Diabetic Nephropathy 2009

Diabetic Nephropathy
Joel Michels Topf, MD Clinical Nephrologist

Year Capacity
1926 84,401
85,753
97,239
101,001
1991 102,501
107,501
107,501
2006 107,501
2009 106,201
Incident ESRD 0 0 0 0 56,103 87,179 91,275 110,854 117,632

Etiologies of ESRD

Diabetes, diabetic nephropathy and the epidemic raging in the U.S.

Diabetics on Dialysis: 183,706
USRDS Atlas 2005 http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/index.htm#7 Total no of Diabetics: 23,600,000 0.78%

ESRD CV Mortality

Finne, P. JAMA 2005; 294:1782-87.

Diabetic nephropathy
Progressive renal damage as a result of diabetis mellitus type I or II
Initially, patients have increased GFR (2x normal)
Followed by proteinuria
Followed by progressively deteriorating GFR

5-10 years 15-20 years 20 years

Ritz E, et al. N Engl J Med 1999;341 :1127-33.

220 g 240 g Size Matters Normal kidney weight is 150 g
Diseases with large kidneys:
Multiple Myeloma • Hydronephrosis
Amyloidosis • Renal Cell Cancer
ADPKD/ARPKD • Not HIVAN

nodular glomerulosclerosis Kimmelstiel-Wilson lesions

One in five diabetic patients on dialysis do not have this “classic” pathology.
They have ischemic nephropathy, with non-specific vascular and interstitial lesions
Ritz E, Orth SR. N Eng J Med 1999; 341:1127-33.

Type I Diabetes Type II Diabetes No difference in glycemic control between people who get nephropathy and those who don’t Ritz E, et al. N Engl J Med 1999;341 :1127-33. Incidence of proteinuria at 25 years after diagnosis

Genetics
Familial clustering
Diabetic family members of patients with diabetic nephropathy have an OR of 4.0
Race
ESRD is 5 times more likely in African Americans with family members on dialysis from DN
Pima indians have very high rates of diabetic nephropathy

Transforming Growth Factor Beta Angiotensin II Hyperglycemia Extracellular matrix Fibrosis Scientific studies on TGFß and renal disease Huang Y, Et al. Kidney International 2006; 69: 1713-4. TGFß

Hyperfiltration
Early finding
Renal vasodilation
Causes early increases in GFR
Later
Nephron loss results in compensatory hyperfiltration
No increase in GFR

Pathology

A B C 0 years 5 years 10 years

What is microalbuminuria?
Any albumin in the urine
Trace protein on dipstick in a first morning specimen
20-200 µg/min on a timed specimen
30-300 mg albumin/g creatinine
30-300 mg/L
What is macroalbuminuria?
1+ protein on a dipstick in a first morning specimen
1+ protein on a dipstick at any time
>250 mg in 24 hours
>3.5 g per 24 hours
Diagnosis Hyperfiltration Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria Renal failure Diabetes

Diagnosis Hyperfiltration Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria Renal failure Diabetes Microalbuminuria Dipstick negative Macroalbuminuria Dipstick positive 30 300 mg/d 0  MI, CVA, CV Death  All-cause mortality  CHF hospitalization Gerstein, H. C. et al. JAMA 2001;286:421-426. Albuminuria (mg/d)

Perkins BA, Et al. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2285-93. Cholesterol < 198 Triglycerides < 145 Glycemic control (hgb a1c <8) Blood pressure (sbp<115) ACEi Diagnosis Hyperfiltration Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria Renal failure Type I

Perkins BA, Et al. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2285-93. Diagnosis Hyperfiltration Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria Renal failure Type I Diagnosis Hyperfiltration Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria Renal failure Type II Diagnosis Diagnosis Diagnosis

U/A at Diagnosis (Type 2 patients) Random spot collection Albumin:creatinine Repeat 3x in 3-6 months 2 of 3 ≥ 30mg/g creatinine Microalbuminuria, begin treatment Nephropathy Quantify µalb:Cr Consider referral Modified from the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2002; 25 Suppl 1: S85-S89. No microalbuminuria Re-screen yearly Negative Positive No Yes
Differential of microalbuminuria
Early diabetic nephropathy
Obesity
Hypertension
Endothelial dysfunction
Metabolic syndrome
Atherosclerosis

When is proteinuria not diabetic nephropathy? When does a diabetic need a biopsy?

