Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0011860 (type 2 diabetes)
 57,723 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors appear to possess unique cardioprotective benefits, even when used in patients without high blood pressure or left ventricular dysfunction (the traditional indications for ACE inhibitor therapy). The ACE inhibitors improve endothelial function and regress both left ventricular hypertrophy and arterial mass better than other antihypertensive agents that lower blood pressure equally as well. These agents promote collateral vessel development and improve prognosis in patients who have had a coronary revascularization procedure (i.e., percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass graft surgery). Insulin resistance, present not only in type 2 diabetes but also commonly in patients with hypertension or coronary artery disease, or both, sensitizes the vasculature to the trophic effects of angiotensin II and aldosterone. This may partly explain the improvement in prognosis noted when patients who have atherosclerosis or diabetes are treated with an ACE inhibitor. Therapy with ACE inhibitors has also been shown, in two large, randomized trials, to reduce the incidence of new-onset type 2 diabetes through largely unknown mechanisms. The ACE inhibitors are safe, well tolerated and affordable medications. The data suggest that most people with atherosclerosis should be considered candidates for ACE inhibitor therapy, unless they are intolerant to the medication, or have systolic blood pressures consistently <100 mm Hg. Patients who show evidence of insulin resistance (with or without overt type 2 diabetes) should also be considered as candidates for prophylactic ACE inhibitor therapy. Although angiotensin receptor blockers should not be considered equivalent to ACE inhibitors for this indication, they may be a reasonable alternative for patients intolerant of ACE inhibitors.
 ...
PMID:Should an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor be standard therapy for patients with atherosclerotic disease? 1115 22

The role of genetic investigations in diabetes one can describe in aspect of their role in the pathogenesis of type 1 and type 2 as well as in pathogenesis of chronic complications and gene therapy of diabetes. There is not only one gene responsible for type 1 diabetes. Similarly there are many gene-candidates in type 2 diabetes. Only in 6 types of MODY the genes responsible for beta-cell dysfunction were described. In diabetic complications some role e.g. in retinopathy may be played by genes of growth factors, heparan sulfate synthesis as well as genes of adrenergic receptor beta 3. In diabetic nephropathy the genes of renin synthesis, converting enzyme, aldose reductase or angiotensin receptor can be of importance. It should be emphasized that identification of human genome and genes responsible for diabetes can contribute to introduction of gene therapy in diabetes.
 ...
PMID:[The role of genetic studies in finding the etiopathogenesis of diabetes mellitus]. 1129 31

Microalbuminuria (MA) is defined as persistent elevation of albumin in the urine, of 30-300 mg/day (20-200 microg/min). These values are less than the values detected by routine urine dipstick testing, which does not become positive until protein excretion exceeds 300-500 mg/day. Use of the albumin-to-creatinine ratio is recommended as the preferred screening strategy for all diabetic patients. MA is measured in spot morning urine obtained from the patient in the office and sent for measurement of both albumin and creatinine. A value above 0.03 mg/mg suggests that albumin excretion is above 30 mg/day and therefore MA is present. MA should be checked annually in everyone, and every 6 months within the first year of treatment to assess the impact in patients started on antihypertensive therapy. MA is an established risk factor for renal disease progression in type 1 diabetes and its presence is the earliest clinical sign of diabetic nephropathy. In addition, a number of studies suggest that MA is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and defines a group at high risk for early cardiovascular mortality in both type 2 diabetes and essential hypertension. MA also signifies abnormal vascular permeability and the presence of atherosclerosis. Among nondiabetic patients with essential hypertension, MA is associated with higher blood pressures, increased serum total cholesterol, and reduced serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Thus, taken together these data support the concept that the presence of MA is the kidney's notice to the physician/patient that there is a problem with the vasculature. MA can be reduced, and progression to overt proteinuria prevented, by aggressive blood pressure reduction. The National Kidney Foundation recommends that blood pressure levels be maintained at or below 130/80 mm Hg in anyone with diabetes or renal disease. This should be accomplished with antihypertensive agents that prevent the rise in MA and hence prevent development of proteinuria. Such agents are angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and, to a lesser extent, Beta blockers, non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonists, and diuretics. In summary, the presence of MA is a marker of endothelial dysfunction and a harbinger of markedly enhanced cardiovascular risk. All patients with diabetes and/or hypertension should be screened for the presence of microalbuminuria with use of spot morning urine. To maximize prevention of MA development, the following goals should be instituted: 1) blood pressure should be maintained at less than 130/80 mm Hg and a low-salt, moderate-potassium diet instituted; 2) in diabetics, HbA1c should be kept at less than 7%; 3) in obese patients, a weight loss program should be implemented, with a goal BMI of less than 30; and 4) the physician and patient, working together, should maintain low-density lipoprotein cholesterol at less than 120 mg/dL, and less than 100 mg/dL if diabetes is present. (c)2001 by Le Jacq Communications, Inc.
 ...
PMID:Microalbuminuria: what is it? Why is it important? What should be done about it? 1141 91

