Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0033687 (proteinuria)
 24,015 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Primary (AL, amyloid light-chain) amyloidosis is a plasma cell disorder in which deposits of amyloid light-chain protein cause progressive organ failure. It is important to recognise that amyloidosis is a dynamic process and chemotherapy-induced reduction of the activity of the plasma cell clone reduces the supply of the amyloid precursor protein and can result in a major regression of the deposits. The most common target organ is the kidney and renal amyloidosis manifests as proteinuria or nephrotic syndrome. Proteinuria is seen in three quarters of patients. Amyloid related nephrotic syndrome and renal failure are potentially reversible. Fatigue, congestive heart failure, hepatomegaly, peripheral neuropathy, orthostatic hypotension, carpal tunnel syndrome and macroglossia are other common features. The median survival is one to two years. Conventional-dose melphalan as standard treatment can prolong the median duration of survival by about ten months, but the clinical response rates with improvement of impaired organ function are low. Up-front high-dose chemotherapy with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation is much more effective and can result in a major improvement in the clinical condition of patients. However, the toxicity related to this treatment can be relevant due to impaired organ function. Conventional-dose chemotherapy consisting of vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone or high-dose dexamethasone or interferon-alpha are other possible approaches to treatment. The improvement of patient condition with an effective conventional-dose chemotherapy may increase the tolerability of high-dose chemotherapy and reduce transplantation related problems.
 ...
PMID:Novel approaches to the treatment of primary amyloidosis. 1106 Aug 11

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor subtype 1 antagonists have proven to be effective and well tolerated antihypertensive agents. They also exhibit unique cardioprotective and renoprotective properties in patients with comorbid conditions such as congestive heart failure and proteinuria or renal insufficiency. This benefit is observed most dramatically in diabetic persons. Although inconclusive, the results of a limited number of clinical trials support the notion that additive antihypertensive, cardioprotective, and renoprotective effects may be obtained with combined used of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor subtype 1 antagonists in some patients. More studies are needed to confirm the findings of these preliminary studies, and to define more clearly those subsets of patients who might derive the greatest benefit from angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-angiotensin II receptor subtype 1 antagonist combination therapy.
 ...
PMID:Is there a place for combining angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor antagonists in the treatment of hypertension, renal disease or congestive heart failure? 1149 59

This article gives an overview, citing animal and clinical studies, of the effects of increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) in severe obesity. Animal studies demonstrate that increased IAP increases pleural pressure, cardiac filling pressures, femoral venous pressure, renal venous pressure, systemic blood pressure, and vascular resistance, renin and aldosterone levels, and intracranial pressure. Thus, the comorbidities presumed secondary to increased IAP in obese patients include congestive heart failure, hypoventilation, venous stasis ulcers, gastroesophageal reflux, urinary stress incontinence, incisional hernia, pseudotumor cerebri, proteinuria, and systemic hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Effects of increased intra-abdominal pressure in severe obesity. 1158 45

A number of studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of regular physical activity on levels of HgbA(1)C in patients with type II diabetes mellitus, largely due to an increase in insulin sensitivity. Benefits are related to short-term improvements in insulin sensitivity following individual exercise bouts. Regular exercise can prevent or delay the onset of type II diabetes in high-risk populations. The insulin resistant state is associated with a cluster of cardiovascular risk factors all of which improve with regular physical activity. Because of the high incidence of occult coronary disease, patients need a cardiovascular evaluation when initiating an exercise program. High intensity exercise may result in retinal hemorrhage and transient worsening of diabetic proteinuria. The most common complication is hypoglycemia. A combination of aerobic and light resistance exercise is appropriate. Patients should exercise a minimum of three times a week for 30-60 minutes at 50% to 75% of their VO(2max). (c) 2000 by CHF, Inc.
 ...
PMID:The role of exercise in type II diabetes mellitus. 1183 22

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

Drugs that inhibit the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) are of proven benefit in the treatment of hypertension, congestive heart failure, or acute myocardial infarction. In the last decade, several clinical trials have shown that RAS inhibitors also offer significant renoprotection in both diabetic and non-diabetic nephropathy. However, patients with advanced renal insufficiency did not take part in these trials because of the risk of acute renal failure (ARF) and hyperkalemia, and, for the same reason, most physicians do not offer these drugs to patients with impaired renal function. Recently, a post-hoc analysis of the Ramipril Efficacy In Nephropathy (REIN) study which included patients with severe renal insufficiency, showed that RAS inhibition slows glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline over time and progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in a safe way in patients quite close to ESRD (basal GFR, 10 to 30 ml/min/1.73m2). These beneficial effects have also been shown in the Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the All Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, clinical proteinuria, and renal insufficiency, where RAS inhibition therapy significantly reduced the risk of ESRD once doubling of baseline serum creatinine levels had been achieved as compared to non-RAS anti-hypertensive treatment. Thus, these data suggest that RAS inhibition therapy should be given to all patients with proteinuric chronic nephropathy, independently of the level of renal function.
 ...
PMID:Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system reduce the rate of GFR decline and end-stage renal disease in patients with severe renal insufficiency. 1224 75

