scholarly journals Renal outcomes of treatment with telmisartan in patients with stage 3–4 chronic kidney disease: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial (JINNAGA)

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 205031212097350
Author(s):  
Mineaki Kitamura ◽  
Hideyuki Arai ◽  
Shinichi Abe ◽  
Yuki Ota ◽  
Kumiko Muta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Angiotensin Ii ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Urinary Protein ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor Blockers ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
Receptor Blockers ◽  
Dose Dependent

Objectives: Although angiotensin II receptor blockers are effective for patients with chronic kidney disease, dose-dependent renoprotective effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers in patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease with non-nephrotic proteinuria are not known. Our aim was to elucidate the dose-dependent renoprotective effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers on such patients. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial was conducted from 2009 to 2014. Patients with non-nephrotic stage 3–4 chronic kidney disease were randomized for treatment with either 40 or 80 mg telmisartan and were observed for up to 104 weeks. Overall, 32 and 29 patients were allocated to the 40 and 80 mg telmisartan groups, respectively. The composite primary outcome was renal death, doubling of serum creatinine level, transition to stage 5 chronic kidney disease, and death from any cause. Secondary outcomes included the level of urinary proteins and changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate. Results: There was no difference in the primary outcome (p = 0.78) and eGFR (p = 0.53) between the two groups; however, after 24 weeks, urinary protein level was significantly lower in the 80 mg group than in the 40 mg group (p < 0.05). No severe adverse events occurred in either group, and the occurrence of adverse events did not significantly differ between them (p = 0.56). Conclusion: Our findings do not demonstrate a direct dose-dependent renoprotective effect of telmisartan. The higher telmisartan dose resulted in a decrease in the amount of urinary protein. Even though high-dose angiotensin II receptor blockers may be preferable for patients with stage 3–4 chronic kidney disease, the clinical importance of the study results may be limited. The study was registered in the UMIN-CTR ( https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr ) with the registration number UMIN000040875.

scholarly journals Nephroprotective strategy in the treatment of hypertension as a modern general medical problem

2018 ◽  
pp. 107-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. I. Podzolkov ◽  
A. E. Bragina ◽  
T. I. Ishina ◽  
L. V. Bragina ◽  
L. V. Vasilyeva
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Angiotensin Ii ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Renal Dysfunction ◽  
Medical Problem ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor Blocker ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Advanced Stages ◽  
Receptor Blockers

The current population is characterized by a high prevalence of risk factors for the development of chronic kidney disease: hypertension, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, physical inactivity, smoking. The development of severe complications and a close connection with potentially fatal cardiovascular disorders make this disease a socially and economically significant problem. Treatment of chronic kidney disease in advanced stages belong to nephrologist duties. However, the success of preventive interventions depends on the time of their onset, which makes it relevant to identify the disease. The use of nephroprotective approaches by physicians of different specialties (general practitioners, cardiologists, gerontologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists) can significantly improve the prognosis of both those at risk of developing renal dysfunction and the existing disease. The review presents data on the clinical and laboratory efficacy of angiotensin-renin blocker use, as well as the combination of angiotensin II receptor blockers with calcium antagonists. Using the combination of the angiotensin II receptor blocker irbesartan and amlodipine as an example, we demonstrated the possibilities of nephroprotective therapy in patients with renal dysfunction.

Abstract P251: Substitution to Generic Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers: Impact on Risk of Hospitalizations, Emergency Room Consultations and Mortality

Circulation ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 135 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacinthe Leclerc ◽  
Claudia Blais ◽  
Louis Rochette ◽  
Denis Hamel ◽  
Line Guénette ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Angiotensin Ii ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Emergency Room ◽  
Generic Substitution ◽  
Generic Drugs ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor Blockers ◽  
Brand Name ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
Receptor Blockers

Background: Substitution from brand-name to generic drugs is one way to reduce costs of pharmacological treatments. Generic drugs licensing is obtained through comparative bioavailability studies for which a variation of up to 20% is generally accepted. However, “real-life” efficacy and tolerance of generic drugs are not studied prior to commercialization. We aimed to evaluate the impact of brand-name to generic losartan, valsartan or candesartan substitution on serious adverse events (hospitalizations, emergency room consultations [ER] or mortality). Method: Three cohorts of persistent angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) users (losartan [brand-name and 8 generics], valsartan [brand-name and 5 generics] and candesartan [brand-name and 3 generics])aged ≥ 66 years were constituted using data from the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System. Generic exposition was determined by substitution time-distribution matching. Time free of adverse events up to 365 days after the onset of generic exposition was compared between groups by survival analysis using Cox regression models adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, concomitant treatments, socioeconomic status, previous brand-name drug, healthcare resources utilization and prescriber’s speciality, to provide hazard ratio (HR). Sensitivity analysis including non-persistent users was also conducted. Results: Within cohorts (losartan, n = 15,469; valsartan, n = 17,205; and candesartan, n = 25,008), proportions of exposed to generic substitution vs. unexposed who had at least one adverse event were respectively: 35% vs. 25%, 34% vs. 28% and 31% vs. 27% (all, p <0.0001). When adjusted for potential confounders, risk of hospitalizations and ER were higher for those exposed to generic substitution. Specifically, HR for exposed to generic substitution are the following for losartan, valsartan and candesartan: hospitalizations (HR: 1.23 [ p < 0.0001]; 1.22 [ p < 0.0001] and 1.08 [ p = 0.0317]) and ER (HR: 1.55; 1.20 and 1.16, all = p < 0.0001). Regarding mortality, HR were respectively: 0.63 [ p = 0.1456]; 0.95 [ p = 0.8487] and 0.43 [ p < 0.0001]). Survival was not significantly different for exposed to generic losartan and valsartan substitution. However, even if the time free of hospitalizations and ER was 8% and 16% shorter for patients exposed to generic candesartan substitution, their survival was 2.3 times better when compared to patients who remained on brand-name candesartan (unexposed). Sensitivity analysis yield similar results. Conclusion: Substitution to generic antihypertensive drugs is associated with a significantly reduced delay before hospitalizations and ER for the three ARBs but a better survival for patients exposed to generic candesartan substitution only. Better bioavailability of generics versions of candesartan or differences in health cares between users could explain these differences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document