Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0011881 (diabetic nephropathy)
 10,836 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

There are several theories on the cause of ACE inhibitor-induced cough, but the exact mechanism is not known. In many patients, if cough develops, the ACE inhibitor can be discontinued and a drug in another therapeutic class used in its place. However, in patients with CHF, diabetic nephropathy, and patients who have experienced a myocardial infarction, discontinuing the ACE inhibitor may not be in the best interest of the patient. In this patient population it would be reasonable to try cromolyn sodium to treat cough, while continuing the ACE inhibitor. Data are not available to support the efficacy of cromolyn sodium to treat cough in patients with diabetic nephropathy, but these patients clearly benefit from the use of an ACE inhibitor. Other factors not addressed in the case reports and the clinical trial such as patient adherence, cost, and quality of life should also play a role in the decision to use cromolyn sodium. Cromolyn sodium has been effective for the treatment of ACE inhibitor-induced cough in many case reports and has had mild success in one small clinical trial. Although none of the reports adequately assessed adverse effects, studies examining cromolyn for other indications have demonstrated a relatively benign adverse effect profile. It is difficult to recommend an exact dose to use because of the dosing variability in the case reports. The majority of the case reports and the one clinical trial used dosages similar to recommendations for bronchial asthma (i.e., 2 puffs [1.6 mg] 4 times daily via MDI or 20-mg capsules 4 times daily via breath-activated inhalation). At this time, the use of cromolyn sodium is a viable option, but more controlled studies are needed to fully elucidate its role in the treatment of ACE inhibitor-induced cough.
 ...
PMID:Cromolyn sodium for ACE inhibitor-induced cough. 918 21

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays an important role in both the short-term and long-term regulation of arterial blood pressure, and fluid and electrolyte balance. The RAAS is a dual hormone system, serving as both a circulating and a local tissue hormone system (i.e., local mediator) as well as neurotransmitter or neuromediator functions in CNS. Control of blood pressure by the RAAS is exerted through multiple actions of angiotensin II, a small peptide which is a potent vasoconstrictor hormone implicated in the genesis and maintenance of hypertension. Hypertension is a primary risk factor associated with cardiovascular, cerebral and renal vascular disease. One of the approaches to the treatment of hypertension, which may be considered as a major scientific advancement, involves the use of drugs affecting the RAAS. Pharmacological interruption of the RAAS was initially employed in the late 1970s with the advent of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, captopril. ACE inhibitors have since gained widespread use in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, and diabetic nephropathy. As the roles of the RAAS in the pathophysiology of several diseases was explored, so did the realization of the importance of inhibiting the actions of angiotensin II. Although ACE inhibitors are well tolerated, they are also involved in the activation of bradykinin, enkephalins, and other biologically active peptides. These actions result in adverse effects such as cough, increased bronchial reactivity, and angioedema. Thus, the goal of achieving a more specific blockade of the effects of angiotensin II than is possible with ACE inhibition. The introduction of the nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan in 1995 marked the achievement of this objective and has opened new vistas in understanding and controlling the additional biological effects of angiotensin II. Complementary investigations into the cloning and sequencing of angiotensin II receptors have demonstrated the existence of a family of angiotensin II receptor subtypes. Two major types of angiotensin II receptors have been identified in humans. The type 1 receptor (AT1) mediates most known effects of angiotensin II. The type 2 receptor (AT2), for which no precise function was known in the past, has gained importance recently and new mechanisms of intracellular signalling have been proposed. This review presents recent advances in angiotensin II receptor pharmacology, molecular biology, and signal transduction, with particular reference to the AT1 receptor. Excellent reviews have appeared recently on this subject.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin II receptors-antagonists, molecular biology, and signal transduction. 1009 99

