Hallvard Holdaas

The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin plus ezetimibe in patients with chronic kidney disease (Study of Heart and Renal Protection) : a randomised placebo-controlled trial

Summary Background Lowering LDL cholesterol with statin regimens reduces the risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and the need for coronary revascularisation in people without kidney disease, but its effects in people with moderate-to-severe kidney disease are uncertain. The SHARP trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of simvastatin plus ezetimibe in such patients. Methods This randomised double-blind trial included 9270 patients with chronic kidney disease (3023 on dialysis and 6247 not) with no known history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation. Patients were randomly assigned to simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg daily versus matching placebo. The key prespecified outcome was first major atherosclerotic event (non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary death, non-haemorrhagic stroke, or any arterial revascularisation procedure). All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00125593, and ISRCTN54137607. Findings 4650 patients were assigned to receive simvastatin plus ezetimibe and 4620 to placebo. Allocation to simvastatin plus ezetimibe yielded an average LDL cholesterol difference of 0·85 mmol/L (SE 0·02; with about two-thirds compliance) during a median follow-up of 4·9 years and produced a 17% proportional reduction in major atherosclerotic events (526 [11·3%] simvastatin plus ezetimibe vs 619 [13·4%] placebo; rate ratio [RR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·74–0·94; log-rank p=0·0021). Non-significantly fewer patients allocated to simvastatin plus ezetimibe had a non-fatal myocardial infarction or died from coronary heart disease (213 [4·6%] vs 230 [5·0%]; RR 0·92, 95% CI 0·76–1·11; p=0·37) and there were significant reductions in non-haemorrhagic stroke (131 [2·8%] vs 174 [3·8%]; RR 0·75, 95% CI 0·60–0·94; p=0·01) and arterial revascularisation procedures (284 [6·1%] vs 352 [7·6%]; RR 0·79, 95% CI 0·68–0·93; p=0·0036). After weighting for subgroup-specific reductions in LDL cholesterol, there was no good evidence that the proportional effects on major atherosclerotic events differed from the summary rate ratio in any subgroup examined, and, in particular, they were similar in patients on dialysis and those who were not. The excess risk of myopathy was only two per 10 000 patients per year of treatment with this combination (9 [0·2%] vs 5 [0·1%]). There was no evidence of excess risks of hepatitis (21 [0·5%] vs 18 [0·4%]), gallstones (106 [2·3%] vs 106 [2·3%]), or cancer (438 [9·4%] vs 439 [9·5%], p=0·89) and there was no significant excess of death from any non-vascular cause (668 [14·4%] vs 612 [13·2%], p=0·13). Interpretation Reduction of LDL cholesterol with simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg daily safely reduced the incidence of major atherosclerotic events in a wide range of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. Funding Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; British Heart Foundation; UK Medical Research Council.

Rosuvastatin and Cardiovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis

BACKGROUND Statins reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients at high cardiovascular risk. However, a benefit of statins in such patients who are undergoing hemodialysis has not been proved. METHODS We conducted an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, prospective trial involving 2776 patients, 50 to 80 years of age, who were undergoing maintenance hemodialysis. We randomly assigned patients to receive rosuvastatin, 10 mg daily, or placebo. The combined primary end point was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary end points included death from all causes and individual cardiac and vascular events. RESULTS After 3 months, the mean reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels was 43% in patients receiving rosuvastatin, from a mean baseline level of 100 mg per deciliter (2.6 mmol per liter). During a median follow-up period of 3.8 years, 396 patients in the rosuvastatin group and 408 patients in the placebo group reached the primary end point (9.2 and 9.5 events per 100 patient-years, respectively; hazard ratio for the combined end point in the rosuvastatin group vs. the placebo group, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.11; P=0.59). Rosuvastatin had no effect on individual components of the primary end point. There was also no significant effect on all-cause mortality (13.5 vs. 14.0 events per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.07; P=0.51). CONCLUSIONS In patients undergoing hemodialysis, the initiation of treatment with rosuvastatin lowered the LDL cholesterol level but had no significant effect on the composite primary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00240331.)

Effect of fluvastatin on cardiac outcomes in renal transplant recipients: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Renal transplant recipients are at increased risk of premature cardiovascular disease. Although statins reduce cardiovascular risk in the general population, their efficacy and safety in renal transplant recipients have not been established. We investigated the effects of fluvastatin on cardiac and renal endpoints in this population. METHODS We did a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 2102 renal transplant recipients with total cholesterol 4.0-9.0 mmol/L. We randomly assigned patients fluvastatin (n=1050) or placebo (n=1052) and follow up was for 5-6 years. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of a major adverse cardiac event, defined as cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or coronary intervention procedure. Secondary endpoints were individual cardiac events, combined cardiac death or non-fatal MI, cerebrovascular events, non-cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and graft loss or doubling of serum creatinine. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS After a mean follow-up of 5.1 years, fluvastatin lowered LDL cholesterol concentrations by 32%. Risk reduction with fluvastatin for the primary endpoint (risk ratio 0.83 [95% CI 0.64-1.06], p=0.139) was not significant, although there were fewer cardiac deaths or non-fatal MI (70 vs 104, 0.65 [0.48-0.88] p=0.005) in the fluvastatin group than in the placebo group. Coronary intervention procedures and other secondary endpoints did not differ significantly between groups. INTERPRETATION Although cardiac deaths and non-fatal MI seemed to be reduced, fluvastatin did not generally reduce rates of coronary intervention procedures or mortality. Overall effects of fluvastatin were similar to those of statins in other populations.