The Reduction in End Points in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study and the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT) are two recently reported trials with hard end points, conducted in patients in advanced stages of diabetic nephropathy. Two other studies--the Irbesartan Microalbuminuria Study (IRMA)-2 and the Microalbuminuria Reduction with Valsartan study (MARVAL)--were trials conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes with microalbuminuria, a cardiovascular risk factor associated with early-stage diabetic nephropathy. These trials all had a common theme--that is, does an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) interfere with the natural history of diabetic nephropathy in a blood pressure-independent fashion? Without question, the results of these trials legitimatize the use of the ARB class in forestalling the deterioration in renal function, which is almost inevitable in the patient with untreated diabetic nephropathy. These data can now be added to the vast array of evidence supporting angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor use in patients with nephropathy associated with type 1 diabetes. It now appears a safe conclusion that the patient with diabetic nephropathy should receive therapy with an agent that interrupts the renin-angiotensin system. These studies have not resolved the question as to whether an ACE inhibitor or an ARB is the preferred agent in people with nephropathy from type 1 diabetes, though the optimal doses of these drugs remain to be determined. Head-to-head studies comparing ACE inhibitors to ARBs in diabetic nephropathy are not likely to occur, so it is unlikely that comparable information will be forthcoming with ACE inhibitors. An evidence-based therapeutic approach derived from these trials would argue for ARBs to be the foundation of therapy in the patient with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.
 ...
PMID:Type 2 diabetes: RENAAL and IDNT--the emergence of new treatment options. 1182 41

Recent trials have helped to clarify indications for the initial pharmacological therapy of hypertension. Both the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI) and World Health Organization-international Society of Hypertension (WHO-ISH) recommendations should be revised. The more recent trials indicate that: (1) diuretics and beta-blockers appear to be as effective in reducing overall morbidity/ mortality as other agents (Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension [STOP-2], United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study [UKPDS], Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment [INSIGHT], Nordic diltiazem [NORDIL]); (2) the use of an a-blocker results in more cardiovascular events, especially congestive heart failure, when compared with a diuretic (Antihypertensive Therapy and Lipid Lowering Heart Attack Trial [ALLHAT]); (3)the use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor results in fewer myocardial infarctions and episodes of heart failure than calcium channel blockers in the elderly and in diabetic patients (Fosinopril vs. Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial [FACET], Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in Diabetes [ABCD], STOP-2) - other data (Captopril Prevention Project [CAPPP]) suggest that the use of an ACE inhibitor is preferred in diabetic patients; (4) overall cardiovascular events are similar with calcium channel blockers compared with a diuretic - however, there are fewer strokes with non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (NORDIL) and a trend towards an increase in heart failure and myocardial infarctions with either a dihydropyridine or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers compared with a diuretic (INSIGHT, NORDIL); (5) angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) will decrease proteinuria and slow progression of renal disease in type 2 diabetic patients when compared with regimens that do not include an ARB or an ACE inhibitor (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan [RENAAL], Irbesartan Type II Diabetic Nephropathy Trial [IDNT], Irbesartan Type II Diabetes with Microalbuminuria [IRMA Il]). The debate over initial therapy may be moot. High-risk hypertensive patients should probably be treated initially with combination therapy, one of which should be a diuretic. The use of diuretics and beta-blockers as well as ACE-inhibitors alone or with a diuretic should be considered as initial therapy (a change from JNCVI). Alpha-blockers should be reserved for special situations, i.e. prostatic hypertrophy (in contrast to WHO-ISH recommendations). An ACE-inhibitor or ARB, usually along with a diuretic, can be considered as preferred therapy in hypertensive diabetic patients. Some data suggest equal or greater reduction in strokes with a calcium channel blocker than other medications.
 ...
PMID:Current recommendations for the treatment of hypertension: are they still valid? 1199 97

Type 2 diabetes is the most common cause of end-stage renal disease in the United States, and type 2 diabetes has been shown to be a myocardial infarction equivalent in regard to risk of death from a cardiovascular event. Proteinuria is a surrogate marker for renal disease progression, and although data favor both the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing proteinuria, data for renal outcomes, such as time to dialysis, only exist for the ARBs, which clearly increase the duration to dialysis. Conversely, ACE inhibitors have overwhelming data that show substantial risk reduction from cardiovascular events and death in people with type 2 diabetes. Similar data on cardiovascular risk reduction are not yet available with ARBs, although two trials of renal disease progression did have cardiovascular endpoints as secondary outcomes. There were no significant differences between the ARB and control group except for first hospitalization with heart failure, where losartan reduced the risk by 32%, but there was a trend, albeit not significant, toward reduction of myocardial infarction. The first information regarding ARB effects on cardiovascular events as primary outcomes will come from the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint (LIFE) Reduction in Hypertension study. Therefore, as of this writing, all patients with type 2 diabetes and no evidence of nephropathy, ie, proteinuria and an elevated creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL, should be placed on an ACE inhibitor for cardiovascular risk reduction. If nephropathy is present, the evidence would support an ARB for therapy in concert with a b-blocker for cardiovascular risk reduction and renoprotection.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in nephropathy from type 2 diabetes. 1200 99

