Ilian Iliev

Glomerular Hyperfiltration and Renal Disease Progression in Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE To describe the prevalence and determinants of hyperfiltration (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] ≥120 mL/min/1.73 m2), GFR decline, and nephropathy onset or progression in type 2 diabetic patients with normo- or microalbuminuria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We longitudinally studied 600 hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with albuminuria <200 μg/min and who were retrieved from two randomized trials testing the renal effect of trandolapril and delapril. Target blood pressure (BP) was <120/80 mmHg, and HbA1c was <7%. GFR, albuminuria, and glucose disposal rate (GDR) were centrally measured by iohexol plasma clearance, nephelometry in three consecutive overnight urine collections, and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp, respectively. RESULTS Over a median (range) follow-up of 4.0 (1.7–8.1) years, GFR declined by 3.37 (5.71–1.31) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year. GFR change was bimodal over time: a larger reduction at 6 months significantly predicted slower subsequent decline (coefficient: −0.0054; SE: 0.0009), particularly among hyperfiltering patients. A total of 90 subjects (15%) were hyperfiltering at inclusion, and 11 of 47 (23.4%) patients with persistent hyperfiltration progressed to micro- or macroalbuminuria versus 53 (10.6%) of the 502 who had their hyperfiltration ameliorated at 6 months or were nonhyperfiltering since inclusion (hazard ratio 2.16 [95% CI 1.13–4.14]). Amelioration of hyperfiltration was independent of baseline characteristics or ACE inhibition. It was significantly associated with improved BP and metabolic control, amelioration of GDR, and slower long-term GFR decline on follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Despite intensified treatment, patients with type 2 diabetes have a fast GFR decline. Hyperfiltration affects a subgroup of patients and may contribute to renal function loss and nephropathy onset or progression. Whether amelioration of hyperfiltration is renoprotective is worth investigating.

Insulin Resistance and Microalbuminuria: A Cross-Sectional, Case-Control Study of 158 Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Different Degrees of Urinary Albumin Excretion

Microalbuminuria is a risk factor for renal and cardiovascular disease. A role for insulin resistance in the pathogenesis of microalbuminuria has been suggested but is still unproven. In this case-control, cross-sectional study, we compared glucose disposal rate (GDR), measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, in 50 pairs of matched type 2 diabetic patients with micro- or normoalbuminuria (main study) and in 29 matched pairs of diabetic patients with macro- or microalbuminuria (substudy). In the main study, GDR was ∼25% lower in micro- than in normoalbuminuric patients (5.20 ± 1.91 vs. 6.86 ± 2.88 mg · kg−1 · min−1, P < 0.05) and was independently associated with microalbuminuria (P = 0.002), with each 1 mg · kg−1 · min−1 decrease predicting ∼40% increased prevalence (odds ratio 1.37 [95% CI 1.14–1.70]). Microalbuminuria was threefold more frequent in patients with GDR ≤7.50 ± 2.56 mg · kg−1 · min−1 than in those with higher GDR (60% vs. 20%, P < 0.005). In the substudy, GDR in macro- and microalbuminuric patients was comparable (5.52 ± 2.56 vs. 5.16 ± 1.61 mg · kg−1 · min−1) and independent of macroalbuminuria. GDR was significantly correlated with urinary albumin excretion rate in the main study (P = 0.004) but not in the substudy (P = 0.60). In type 2 diabetes, more severe insulin resistance is independently associated with microalbuminuria. Longitudinal studies are needed to clarify the role of insulin resistance in the pathogenesis of microalbuminuria and related complications.

The GFR and GFR decline cannot be accurately estimated in type 2 diabetics

There are no adequate studies that have formally tested the performance of different estimating formulas in patients with type 2 diabetes both with and without overt nephropathy. Here we evaluated the agreement between baseline GFRs, GFR changes at month 6, and long-term GFR decline measured by iohexol plasma clearance or estimated by 15 creatinine-based formulas in 600 type 2 diabetics followed for a median of 4.0 years. Ninety patients were hyperfiltering. The number of those identified by estimation formulas ranged from 0 to 24:58 were not identified by any formula. Baseline GFR was significantly underestimated and a 6-month GFR reduction was missed in hyperfiltering patients. Long-term GFR decline was also underestimated by all formulas in the whole study group and in hyper-, normo-, and hypofiltering patients considered separately. Five formulas generated positive slopes in hyperfiltering patients. Baseline concordance correlation coefficients and total deviation indexes ranged from 32.1% to 92.6% and from 0.21 to 0.53, respectively. Concordance correlation coefficients between estimated and measured long-term GFR decline ranged from -0.21 to 0.35. The agreement between estimated and measured values was also poor within each subgroup considered separately. Thus, our study questions the use of any estimation formula to identify hyperfiltering patients and monitor renal disease progression and response to treatment in type 2 diabetics without overt nephropathy.