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) are a class of antihypertensive agents that decrease mortality in congestive heart failure and have established efficacy in the treatment of hypertension and the slowing of established diabetic nephropathy and other proteinuria-associated glomerulonephritides. These drugs have not gained wide acceptance in the treatment of hypertension in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) because of a potential for decreased renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate associated with a single kidney and concomitant cyclosporine use. Experimental animal models suggest that ACEi may be of benefit in slowing the progression of chronic renal allograft rejection. We undertook a retrospective chart analysis of all RTRs in our institution who had been treated with an ACEi or an angiotensin II (AT II) antagonist, with the objectives of determining the safety, efficacy, and side effect profile of these medications. The minimum follow-up period was 6 months. One hundred seventy-seven of 642 RTRs were prescribed an ACEi or AT II antagonist. Forty-seven patients discontinued therapy, with the most common causes of discontinuation being cough (8 patients) and hyperkalemia (6 patients). The mean arterial blood pressure at each follow-up period was lower than that at the time of initiation of ACEi or AT II antagonist therapy, with a decrease from 92 +/- 12 mm Hg to 86 +/- 9 mm Hg (P < 0.05) after 3 years of treatment. The serum creatinine concentrations did not change throughout the follow-up period. There was a nonsustained increase from the baseline serum potassium of 4.4 +/- 0.5 to 4.6 +/- 0.6 mEq/L at 3 months (P < 0.05), but no further increases in potassium beyond this time. The mean hemoglobin concentration for the cohort did not change, but 13 RTRs given an ACEi for posttransplantation erythrocytosis (PTE) had a decrease in hemoglobin from 17.1 +/- 1.0 g/dL at the start of ACEi therapy to 14.8 +/- 2.2 g/dL at 3 years (P < 0.05). ACEi and AT II antagonists were generally effective antihypertensives, and were safe and well-tolerated agents in this cohort of RTRs. ACEi were also effective in the treatment of PTE.
 ...
PMID:ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II antagonists in renal transplantation: an analysis of safety and efficacy. 1062 May 59

The limitations of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and the role of angiotensin II-receptor blockers (ARBs) in the treatment of hypertension, heart failure, and diabetic nephropathy are discussed. Although ACE inhibitors are generally well tolerated, two important class-related adverse effects are cough, which is common, and angioedema, which is rare but serious. Cough and angioedema appear to be less frequent with ARBs than with ACE inhibitors. ARBs seem to be as capable as ACE inhibitors of producing renal dysfunction. ARBs may offer more complete inhibition of angiotensin II than ACE inhibitors. The mechanism of action is based on selective binding to angiotensin type 1 receptors. Many clinical studies have shown that ARBs lower blood pressure as effectively as other antihypertensive agents, including ACE inhibitors. ARBs do not appear to have a greater clinical effect than ACE inhibitors in patients with heart failure. Some studies of combination ARB and ACE inhibitor therapy for heart failure indicate advantages of the combination over therapy with either class. ARBs may exert renal protective effects in diabetic nephropathy. ARBs offer an alternative to ACE inhibitors in the management of hypertension, especially for ACE-inhibitor-intolerant patients. ACE inhibitors remain the drugs of choice for patients with heart failure, left ventricular dysfunction after MI, and diabetic nephropathy; ARBs offer these patients an alternative when ACE inhibitor therapy is not tolerated.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin II-receptor blockers: clinical relevance and therapeutic role. 1132 59

Arterial hypertension is a major risk factor for microangiopathic diabetic complications and associated with an increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. An intensified antihypertensive treatment reduces microangiopathic complications and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. Even in normotensive type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients, the treatment with ACE inhibitors may prevent the later development of diabetic nephropathy. Treatment with ACE inhibitors increases the concentrations of bradykinin, which is responsible for the side effects such as cough and urticaria in some patients. On the other hand, bradykinin may have beneficial intrarenal effects decreasing the intraglomerular pressure. The novel angiotensin II receptor type 1 antagonists do not influence the bradykinin concentrations and seem to be tolerated by patients suffering from chronic cough with ACE inhibitor therapy. It is still unclear whether the different intrarenal effects are of clinical relevance in the long-term treatment of diabetic patients. In studies with diabetic animals the nephroprotective effects of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists are comparable. It was shown that glucose and lipid metabolism is not influenced by treatment with angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists. Further compared to Felodipine the reduction of urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) was more pronounced by Losartane in Chinese type 2 diabetic patients. Short-term studies directly comparing the renal effects of ACE inhibitors with AT II type 1 receptor antagonists revealed similar reduction of blood pressure and albumin excretion rate in patients with diabetic nephropathy, so a combination of both substances might be useful. Data from ongoing long-term trials are still missing. Further, it is unknown whether different phenotypes of the ACE gene (DD, II polymorphism) require different therapeutic options. In conclusion, treatment with angiotensin II receptor antagonists is well-tolerated and has no adverse effects on metabolic control in diabetic patients. The beneficial effect on microangiopathic complications however has to be proven in randomized long-term studies in direct comparison with ACE inhibitors, which were clearly shown to delay the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy.
 ...
PMID:[Angiotensin II type-1 receptor antagonists and diabetes mellitus]. 1145 Jan 65