Long-term risks for kidney donors

Previous studies have suggested that living kidney donors maintain long-term renal function and experience no increase in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. However, most analyses have included control groups less healthy than the living donor population and have had relatively short follow-up periods. Here we compared long-term renal function and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in living kidney donors compared with a control group of individuals who would have been eligible for donation. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) was identified in 1901 individuals who donated a kidney during 1963 through 2007 with a median follow-up of 15.1 years. A control group of 32,621 potentially eligible kidney donors was selected, with a median follow-up of 24.9 years. Hazard ratio for all-cause death was significantly increased to 1.30 (95% confidence interval 1.11-1.52) for donors compared with controls. There was a significant corresponding increase in cardiovascular death to 1.40 (1.03-1.91), while the risk of ESRD was greatly and significantly increased to 11.38 (4.37-29.6). The overall incidence of ESRD among donors was 302 cases per million and might have been influenced by hereditary factors. Immunological renal disease was the cause of ESRD in the donors. Thus, kidney donors are at increased long-term risk for ESRD, cardiovascular, and all-cause mortality compared with a control group of non-donors who would have been eligible for donation.

Long‐term Cardiac Outcomes in Renal Transplant Recipients Receiving Fluvastatin: The ALERT Extension Study

Renal transplant recipients (RTR) have an increased risk of premature cardiovascular disease. The ALERT study is the first trial to evaluate the effect of statin therapy on cardiac outcomes following renal transplantation. Patients initially randomized to fluvastatin or placebo in the 5–6 year ALERT study were offered open‐label fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day in a 2‐year extension to the original study. The primary endpoint was time to first major adverse cardiac event (MACE). Of 1787 patients who completed ALERT, 1652 (92%) were followed in the extension. Mean total follow‐up was 6.7 years. Mean LDL‐cholesterol was 98 mg/dL (2.5 mmol/L) at last follow‐up compared to a pre‐study level of 159 mg/dL (4.1 mmol/L). Patients randomized to fluvastatin had a reduced risk of MACE (hazards ratio [HR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.63–0.99, p = 0.036), and a 29% reduction in cardiac death or definite non‐fatal MI (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.93, p = 0.014). Total mortality and graft loss did not differ significantly between groups. Fluvastatin produces a safe and effective reduction in LDL‐cholesterol associated with reduced risk of MACE in RTR. The lipid‐lowering and cardiovascular benefits of fluvastatin are comparable to those of statins in other patient groups, and support use of fluvastatin in RTR.

Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP): Randomized trial to assess the effects of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol among 9,438 patients with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND Lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol with statin therapy has been shown to reduce the incidence of atherosclerotic events in many types of patient, but it remains uncertain whether it is of net benefit among people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS Patients with advanced CKD (blood creatinine ≥ 1.7 mg/dL [≥ 150 μmol/L] in men or ≥ 1.5 mg/dL [ ≥ 130 μmol/L] in women) with no known history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization were randomized in a ratio of 4:4:1 to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily versus matching placebo versus simvastatin 20 mg daily (with the latter arm rerandomized at 1 year to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily vs placebo). The key outcome will be major atherosclerotic events, defined as the combination of myocardial infarction, coronary death, ischemic stroke, or any revascularization procedure. RESULTS A total of 9,438 CKD patients were randomized, of whom 3,056 were on dialysis. Mean age was 61 years, two thirds were male, one fifth had diabetes mellitus, and one sixth had vascular disease. Compared with either placebo or simvastatin alone, allocation to ezetimibe plus simvastatin was not associated with any excess of myopathy, hepatic toxicity, or biliary complications during the first year of follow-up. Compared with placebo, allocation to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily yielded average LDL cholesterol differences of 43 mg/dL (1.10 mmol/L) at 1 year and 33 mg/dL (0.85 mmol/L) at 2.5 years. Follow-up is scheduled to continue until August 2010, when all patients will have been followed for at least 4 years. CONCLUSIONS SHARP should provide evidence about the efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol with the combination of ezetimibe and simvastatin among a wide range of patients with CKD.

Prevention of cardiovascular disease in adult recipients of kidney transplants

Although advances in immunosuppression, tissue typing, surgery, and medical management have made transplantation a routine and preferred treatment for patients with irreversible renal failure, successful transplant recipients have a greatly increased risk of premature mortality because of cardiovascular disease and malignancy compared with the general population. Conventional cardiovascular risk factors such as hyperlipidaemia, hypertension, and diabetes are common in transplant recipients, partly because of the effects of immunosuppressive drugs, and are associated with adverse outcomes. However, the natural history of cardiovascular disease in such recipients differs from that in the general population, and only statin therapy has been studied in a large-scale interventional trial. Thus, the management of this disease and the balance between management of conventional risk factors and modification of immunosuppression is complex.