Measurable Urinary Albumin Predicts Cardiovascular Risk among Normoalbuminuric Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Micro- or macroalbuminuria is associated with increased cardiovascular risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes, but whether albuminuria within the normal range predicts long-term cardiovascular risk is unknown. We evaluated the relationships between albuminuria and cardiovascular events in 1208 hypertensive, normoalbuminuric patients with type 2 diabetes from the BErgamo NEphrologic Diabetes Complication Trial (BENEDICT), all of whom received angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) therapy at the end of the trial and were followed for a median of 9.2 years. The main outcome was time to the first of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction; stroke; coronary, carotid, or peripheral artery revascularization; or hospitalization for heart failure. Overall, 189 (15.6%) of the patients experienced a main outcome event (2.14 events/100 patient-years); 24 events were fatal. Albuminuria independently predicted events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.08). Second-degree polynomial multivariable analysis showed a continuous nonlinear relationship between albuminuria and events without thresholds. Considering the entire study population, even albuminuria at 1-2 μg/min was significantly associated with increased risk compared with albuminuria <1 μg/min (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07). This relationship was similar in the subgroup originally randomly assigned to non-ACEI therapy. Among those originally receiving ACEI therapy, however, the event rate was uniformly low and was not significantly associated with albuminuria. Taken together, among normoalbuminuric patients with type 2 diabetes, any degree of measurable albuminuria bears significant cardiovascular risk. The association with risk is continuous but is lost with early ACEI therapy.

Effects of verapamil added-on trandolapril therapy in hypertensive type 2 diabetes patients with microalbuminuria: The BENEDICT-B randomized trial

Objectives To address whether nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker added-on angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor therapy ameliorates albuminuria and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients. Design The Bergamo Nephrologic Diabetes Complications Trial-B was a multicentre, prospective, double-blind, parallel-group trial comparing renal and cardiovascular outcomes in 281 hypertensive type 2 diabetes patients with microalbuminuria randomized to at least 2-year VeraTran (verapamil/trandolapril 180 mg/2 mg daily) or trandolapril (2 mg daily, identical image) treatment. Main outcome was persistent macroalbuminuria (albuminuria >200 μg/min in two consecutive visits). Treatment targets were SBP/DBP less than 120/80 mmHg and HbA1C less than 7%. Results Over a median follow-up of 4.5 years, 18 patients (13%) on VeraTran vs. 15 (10.5%) on trandolapril [unadjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) 1.07 (0.54–2.12), P = 0.852] progressed to macroalbuminuria, respectively; 62 (44.9%) vs. 71 (49.7%) [0.80 (0.57–1.12), P = 0.198] regressed to normoalbuminuria (urinary albumin excretion <20 μg/min), and 20 (14.5%) vs. 21 (14.7%) [hazard ratio 0.93 (0.50–1.72), P = 0.816] had major cardiovascular events. BP and metabolic control were similar between groups. Patients with cardiovascular events were significantly less [13 (9.8%) vs. 28 (18.9%), hazard ratio: 0.37 (0.19–0.71), P = 0.003] among those regressing to normoalbuminuria than those without regression. Difference was independent of treatment allocation and was significant also after adjusting for baseline characteristics [0.40 (0.20–0.79), P = 0.009], follow-up SBP [0.40 (0.20–0.80), P = 0.010] or DBP [0.36 (0.18–0.73), P = 0.004] BP or HbA1C [0.43 (0.21–0.88), P = 0.021]. Conclusion In hypertensive type 2 diabetes patients with microalbuminuria, verapamil added-on trandolapril did not improve renal or cardiovascular outcomes. Independent of verapamil, trandolapril normalized albuminuria in half of patients and this translated into significant cardioprotection.