Suspicious for non-diabetic nephropathy
Onset within 5 years of dx of diabetes
Acute onset
Active sediment
Unusual review of systems
Serologies
ANA, Hep B, Hep C, HIV
Absence of retinopathy or neuropathy

TREATMENT
Blood pressure control
Glycemic control
Angiotensin 2 control
Proteinuria control
Cholesterol control

Intensive therapy
Low fat (<30%) diet
30 minutes exercise 3-5 days/week
Smoking cessation
ACEi regardless of blood pressure
Vitamin
Aspirin
A1c <6.5
Cholesterol control
Gaerd P, Vedel P, Parving HH. N Engl J Med 2003;348:383-93.

Primary end point
CV Death
Non fatal MI
CABG/PCI
Nonfatal stroke
Amputation
Peripheral revascularization
Gaerd P, Vedel P, Parving HH. N Engl J Med 2003;348:383-93.

Treatment
Glycemic control
Proteinuria control
Cholesterol control

Randomized prospective trial of treatment strategies in type two diabetes
Protocol written in 1976
Recruitment from 1977-1991
End of study 1997
Type 2 diabetic patients 5,102
Person years follow-up 53,000
ukpds

Primary Endpoint: Any Diabetes Related Endpoint
1401 of 3867 patients (36%)
First occurrence of any one of:
diabetes related death
non fatal myocardial infarction, heart failure or angina
non fatal stroke
amputation
renal failure
retinal photocoagulation or vitreous haemorrhage
cataract extraction or blind in one eye

Microvascular Endpoints Any Diabetes Related Endpoint Favors conventional 0.5 1 2 0.88 0.90 0.94 0.84 1.11 0.75 0.029 0.34 0.44 0.052 0.52 0.0099 Any diabetes related endpoint Diabetes related deaths All cause mortality Myocardial infarction Stroke Microvascular RR p Favors intensive Relative Risk 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 3 6 9 12 15 Proportion of patients (%) Years from randomisation Hypoglycemia: any episode 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 3 6 9 12 15 Hypoglycemia: major episodes Proportion of patients (%)

Blood pressure: Tight vs less tight control 60 80 100 140 160 180 0 2 4 6 8 mmHg Years from randomisation 144 154 87 82 Blood pressure: Bad vs worse control

Any diabetes-related endpoints 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0 3 6 9 % of patients with events Tight blood pressure control (758) Less tight blood pressure control (390) risk reduction 24% p=0.0046 Years from randomisation risk reduction 32% p=0.019 Diabetes-related deaths Stroke 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 0 3 6 9 % patients with event Years from randomisation risk reduction 44% p=0.013 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 0 3 6 9 % patients with event Years from randomisation risk reduction 37% p=0.0092 Microvascular endpoints

UK Prospective Diabetes Study
An intensive glucose control policy HbA 1c 7.0 % vs 7.9 %
reduces risk of
any diabetes-related endpoints 12% p=0.030
microvascular endpoints 25% p=0.010
myocardial infarction 16% p=0.052
A tight blood pressure control policy 144/82 vs 154/87
mmHg reduces risk of
any diabetes-related endpoint 24% p=0.005
microvascular endpoint 37% p=0.009
stroke 44% p=0.013
The benefit from tight glycemic control is less than the benefit from lousy blood pressure control

Hypertension Optimal Treatment trial (HOT Trial) randomized 18,790 patients to one of three diastolic blood pressure goals
8% of the original cohort was diabetic
The first line agent was felodipine
Harrison L, Et al. Lancet 1998; 351: 1755-1762. HOT Diabetics

Home blood pressure is the hemoglobin A1c of blood pressure management. Dr Whitey routinely checks Hgb A1c to make sure my diabetes is on track. Dr Whitey asks me check my home BP to verify my BP is on track.

Treatment
Glycemic control
Proteinuria control
Cholesterol control

Lewis, E. J. et al. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1456-1462 Cumulative Incidence of Events in Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy in the Captopril and Placebo Groups

RENAAL Trial 1513 type II DM with nephropathy Cr 1.9 Randomized to placebo or losartan Primary outcome: composite of doubling serum Cr, ESRD, or death Brenner BM, Et al. NEJM 2001; 343: 861-9.

Picture of world with/without electricity

ACEi are good, ARB are good… in patients with albuminuria. What about in normotensive patients without albuminuria?

Mauer M, Zinman B, Gardiner R, et al. N Eng J Med 2009; 361: 40-51.