In well designed studies in patients with mild to moderate hypertension, combinations of the sustained-release (SR) formulation of the nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist verapamil 120 to 240 mg/day and the ACE inhibitor trandolapril 0.5 to 8 mg/day were significantly more effective in reducing sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from baseline than placebo. In most randomised studies, combinations of verapamil SR 120 to 240 mg/day and trandolapril 0.5 to 8 mg/day were significantly more effective in lowering sitting DBP and SBP than the corresponding monotherapies administered at the same dosage. Trandolapril/verapamil SR 2/180 mg/day provided significantly more effective 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control than of the corresponding monotherapies. Moreover, trandolapril/verapamil SR reduced BP in patients inadequately controlled with either of the corresponding monotherapies. The antihypertensive efficacy of trandolapril/verapamil SR 2/180 mg/day was generally similar to that of other combinations of antihypertensive agents (metoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol/chlorthalidone, lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide, enalapril/hydrochlorothiazide) in patients with hypertension, including those with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Trandolapril/verapamil SR reduced BP in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes or primary renal disease, Black patients and elderly patients. Trandolapril/verapamil SR was more effective than the individual components administered as monotherapy in reducing proteinuria in patients with type 2 diabetes or primary renal disease. Trandolapril/verapamil SR had a neutral or beneficial effect on metabolic parameters (glucose, insulin, lipids) in patients with hypertension, including those with type 2 diabetes. Trandolapril/verapamil SR preserved left ventricular function in patients with heart failure. Fewer cardiac events occurred after therapy with trandolapril/verapamil SR than after trandolapril alone in post-myocardial infarction patients with congestive heart failure. The incidence of adverse events in recipients of trandolapril/verapamil SR was similar to that of the individual components, and that of other combination therapies. In placebo-controlled trials conducted in the US, headache, upper respiratory tract infections, cough, constipation, atrioventricular block (first degree) and dizziness were the most commonly reported adverse events in recipients of combinations of verapamil SR (120 to 240 mg/day) and trandolapril (0.5 to 8 mg/day). In conclusion, the fixed-dose combination of trandolapril/verapamil SR is an effective treatment for patients with hypertension, including those with type 2 diabetes. Trandolapril/verapamil SR tended to be more effective than monotherapy with either verapamil SR or trandolapril, and generally showed antihypertensive efficacy similar to that of other combination antihypertensive therapies. Current data support the use of trandolapril/verapamil SR as an alternative treatment when monotherapy with either agent is not effective. Data from large clinical trials currently being conducted will assist in fully defining the role of trandolapril/verapamil SR as a cardio- and renoprotective agent.
 ...
PMID:Fixed combination trandolapril/verapamil sustained-release: a review of its use in essential hypertension. 1242 Nov 12

About half of all the patients with CHF are anemic (they have a hemoglobin of < 12 g%). The prevalence and severity of this anemia increase with increasing severity of the CHF. The anemia is caused by a combination of poor nutrition, associated renal insufficiency causing inappropriately low Erythropoietin (EPO) levels, bone marrow depression and EPO resistance caused by excessive TNF alpha and other factors, gastrointestinal blood loss caused by aspirin, ACE inhibitors, EPO loss in the urine with proteinuria, and hemodilution caused by the excessive plasma volume. Studies have shown that the anemia is an independent risk factor for death in CHF, almost doubling the mortality rate. Correction of the anemia with subcutaneous EPO and IV iron improves cardiac function and functional capacity, helps prevent the progression of renal failure, markedly reduces hospitalization and diuretic doses, and improves self assessed quality of life. This so-called Cardio Renal Anemia Syndrome is very common in CHF. Its successful treatment demands close cooperation between cardiologists and nephrologists.
 ...
PMID:The importance of anemia and its correction in the management of severe congestive heart failure. 1245 37