Renal adrenoceptor mediation of antinatriuretic and renin secretion responses to low frequency renal nerve stimulation in the dog.

We evaluated renal adrenoceptor mediation of the renin secretion and antinatriuretic responses to low frequency (1.0 Hz) electrical stimulation of the renal nerves in the dog using renal a-adrenoceptor blockade with phentolamine {α-i/α-i), prazosin (α,), yohimbine (α2), and rauwolscine (α2), and β-adrenoceptor blockade with d,β-propranolol Oβ1//β2) and atenolol (β,). In all animals studied, renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate remained constant throughout the experiment. In 11 dogs, low frequency renal nerve stimulation decreased urinary sodium excretion (119 ± 13 to 86 ± 18 μEq/min) and increased renin secretion (79 ± 22 to 348 ± 73 μg/ min). Renal arterial infusion of phentolamine (2–10 μg/kg per min) prevented the antinatriuresis but did not change the response of renin secretion (96 ± 46 to 412 ± 93 μg/min). In six dogs, renal arterial infusion of prazosin (0.7 μg/kg per min) similarly blocked the antinatriuretic but not the renin secretion responses to low frequency renal nerve stimulation. Renal arterial infusion of either yohimbine or rauwolscine did not affect the antinatriuretic or renin secretion responses to low frequency renal nerve stimulation. Intrarenal /S]-adrenoceptor blockade with low dose atenolol (0.5 μg/kg per min, n = 9) had no effect on the antinatriuretic responses to low frequency renal nerve stimulation (—47 ± 12 vs. —37 ± 8 μEq/min) but significantly decreased the increment in renin secretion during low frequency renal nerve stimulation (636 ± 249 vs. 305 ± 157 μg/ min; P < 0.05). Renal arterial infusion of d,β-propranolol (0.5 μgAg per min, n = 4) or a high dose of atenolol (5.0 μg/kg per min, n = 8) abolished the renin secretion but not the antinatnuretic responses to low frequency renal nerve stimulation. These results demonstrate that: antinatriuresis during 1.0 Hz renal nerve stimulation (where renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate are unchanged) is mediated by renal oα-adrenoceptors and not by α2- or β-adrenoceptors, that renin secretion elicited by low frequency renal nerve stimulation is mediated by renal βi-adrenoceptors and not by a-adrenoceptors, and that the renin secretion response to low frequency renal nerve stimulation is evoked by direct stimulation of juxtaglomerular granular cell β-adrenoceptors and not indirectly by stimulation of the macula densa receptor through decreased urinary sodium excretion.

Sustained improvement of renal graft function for two years in hypertensive renal transplant recipients treated with nifedipine as compared to lisinopril

BACKGROUND Treatment of posttransplant hypertension is still a matter of debate. Calcium antagonists may ameliorate renal side effects of cyclosporin. Angiotensin converting enzyme- (ACE) inhibitors may be more effective in sustaining renal function in native chronic renal disease. We prospectively compared the effect of controlled release nifedipine and lisinopril on long-term renal function in hypertensive kidney transplant patients treated with cyclosporin. METHODS A total of 154 renal transplant patients presenting with hypertension (diastolic blood pressure >or=95 mmHg) during the first 3 weeks after transplantation were randomised to receive double-blind nifedipine 30 mg or lisinopril 10 mg once daily. A total of 123 patients completed 1 year of treatment (69 nifedipine, 54 lisinopril) and 64 patients completed 2 years of double-blind treatment (39 nifedipine, 25 lisinopril). Baseline glomerular filtration rate was measured as 99 mTc-diethylene-triaminepentaacetate clearance in a stable phase 2 to 5 weeks after inclusion and repeated at 1 and 2 years. RESULTS Baseline glomerular filtration rates were similar (46+/-16 ml/min with nifedipine, 43+/-14 ml/min with lisinopril). The changes in glomerular filtration rates from baseline were statistically significant between the groups after 1 year (9.6 ml/min mean treatment difference (95% confidence interval [CI]s 5.5-13.7 ml/min, P=0.0001) and remained statistically significant also after 2 years (10.3 ml/min mean difference (95% CIs 4.0-16.6], P=0.0017). After 1 year glomerular filtration rates averaged 56+/-19 ml/min in the nifedipine group and 44+/-14 ml/min in the lisinopril group. CONCLUSIONS Both nifedipine and lisinopril were safe and effective in treatment of hypertension in renal transplant patients treated with cyclosporin. Patients receiving nifedipine but not lisinopril improved kidney transplant function over a period of 2 years.

Bilateral Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Cyclosporine A and Atorvastatin in Renal Transplant Recipients

Atorvastatin is increasingly used as a cholesterol‐lowering agent in solid organ transplant recipients receiving cyclosporine A (CsA). However, the potential bilateral pharmacokinetic interaction between atorvastatin and CsA in renal transplant recipients has not previously been examined.