Multicenter, randomized, double blind controlled trial
285 normotensive patients with type I dm and albuminuria < 20 µg/min
Randomized to placebo, enalepril 10/20 mg or losartan 50/100 mg
Primary endpoint was change in mesangial volume on renal biopsy

Mauer M, Zinman B, Gardiner R, et al. N Eng J Med 2009; 361: 40-51. Progression of diabetic retinopathy (2 steps) Odds ratio vs placebo Placebo 38% 1 Enalepril 25% 0.35 (65% reduction) Losartan 21% 0.30 (70% reduction)

ACEi are good ARB are good What about both together?

CALM Study
N= 200
Type II DM with microalbuminuria
Randomized to:
Lisinopril 20 mg qd
Candesartan 16 mg qd
Combination of lisinopril 20 mg and candesartan 16 mg
Mogensen CE, Et al. BMJ 2000; 321: 1440-4.

Combination ACEi & ARB: the Meta analysis
10 studies of patients with diabetic nephropathy
315 patients randomized to ACEi or ACEi and ARB
Jennings DL, Kalus JS, et al. Diabetic Medicine. 24(5):486-493, May 2007

Problem: Too short Wrong target

Studies use change in proteinuria as the primary endpoint
Most were 8-12 weeks in duration
Significant reduction in proteinuria compared to ACEi (p=0.01)
Reduced GFR (3.9 ml/min, p=0.03)
Increase in potassium (0.2 mmol/L, p<0.01)
Reduction in BP (5.2/5.3, p<0.01)
Jennings DL, Kalus JS, et al. Diabetic Medicine. 24(5):486-493, May 2007

STUDIES OF ACEI + ARB IN NON-DIABETICS
What about the data of dual therapy in non-diabetics

On Target
Telmisartan + ramipril vs ramipril vs telmisartan
Outcome: CV death, MI, CVA, hospitalization for CHF
25,620 patients were randomized
Study population: age >55, coronary, peripheral or cerebrovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ damage
ONTARGET Investigators. N Eng J Med. 358: 1547-59, 2008

37% had diabetes
13% had microalbuminuria
50% had prior MI
22%had prior CABG
68% had history of hypertension
56 months of follow-up

Primary outcome ONTARGET Investigators. N Eng J Med. 358: 1547-59, 2008

Renal outcomes
Renal impairment:
13.5% with combo tx
10.2% ramipril
10.6% telmisartan
RR 1.33 for combination tx (p=<0.001)
Initiation of dialysis
0.8% with combination therapy
0.6% with monotherapy
RR 1.37 (p=0.1)

Renal outcomes
Second publication with data focused on renal outcomes
Primary outcome for this publication was dialysis, death or doubling of serum creatinine
Mann JFE, Schmieder RE, McQueen M. Lancet. 372: 547-53, 2008

Mann JFE, Schmieder RE, McQueen M. Lancet. 372: 547-53, 2008 0.037 0.038 0.020

Increased renal outcomes despite better proteinuria

Cooperate Trial: ACEi+ARB in non-diabetics 263 patients with non-diabetic renal disease Average GFR 37.5 mL/min Average protein excretion 2.5 g/day Randomized to losartan 100mg, trandolapril 3mg, or both Nakao N, Et al. Lancet 2003; 361: 117-24. Endpoint: doubling of serum creatinine or dialysis

Potassium Potassium

RESOLVD
768 patients with heart failure (NYHA II to IV)
Potassium rose 0.11 mmol/L (p<0.05 vs Candesartan alone and enalepril alone)
ValHeFT
5010 patients with heart failure (NYHA II to IV and EF<40%)
Potassium rose 0.12 mmol/L (p<0.001)
CHARM-Added trial
2548 patients with heart failure (NYHA II to IV and EF<40%)
No significant change in potassium
McKelvie RS, Et al. Circulation 1999; 100: 1056-64. Cohn JN, Et al. N Eng J Med 2001; 345: 1667-75. McMurray JJ, Et al. Lancet 2003; 362: 767-71.