Diabetes has long been recognized as a risk factor for heart disease. Recent evidence has brought to light complex interactions that seem to influence both the renal and the vascular complications of diabetes. The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers has been shown to ameliorate renal and cardiac risks in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes to a degree that is disproportionate to blood pressure-lowering effects. The judicious use of these agents can materially improve the prognosis for patients with diabetes.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin blockade in type 2 diabetes: what the new evidence tells us about renal and cardiac complications. 1204 87

Both ACE inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are renoprotective beyond their effects on blood pressure (BP), but their widespread use is limited by their tendency to provoke hyperkalemia. The comparative effects of ACEI and ARB on potassium handling have not been investigated. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are differences in dynamic renal potassium handling between ACEI and ARB in response to an oral potassium challenge. This was a randomized crossover study of candesartan versus lisinopril titrated to control BP followed by an inpatient study of renal potassium handling in 24 hypertensive patients with type II diabetes mellitus (DMII) and preserved renal function. Following an oral potassium challenge (0.75 mmol/kg), differences in hourly serum K (mmol/L), rate of urinary potassium excretion (UkV, micromol/min), and fractional excretion of potassium (FEK) were assessed by repeated-measures ANOVA. Hourly UkV(p = .45) and FEK (p = .19) were similar for candesartan and lisinopril, although FEK at 2 hours for candesartan tended to exceed that for lisinopril (.34 [.04] vs. .26 [.03]) and approached significance (p = .096). UkVfor candesartan at hour 2 was 177 (26) and 121 (21) for lisinopril and also approached significance (p = .10). Serial serum potassium did not differ (p = .70). No statistical differences were discovered in renal potassium handling between candesartan and lisinopril in patients with DMII and preserved renal function. Whether there are differences between the drug classes in renal impairment remains to be determined.
 ...
PMID:Comparative effects on dynamic renal potassium excretion of ACE inhibition versus angiotensin receptor blockade in hypertensive patients with type II diabetes mellitus. 1209 42

The RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan) study is a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial which was recently published. It was aimed to evaluate the effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker losartan in patients with diabetic nephropathy. The primary efficacy measure was the time to the first event of the composite end point of a doubling of serum creatinine, end-stage renal disease, or death. The conclusion was that losartan led to significant improvement in renal outcomes, that was beyond that attributable to blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. The perusal of the report raises concern, regarding to both the patient population as well as the outcome measures. At randomization, the placebo group included more patients with angina, myocardial infarction and lipid disorders than the losartan group. Information on glucose metabolism was disregarded, and data on antihyperglycemic therapy--which may have undesirable influences on cardiac performance--were not included in a multivariate analysis. In addition, only data on first hospitalization were reported, whilst information on total specific-cause hospitalizations was disregarded, thus potentially masking further unfavorable events. Furthermore, creatinine seems not to be a reliable surrogate end point. Based on its mechanism of action, losartan may possess favorable renoprotective properties. However, due to the methodological flaws and the incomplete data in the RENAAL study, the question of the effectiveness and safety of this drug in diabetic nephropathy remains yet unanswered.
 ...
PMID:Losartan and diabetic nephropathy: commentaries on the RENAAL study. 1211 58

It is unknown whether the angiotensin receptor antagonist valsartan exerts a renoprotective effect on patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic nephropathy independent of its hypotensive effects. Forty patients with type 2 diabetes participated in this study. All patients received valsartan 40 mg, a dose with no clinical effect on blood pressure levels. Blood pressure, urinary albumin excretion (UAE), and creatinine clearance were determined at baseline and at the end of the 6-month treatment period. Antihypertensive and/or antidiabetic drugs, including insulin, were permitted throughout the study. After 6 months of valsartan therapy, mean UAE decreased from 86.8 +/- 196 to 46.9 +/- 97 microg/min (n = 37). In addition, a significant decrease was observed in the UAE of the subgroup of patients displaying diabetic nephropathy (UAE > 20 microg/min, n = 14), from 219.4 +/- 275 to 102.7 +/- 141 microg/min, (P < 0.01). Changes in UAE for valsartan correlated significantly with UAE at baseline (r = -0.935, P < 0.0001). Serum creatinine levels and creatinine clearance remained stable before and after treatment with valsartan. No significant differences were observed between pre- and post-treatment body mass index, glycosylated hemoglobin, or systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In type 2 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy, 6 months of treatment with low dose valsartan, an angiotensin-II receptor antagonist, thus reduced UAE with no reduction in systemic blood pressure. The drug may be safely administered in this subset of type 2 diabetic patients. The long-term benefits in terms of risk reduction must still be evaluated in further trials.
 ...
PMID:Renoprotective effects of low-dose valsartan in type 2 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy. 1212 67


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>