Effects of Manidipine and Delapril in Hypertensive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus The Delapril and Manidipine for Nephroprotection in Diabetes (DEMAND) Randomized Clinical Trial

To assess whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and third-generation dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers ameliorate diabetic complications, we compared glomerular filtration rate (GFR; primary outcome), cardiovascular events, retinopathy, and neuropathy in 380 hypertensive type 2 diabetics with albuminuria <200 mg/min included in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (DEMAND [Delapril and Manidipine for Nephroprotection in Diabetes]) and randomized to 3-year treatment with manidipine/delapril combination (10/30 mg/d; n=126), delapril (30 mg/d; n=127), or placebo (n=127). GFR was centrally measured by iohexol plasma clearance. Median monthly GFR decline (interquartile range [IQR]) was 0.32 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (IQR: 0.16–0.50 mL/min per 1.73 m2) on combined therapy, 0.36 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (IQR: 0.18–0.53 mL/min per 1.73 m2) on delapril, and 0.30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (IQR: 0.12–0.50 mL/min per 1.73 m2) on placebo (P=0.87 and P=0.53 versus combined therapy or delapril, respectively). Similar findings were observed when baseline GFR values were not considered for slope analyses. Albuminuria was stable in the 3 treatment groups. The hazard ratio (95% CI) for major cardiovascular events between combined therapy and placebo was 0.17 (0.04–0.78; P=0.023). Among 192 subjects without retinopathy at inclusion, the hazard ratio for developing retinopathy between combined therapy and placebo was 0.27 (0.07–0.99; P=0.048). Among 200 subjects with centralized neurological evaluation, the odds ratios for peripheral neuropathy at 3 years between combined therapy or delapril and placebo were 0.45 (0.24–0.87; P=0.017) and 0.52 (0.27–0.99; P=0.048), respectively. Glucose disposal rate decreased from 5.8±2.4 to 5.3±1.9 mg/kg per min on placebo (P=0.03) but did not change on combined or delapril therapy. Treatment was well tolerated. In hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients, combined manidipine and delapril therapy failed to slow GFR decline but safely ameliorated cardiovascular disease, retinopathy, and neuropathy and stabilized insulin sensitivity.

Effect on blood pressure of combined inhibition of endothelin-converting enzyme and neutral endopeptidase with daglutril in patients with type 2 diabetes who have albuminuria: a randomised, crossover, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Effective reduction of albuminuria and blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes who have nephropathy is seldom achieved with available treatments. We tested the effects of treatment of such patients with daglutril, a combined endothelin-converting enzyme and neutral endopeptidase inhibitor. METHODS We did this randomised, crossover trial in two hospitals in Italy. Eligibility criteria were: age 18 years or older, urinary albumin excretion 20-999 μg/min, systolic blood pressure (BP) less than 140 mm Hg, and diastolic BP less than 90 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomised sequence to receive either daglutril (300 mg/day) then placebo for 8 weeks each or vice versa, with a 4-week washout period. Patients also took losartan throughout. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was 24-h urinary albumin excretion in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were median office and ambulatory (24 h, daytime, and night-time) BP, renal haemodynamics and sieving function, and metabolic and laboratory test results. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00160225. FINDINGS We screened 58 patients, of whom 45 were enrolled (22 assigned to daglutril then placebo, 23 to placebo then daglutril; enrolment from May, 2005, to December, 2006) and 42 (20 vs 22) were included in the primary analysis. Daglutril did not significantly affect 24-h urinary albumin excretion compared with placebo (difference in change -7·6 μg/min, IQR -78·7 to 19·0; p=0·559). 34 patients had complete 24-h BP readings; compared with placebo, daglutril significantly reduced 24-h systolic (difference -5·2 mm Hg, SD 9·4; p=0·0013), diastolic (-2·5, 6·2; p=0·015), pulse (-3·0, 6·3; p=0·019), and mean (-3·1, 6·2; p=0·003) BP, as well as all night-time BP readings and daytime systolic, pulse, and mean BP, but not diastolic BP. Compared with placebo, daglutril also significantly reduced office systolic BP (-5·4, 15·4; p=0·028), but not diastolic (-1·8, 9·9; p=0·245), pulse (-3·1, 10·6; p=0·210), or mean (-2·1, 10·4; p=0·205) BP, and increased big endothelin serum concentration. Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between treatment periods. Three patients taking placebo and six patients taking daglutril had mild treatment-related adverse events--the most common was facial or peripheral oedema (in four patients taking daglutril). INTERPRETATION Daglutril improved control of BP in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy and had an acceptable safety profile. Combined endothelin-converting enzyme and neutral endopeptidase inhibition could provide a new approach to hypertension in this high-risk population. FUNDING Solvay Pharmaceuticals.