Any addition of
ACEi
ARB
Aldosterone antagonist
Diuretic
Must check electrolytes one week later
High potassium
Stop the drug
Low potassium diet
Loop diuretic
Thiazide diuretic
Liberalize sodium restriction

Treatment
Glycemic control
Proteinuria control
Cholesterol control

Theory: reduce proteinuria, reduce cardiovascular events High  High | High  Low | Low  High | Low  Low Ibsen H, Et al. Hypertension 2005; 45: 198-202. Pre-specified subanalysis of the LIFE trial 8206 men and women ages 55-80 with hypertension and LVH 13% were diabetics Primary analysis was Atenolol vs Losartan Composite endpoint (CEP) was CV death, non-fatal stroke, or non-fatal MI … Reduction in albuminuria during treatment translates to a reduction in cardiovascular events…

Theory: reduce proteinuria, reduce cardiovascular events and renal end-points Reanalysis of the RENAAL trial. Instead of the intension to treat analysis, patients were analyzed by baseline proteinuria or reduction in proteinuria. The reduction in albuminuria at 6 months predicted outcomes at 42 months … Interestingly, suppression of albuminuria was the strongest predictor of long-term protection from cardiovascular events… De Zeeuw D, Et al. Circulation 2004; 110: 921-927.

Conclusion: reduction in proteinuria reduces CV complications and renal complications Implications: reduction in proteinuria can be used as an intermediate end-point, i.e. interventions which reduce proteinuria are good.

Calcium channel blockers
Verapamil does not delay development of microalbuminuria
Verapamil does reduce proteinuria in diabetics independent of changes in blood pressure
Aldosterone antagonists
Spironolactone reduces proteinuria in diabetics
Change in proteinuria is independent of blood pressure
All patients were treated with an ACEi or ARB
24-Hr ambulatory BP fell 6/2
Carvedilol
RCT of metoprolol vs. carvedilol, improved A1c and albuminuria
Bakris GL, Et al. JAMA 2004; 292: 2227-36. Ruggenenti P, Et al. N Eng J Med 2004; 351: 1941-51. % Change in Proteinuria Blood pressure Bakris GL, Et al. Kidney Int 1998; 58: 1283-9. Schjoedt KJ, Et al. Kidney International 2006; 70: 536-542.

Aliskiren in addition to losartan in DM2 and nephropathy
RCT double blind, multicenter
N=599
Placebo vs 150 mg aliskiren for 3 months
Followed by doubling of the dose of the placebo and aliskiren (300 mg)
Study duration 6 months

Use of aliskiren 150 mg for 3 months and 300 mg for 3 months lowered albuminuria 20% compared to placebo
150 mg 300 mg

Treatment
Glycemic control
Proteinuria control
Cholesterol control

Run-in ACEi or ARB ACEi + ARB Atorvastatin Group A Placebo Group B Randomization Bianchi S, Et al. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41:565-570. A Controlled, Prospective Study of the Effects of Atorvastatin on Proteinuria and Progression of Kidney Disease 56 men and women with non-diabetic GN CrCl 53 mL/min and proteinuria = 2.5 g/d

GREACE Study 1541Greek men and women Age < 75, LDL > 100 and hx CHD 20% DM 3 year follow-up CHD events: Study:12% vs control: 24.5% Athyros VG, Et al. J Clin Pathol 2004; 57: 728-34.

Endothelin antagonists
Avosentan is an endothelin A antagonist
Endothelin A receptors stimulate matrix production in animal models of diabetic nephropathy
Avosentan proof of concept
286 diabetics with 1.0-1.5 g proteinuria on ACEi/ARB
reduced the urinary albumin excretion rate by about 50%
No change in BP, HR, CrCl
Slight decrease in Hct

Ascend trial, Phase III trial of Avosentan
International multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Randomization is 1:1:1
25 mg avosentan
50 mg avosentan
Placebo
End-point is doubling of serum creatinine, ESRD or death
Enrollment criteria
Type II diabetics age 21-80
Diabetes at least 3 yrs ago
Albuminuria > 300 mg/day
Cr 1.0-1.4 for men
Cr 1.0-1.3 for women
All patients must be on ACEi/ARB or intolerant

Conclusions
Diabetic nephropathy is the most common cause of ESRD in the world
ESRD is a rare out-come among diabetics
Just over half of diabetics will develop nephropathy
Glycemic control
Angiotensin 2 reduction
Proteinuria reduction
ACEi + ARB
Statins
Aldosterone antagonists
Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers
Endothelin antagonists

Incidence of ESRD due to diabetic nephropathy IDNT RENALL

http://www.pbfluids.com	461
http://www.slideshare.net	47
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com	1

Diabetic Nephropathy 2009

by Joel Topf on Sep 10, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 509

Statistics

Diabetic Nephropathy 2009 — Presentation Transcript