhibit or degrade TGF-ß or inhibit AGEs have shown success in animals and are being developed for clinical human trials. One such agent, currently known as ALT-711, breaks crosslinks in AGE complexes. It has been shown to improve vascular endothelial function in diabetes and may have promise in diabetic nephropathy.21
Nephrology
Referral
Referral
to a nephrologist should be considered if the GFR is steadily declining
or is already below 60-70 ml/min. Challenges in blood pressure control,
hyperkalemia, or rising creatinine on angiotensin blockade may also prompt
a referral. We consider it appropriate to refer a patient in any situation
where the primary physician feels he or she needs additional input or
assistance with management of diabetic nephropathy.
Prevention and treatment of diabetic nephropathy consist of tight glucose control and tight blood pressure control, starting with angiotensin blockade but often adding multiple agents as necessary to meet blood pressure goals. Avoidance of nephrotoxins is important. Other measures such as lipid control, smoking cessation, weight loss, and exercise modulate cardiac risk and may also inhibit the progression of renal disease itself. Future treatments may target and even reverse lesions in advanced diabetic nephropathy. For now, however, early aggressive treatment is most effective in the prevention of renal failure. Therefore, screening for diabetes and for glucose intolerance early on is important, and initiating aggressive treatment at or before the onset of microalbuminuria is the best strategy.
- Diabetes
Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive
treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term
complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977-986.
- UK
Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with
sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk
of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Lancet. 1998;352:837-853.
- Fioretto
P, Steffes MW, Sutherland DE, Goetz FC, Mauer M. Reversal of lesions
of diabetic nephropathy after pancreas transplantation. N Engl J
Med. 1998;339:69-75.
- Parving
HH, Andersen AR, Smidt UM, Svendsen PA. Early aggressive antihypertensive
treatment reduces rate of decline in kidney function in diabetic nephropathy. Lancet. 1983;1:1175-1179.
- Palmer
BF. Renal dysfunction complicating the treatment of hypertension. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1256-1261.
- UK
Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk
of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes:
UKPDS 38. BMJ. 1998;317:703-713.
- The
seventh report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection,
evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. JAMA. 2003;289:2560-2572.
- Hansson
L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al, for the HOT Study Group. Effects
of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients
with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment
(HOT) randomised trial. Lancet. 1998;351:1755-1762.
- Peterson
JC, Adler S, Burkart JM, et al. Blood-pressure control, proteinuria,
and the progression of renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal
Disease Study. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:754-762.
- Lewis
EJ, Hunsicker LG, Bain RP, Rohde RD for the Collaborative Study Group.
The effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition on diabetic nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1456-1462.
- Heart
Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of ramipril
on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes
mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet.
2000;355:253-259.
- Parving
HH, Lehnert H, Brochner-Mortensen J, Gomis R, Andersen S, Arner P. The
effect of irbesartan on the development of diabetic nephropathy in patients
with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:870-878.
- Viberti
G, Wheeldon NM, for the MicroAlbuminuria Reduction with VALsartan (MARVAL)
Study Investigators. Microalbuminuria reduction with valsartan in patients
with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a blood pressure-independent effect. Circulation. 2002;106:672-678.
- Lewis
EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, et al, for the Collaborative Study Group.
Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan
in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med.
2001;345:851-860.
- Brenner
BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al, for the RENAAL Study Investigators.
Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients
with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:861-869.
- Ruggenenti
P, Perna A, Remuzzi G, for the Gruppo Italiano di Studi Epidemiologici
in Nefrologia (GISEN). ACE inhibitors to prevent end-stage renal disease:
when to start and why possibly never to stop: a post hoc analysis of
the REIN trial results. Ramipril Efficacy in Nephropathy. J Am Soc
Nephrol. 2001;12:2832-2837.
- Mogensen
CE, Neldam S, Tikkanen I, Oren S, Viskoper R, Watts RW, Cooper ME for
the CALM Study Group. Randomised controlled trial of dual blockade of
renin-angiotensin system in patients with hypertension, microalbuminuria,
and non-insulin dependent diabetes: the candesartan and lisinopril microalbuminuria
(CALM) study. BMJ. 2000;321:1440-1444.
- Sica
DA, Black HR. Current concepts of pharmacotherapy in hypertension: ACE
inhibitor-related angioedema: can angiotensin-receptor blockers be safely
used? [review] J Clin Hypertens. (Greenwich). 2002;4:375-380.
- Chrysostomou A, Becker G. Spironolactone in addition
to ACE inhibition to reduce proteinuria in patients with chronic renal
disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:925-926.
- Yokota
T, Utsunomiya K, Murakawa Y, Kurata H, Tajima N. Mechanism of preventive
effect of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor on diabetic nephropathy. Kidney
Int. 1999;56(Suppl 71):S178-S181.
- Vasan S, Foiles PG, Founds HW. Therapeutic potential of AGE inhibitors and breakers of AGE protein cross-links. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2001;10:1977-1987.