Prevention and Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy: Evidence from Clinical Trials and Perspectives

Diabetic retinopathy is the most common microvascular complication of diabetes mellitus and is the leading cause of blindness amongst working-age adults in Western countries. Large observational and randomized studies have consistently shown that optimal blood glucose and blood pressure control is the key component of intervention strategies aimed to halt or regress the disease, and limit the risk of progression to the proliferative stage, with consequent visual loss up to blindness in most severe cases. Amelioration of dyslipidemia by statins, especially if combined with fenofibrate, may also ameliorate retinopathy in line with a potential pathogenic role of hyperlipidemia. Recently, evidence has also emerged that renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors may electively prevent or delay progression of retinopathy, possibly because of specific protective effect against the structural and functional retinal changes sustained by local RAS activation. Thus, metabolic and blood pressure control by RAS inhibition is to prevent or limit the onset of retinopathy and its progression towards visual-threatening stages. Topic treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents is emerging as a treatment option for retinopathy in advanced stages to limit the need for laser photocoagulation. This option however should be considered with caution due to the risk of systemic adverse events.

Preventing Left Ventricular Hypertrophy by ACE Inhibition in Hypertensive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A prespecified analysis of the Bergamo Nephrologic Diabetes Complications Trial (BENEDICT)

OBJECTIVE—In patients with type 2 diabetes, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) predicts cardiovascular events, and the prevention of LVH is cardioprotective. We sought to compare the effect of ACE versus non-ACE inhibitor therapy on incident electrocardiographic (ECG) evidence of LVH (ECG-LVH). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This prespecified study compared the incidence of ECG-LVH by Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell voltage criteria in 816 hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients of the Bergamo Nephrologic Diabetes Complications Trial (BENEDICT), who had no ECG-LVH at baseline and were randomly assigned to at least 3 years of blinded ACE inhibition with trandolapril (2 mg/day) or to non-ACE inhibitor therapy. Treatment was titrated to systolic/diastolic blood pressure <130/80 mmHg. ECG readings were centralized and blinded to treatment. RESULTS—Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 36 (24–48) months, 13 of the 423 patients (3.1%) receiving trandolapril compared with 31 of the 376 patients (8.2%) receiving non-ACE inhibitor therapy developed ECG-LVH (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34 [95% CI 0.18–0.65], P = 0.0012 unadjusted, and 0.35 [0.18–0.68], P = 0.0018 adjusted for predefined baseline covariates). The HR was significant even after adjustment for follow-up blood pressure and blood pressure reduction versus baseline. Compared with baseline, both Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell voltages significantly decreased with trandolapril but did not change with non-ACE inhibitor therapy. CONCLUSIONS—ACE inhibition has a specific protective effect against the development of ECG-LVH that is additional to its blood pressure–lowering effect. Because ECG-LVH is a strong cardiovascular risk factor in people with hypertension and diabetes, early ACE inhibition may be cardioprotective in this population.

Effects of Combined Ezetimibe and Simvastatin Therapy as Compared With Simvastatin Alone in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes A prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVE To assess the effects of inhibited gastrointestinal cholesterol absorption in statin-treated dyslipidemic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In a multicenter prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, we primarily compared by ANCOVA the effect of 2-month ezetimibe (10 mg/day) or placebo therapy on LDL cholesterol serum levels in 108 type 2 diabetic patients with albuminuria <200 μg/min and total cholesterol concentrations >135 mg/dl despite simvastatin treatment (40 mg/day). RESULTS Unlike placebo, ezetimibe decreased LDL cholesterol from 99 ± 31 to 66 ± 22 mg/dl, total cholesterol from 162 ± 36 to 124 ± 30 mg/dl, and apolipoprotein B from 83 ± 22 to 64 ± 18 mg/dl (P < 0.0001 for all changes versus placebo). A total of 72 and 17% of patients on ezetimibe or placebo achieved LDL levels <70 mg/dl, respectively (P < 0.0001). Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS Adding ezetimibe to simvastatin therapy helps to improve the pro-atherogenic lipoprotein profile in type 2 diabetic patients who fail to reach recommended lipid targets with statin therapy alone.