Diabetic nephropathy has become the leading cause of terminal renal failure in all Western nations due to a steady increase of patients with the renal complication of type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. A number of modifiable risk factors have been identified that predispose to and/or accelerate renal disease in patients with diabetes mellitus. Among these, the level of blood pressure, even in the range of normotension according to World Health Organization or Joint National Committee definition, is closely related to the rate of progression of diabetic nephropathy. This has been documented in patients with incipient (microalbuminuric) and in patients with manifest (proteinuric) diabetic renal disease. Consequently, the treatment of even normotensive diabetics has been recommended once microalbuminuria is present, and blood pressure values in the low normal range should be aimed for. The selection of antihypertensive agents is also important, however, since a 'renoprotective effect' has been documented for drugs that interfere with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system such as angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Recently, a new class of drugs that selectively inhibits this system by specifically targeting the angiotensin II receptor has been developed. These angiotensin II subtype 1-receptor antagonists are efficacious antihypertensive agents with a side-effect profile similar to placebo. Evidence for a renoprotective effect in patients with diabetic nephropathy from a large controlled clinical trial is still awaited, but data generated in animal experiments and in smaller clinical trials are encouraging. Currently, these drugs are a valuable substitute for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in patients who experience side effects such as intractable cough.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin II subtype 1-receptor antagonists in the treatment of diabetic nephropathy. 1145 Dec 16

The rising incidence of stroke, congestive heart failure (CHF) and end stage renal disease (ESRD) has signalled a need to increase awareness, treatment and control of hypertension. There continues to be a need for effective antihypertensive medications since hypertension is a major precursor to various forms of cardiovascular disease. The renin-angiotensin (AT) aldosterone system (RAAS) is a key component to the development of hypertension and can be one target of drug therapy. Angotensin II (ATII) receptor blockers (ARBs) are the most recent class of agents available to treat hypertension, which work by by inhibiting ATII at the receptor level. Currently, national consensus guidelines recommend that ARBs should be reserved for hypertensive patients who cannot tolerate angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (ACEIs). ARBs, however, are moving to the forefront of therapy with a promising role in the area of renoprotection and CHF. Recent trials such as the The Renoprotective Effect of the Angiotensin-Receptor Antagonist Irbesartan in Patients with Nephropathy Due to Type 2 Diabetes Trial (IDNT), the Effect of Irbesartan on the Development of Diabetic Nephropathy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (IRMA2), and The Effects of Losartan on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy (RENAAL) study have demonstrated the renoprotective effects of ARBs in patients with Type 2 diabetes. The Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT) adds to the growing body of evidence that ARBs may improve morbidity and mortality in CHF patients. As a class, ARBs are well tolerated and have a lower incidence of cough and angioedema compared to ACEIs. This article reviews the differences among the ARBs, existing efficacy data in hypertension, and explores the role of ARBs in CHF and renal disease.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin II receptor blockers for the treatment of hypertension. 1182 17

Angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AAIIs) are the most specific inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. There are two types of angiotensin II (Ang II) receptors, the AT(1) receptor, which is responsible for all the classical physiological properties of Ang II, and the AT(2) receptor, whose function in humans remains unclear. The different AAIIs used in clinical practice vary depending on their pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and, for some of them, depending on their metabolism in vivo into an active metabolite. AAIIs are relatively well tolerated, and, unlike angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), do not induce cough. AAIIs are indicated in mild, moderate and severe essential hypertension, where their efficacy has been proven in many studies. The maximal antihypertensive effect is obtained in a few days or weeks, and is somewhat retarded when compared with ACEIs. Their effect is independent of age and sex, but does depend to a certain extent on ethnic origin, since Afro-American patients are less sensitive to AAIIs than Caucasians. In general, the antihypertensive and haemodynamic response to blockers of the renin-angiotensin system is potentiated in presence of a negative salt balance and attenuated in case of a positive salt balance. This means that AAII efficiency is improved by salt depletion induced by a salt-free diet or thiazide diuretics. AAIIs induce short-term improvement of haemodynamic parameters in cardiac insufficiency. Several ongoing clinical trials have been designed to compare their efficacy in cardiac insufficiency and myocardial infarction with those of reference treatments. Valsartan has been recently shown to improve morbimortality in patients with cardiac insufficiency and receiving a conventional treatment including an ACEI. It has been convincingly shown that blockade of the renin-aldosterone system by ACEIs decreases proteinuria and slows down the progression of renal insufficiency, especially in type 2 diabetic nephropathy. Recent trials have shown that AAIIs share the same properties as ACEIs in these indications. It appears that the beneficial effect of AAIIs and ACEIs is not entirely explained by the blood pressure lowering effect of these drugs. AAII administration increases renin release and Ang II production, which may overcome Ang II blockade. On this basis, the combination of an AAII and an ACEI has been proposed to achieve a maximal renin-angiotensin system blockade. Several experimental studies in animals and preliminary clinical studies all indicate that the combination of the two drugs may be more beneficial than either drug used alone in hypertension, cardiac insufficiency and post-myocardial infarction. Clinical trials are necessary to further document the putative advantages of such a combined therapy. The future of AAIIs depends on the following: progress made in the understanding of the molecular and cellular activities of angiotensin (angiotensin receptor signalling, receptor dimerisation, presence of other angiotensin receptor subtypes, role of AT(2) receptor, etc.);a comprehensive view of the role of the local renin system in various organs (local generation and effect of Ang II on cellular proliferation, fibrosis, inflammation, angiogenesis, etc.);predictability of the response to AAII treatment (genetic predisposition to AAII treatment, in conjunction with environmental factors); andresults of the ongoing clinical trials designed to assess the long-term effects of AAIIs in cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, in comparison with reference treatments.
 ...
PMID:[Angiotensin II receptor blockers: current status and future prospects]. 1203 89

Imidapril hydrochloride (imidapril) is a long-acting, non-sulfhydryl angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, which has been used clinically in the treatment of hypertension, chronic congestive heart failure (CHF), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and diabetic nephropathy. It has the unique advantage over other ACE inhibitors in causing a lower incidence of dry cough. After oral administration, imidapril is rapidly converted in the liver to its active metabolite imidaprilat. The plasma levels of imidaprilat gradually increase in proportion to the dose, and decline slowly. The time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (T(max)) is 2.0 h for imidapril and 9.3 h for imidaprilat. The elimination half-lives (t(1/2)) of imidapril and imidaprilat is 1.7 and 14.8 h, respectively. Imidapril and its metabolites are excreted chiefly in the urine. As an ACE inhibitor, imidaprilat is as potent as enalaprilat, an active metabolite of enalapril, and about twice as potent as captopril. In patients with hypertension, blood pressure was still decreased at 24 h after imidapril administration. The antihypertensive effect of imidapril was dose-dependent. The maximal reduction of blood pressure and plasma ACE was achieved with imidapril, 10 mg once daily, and the additional effect was not prominent with higher doses. When administered to patients with AMI, imidapril improved left ventricular ejection fraction and reduced plasma brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels. In patients with mild-to-moderate CHF [New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II-III], imidapril increased exercise time and physical working capacity and decreased plasma atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) and BNP levels in a dose-related manner. In patients with diabetic nephropathy, imidapril decreased urinary albumin excretion. Interestingly, imidapril improved asymptomatic dysphagia in patients with a history of stroke. In the same patients it increased serum substance P levels, while the angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan was ineffective. These studies indicate that imidapril is a versatile ACE inhibitor. In addition to its effectiveness in the treatment of hypertension, CHF, and AMI, imidapril has beneficial effects in the treatment of diabetic nephropathy and asymptomatic dysphagia. Good tissue penetration and inhibition of tissue ACE by imidapril contributes to its effectiveness in preventing cardiovascular complications of hypertension. The major advantages of imidapril are its activity in the treatment of various cardiovascular diseases and lower incidence of cough compared with some of the older ACE inhibitors.
 ...
PMID:Protection of the cardiovascular system by imidapril, a versatile angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. 1217 88