The most important factor that prevents the progression of renal damage in diabetes mellitus, beside the improvement of blood glucose control, is tight BP control. The tenet of tight BP control may be defined as the lowest BP level one can accomplish using antihypertensive therapy that is at the same time compatible with the absence of untoward side effects. In fact, both the Framingham Heart Study in nondiabetic normal subjects and the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study in type 2 diabetic patients showed that systolic values as low as 108 to 111 mmHg and diastolic values as low as 70 to 71 mmHg are significantly associated with decreased cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. However, 45 to 50% of the patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension have systolic BP levels above 140 mmHg during antihypertensive therapy, particularly when using monotherapy. Thus the issue regarding the choice of which drugs one should use to treat hypertension became critical from a clinical point of view. Pharmaceutical compounds, which inhibit the renin-angiotensin system, have become the first-choice treatment in patients with diabetes mellitus and incipient and advanced renal complications. The present brief review analyzes the effects of calcium channel blockers (CCB) on cardiovascular and renal complications in diabetes mellitus. The review discussed those studies that directly and blindly compared CCB with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and with angiotensin II AT(1) receptor blockers (ARB). Furthermore, size of the population recruited in each trial was used as a criterion of priority in the selection of the reports from the available literature. From the point of view of cardiovascular complications, the results of these studies showed a slightly better benefit of CCB on stroke, whereas ACE inhibitors better prevented the occurrence of myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure. On the other hand, recent observations demonstrated that also ACE inhibitors and ARB are effective in the primary and secondary prevention of stroke, although these studies did not directly compare these compounds with CCB. With regard to the outcome of renal complications, both ARB and ACE inhibitors more effectively prevented the progression of renal damage among the patients with overt nephropathy than CCB. On the contrary, both CCB and ACE inhibitors were equally effective on blunting the decay of GFR in diabetic patients who do not have overt proteinuria. However, ACE inhibitors and ARB more markedly decreased the rate of albumin excretion rate in the range of both microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria. Recent advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of abnormalities of albumin excretion rate and of atherosclerosis are also discussed. Both mechanical stress, mainly secondary to systolic hypertension, and elevated circulating and tissue levels of angiotensin II, partially independent from each other, cause excessive generation of superoxide compounds. This chain reaction of events in turn leads to disorders of structural components of glomerular filter and to damage of the vascular wall. Systolic BP control (<130 mmHg) is not adequately accomplished in the majority of the patients treated only with ACE inhibitors and ARB, even in association with diuretics. Poor BP control may lead to excessive systemic mechanical stress at the vascular level despite satisfactory inhibition of angiotensin II effects. In conclusion, one can suggest that CCB are useful and often indispensable pharmaceutical compounds, beside ACE inhibitors and ARB, to accomplish tight BP control (<130/85 mmHg), a target that is unlikely to be successfully maintained in the overall population of type 2 diabetic patients only by ACE inhibitors or ARB, as monotherapy. However, ACE inhibitors and ARB might be considered first-choice drugs in the treatment of hypertension in diabetes mellitus, mainly because of a better renoprotection.
 ...
PMID:Cardiovascular and renal protection in type 2 diabetes mellitus: the role of calcium channel blockers. 1246 17

The clinical diagnosis of renal artery stenosis relies on a high index of suspicion and confirmation by noninvasive imaging modalities. There are three distinct clinical syndromes associated with renal artery stenosis: renin-dependent hypertension, essential hypertension, and ischemic nephropathy. Clinical features that should heighten suspicion for renal artery stenosis include abrupt-onset or accelerated hypertension at any age, unexplained acute or chronic azotemia, azotemia induced by angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, asymmetric renal dimensions, and congestive heart failure with normal ventricular function. Patients with true renin-dependent (renovascular) hypertension are typically young or middle-age women with renal fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD). Initial therapy for renovascular hypertension associated with FMD is an ACE inhibitor; refractory hypertension responds readily to balloon angioplasty without stenting. Elderly patients with generalized atherosclerosis and hypertension often have atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS); hypertension in these patients is usually not renin dependent (ie, essential hypertension). Hypertension alone, even if treated with multiple medications, is not a compelling indication for renal artery revascularization; these patients should be treated aggressively with antihypertensive medical therapy. Renal artery revascularization with stenting may be considered for refractory severe hypertension, and would be expected to improve blood control and modestly reduce medication requirements. Renal revascularization rarely cures hypertension in patients with ARAS. Patients with ARAS, hypertension, and end-organ injury should be considered for renal revascularization. Manifestations of end-organ injury include nonischemic pulmonary edema; hypertensive crisis associated with acute coronary syndrome, aortic dissection, or neurologic impairment; and renal insufficiency. Ischemic nephropathy is best treated before the development of advanced renal failure. The best candidates for revascularization are those with baseline serum creatinine less than 2.0 mg/dL, bilateral renal artery stenosis, normal renal resistive indices, no proteinuria, and one or more manifestations of end-organ injury. In these patients, renal revascularization is best accomplished by stenting, although surgical revascularization may be considered in patients with concomitant severe aortic aneurysmal or occlusive disease.
 ...
PMID:Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis. 1268 6


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