Even well-conducted randomized controlled trials can only reduce uncertainty, not eliminate it. The trials presented in this article all have gaps, and like many studies, some raise more questions than answers. A summary of the current trials, however, can be presented as follows. For patients with essential hypertension who are at high risk for cardiovascular disease, the use of diuretic therapy (excluding simultaneous use of ACE or CCB) resulted in outcomes at least equivalent to the use of either ACE or CCB without diuretics. Naturally, the dilemma for clinicians is that these drugs are most often used in combination with thiazide diuretics, as indicated by the RENAAL trial where 80% of ARB were used with diuretics in patients with type II diabetes and known nephropathy. The increased risk of heart failure observed with ACE and CCB in that trial may be relevant only to patients in whom diuretics were not also used. The study does raise important awareness, however, that ACE or CCB use without diuretic therapy is no better than diuretic therapy, and may be associated with higher risk of certain outcomes. A substantial number of patients with essential hypertension might achieve adequate blood pressure control with diuretic monotherapy. If so, that certainly has important implications for the cost of medical care in this country. For African Americans with essential hypertension, ACE may have advantages as a component of therapy in comparison with CCBs or beta-blockers, although diuretics should probably be the cornerstone of therapy for them and supported by the Seventh Joint National Committee. For patients with proteinuric renal disease, whether associated with diabetes or hypertension, it should be considered inappropriate to use DHP CCB as monotherapy in any setting, whether as part of a clinical trial or in clinical practice. These drugs should not be considered as ethical placebo arms in trials, most especially in diabetic nephropathy, nor should they be used without an ACE or ARB in patients with proteinuric renal disease in the absence of documented contraindications or intolerance to ACE, ARB, or non-DHP CCB (which are now considered second-line agents for proteinuric renal disease, and are acceptable placebo or comparison arms in clinical trials). For patients with type I diabetes, ACE remain the cornerstone of therapy. Because of recent RENAAL and IDNT trial results, the greatest benefit for slowing progression of renal disease in type II diabetic nephropathy now belongs to ARBs. In contrast, however, the HOPE trial showed that ACE, specifically ramipril, had the greatest evidence for prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in patients with renal insufficiency, regardless of diabetic status. Cardiovascular outcomes were secondary end points in the RENAAL and IDNT trials, and with the exception of heart failure for losartan, no benefits on cardiovascular outcomes were statistically significant. Progression of renal disease has only been studied in a relatively small cohort of Israeli patients comparing enalapril with nifedipine. These gaps lead to a classic dilemma in medical decision-making. Because evidence has shown that patients with elevated serum creatinine (greater than or equal to 1.4 mg/dL) are just as likely to die from cardiovascular disease as they are to reach end-stage renal disease, which outcome should be the focus for clinicians, or for researchers? Using a strictly evidence-based approach, this question can only be answered by yet another large, long, randomized, controlled trial. Given the similarity of actions between the ARB and ACE, it is likely there is considerable overlap of both benefits and side-effects between the two, although ARB may have a lower incidence of cough and hyperkalemia. The decision of which antihypertensive agents to use will have to be tailored carefully to the needs of the patient and careful consideration of both medical and economic factors. Regardless of the choice between an ACE or ARB, however, post hoc analysis of clinical trials [21,47] and observational data clearly indicate that patients with chronic kidney disease, even if considered mild (ie, serum creatinine greater than or equal to 1.4 mg/dL) are at significantly greater risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared with those with better kidney function. As stated in a recent review by the authors of the HOPE trial [50], "the frequent practice of withholding ACE [or ARB] in patients with mild renal insufficiency is unwarranted," because not only are these patients precisely those who might benefit most from their use, but safety and tolerability are generally excellent. Based on the results of the AASK trial, the authors add the same for the use of ACE inhibitors in African Americans.
 ...
PMID:What have we learned from the current trials? 1487 Oct 59


1 2 3 Next >>