Blog
About

8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Evaluating the Contribution of the Cause of Kidney Disease to Prognosis in CKD: Results From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The relevance of the cause of kidney disease to prognosis among patients with chronic kidney disease is uncertain.

          Study Design

          Observational study.

          Settings & Participants

          6,245 nondialysis participants in the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP).

          Predictor

          Baseline cause of kidney disease was categorized into 4 groups: cystic kidney disease, diabetic nephropathy, glomerulonephritis, and other recorded diagnoses.

          Outcomes

          End-stage renal disease (ESRD; dialysis or transplantation) and death.

          Results

          During an average 4.7 years' follow-up, 2,080 participants progressed to ESRD, including 454 with cystic kidney disease (23% per year), 378 with glomerulonephritis (10% per year), 309 with diabetic nephropathy (12% per year), and 939 with other recorded diagnoses (8% per year). By comparison with patients with cystic kidney disease, other disease groups had substantially lower adjusted risks of ESRD (relative risks of 0.28 [95% CI, 0.24-0.32], 0.40 [95% CI, 0.34-0.47], and 0.29 [95% CI, 0.25-0.32] for glomerulonephritis, diabetic nephropathy, and other recorded diagnoses, respectively). Albuminuria and baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate were associated more weakly with risk of ESRD in patients with cystic kidney disease than the 3 other diagnostic categories ( P for interaction, <0.001 and 0.01, respectively). Death before ESRD was uncommon in patients with cystic kidney disease, but was a major competing risk for participants with diabetic nephropathy, whose adjusted risk of death was 2-fold higher than that of the cystic kidney disease group (relative risk, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.73-3.18]).

          Limitations

          Exclusion of patients with prior myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization.

          Conclusions

          The cause of kidney disease has substantial prognostic implications. Other things being equal, patients with cystic kidney disease are at much higher risk of ESRD (and much lower risk of death before ESRD) than other patients. Patients with diabetic nephropathy are at particularly high risk of death prior to reaching ESRD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.

          Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease. Interruption of the renin-angiotensin system slows the progression of renal disease in patients with type 1 diabetes, but similar data are not available for patients with type 2, the most common form of diabetes. We assessed the role of the angiotensin-II-receptor antagonist losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. A total of 1513 patients were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind study comparing losartan (50 to 100 mg once daily) with placebo, both taken in addition to conventional antihypertensive treatment (calcium-channel antagonists, diuretics, alpha-blockers, beta-blockers, and centrally acting agents), for a mean of 3.4 years. The primary outcome was the composite of a doubling of the base-line serum creatinine concentration, end-stage renal disease, or death. Secondary end points included a composite of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular causes, proteinuria, and the rate of progression of renal disease. A total of 327 patients in the losartan group reached the primary end point, as compared with 359 in the placebo group (risk reduction, 16 percent; P=0.02). Losartan reduced the incidence of a doubling of the serum creatinine concentration (risk reduction, 25 percent; P=0.006) and end-stage renal disease (risk reduction, 28 percent; P=0.002) but had no effect on the rate of death. The benefit exceeded that attributable to changes in blood pressure. The composite of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular causes was similar in the two groups, although the rate of first hospitalization for heart failure was significantly lower with losartan (risk reduction, 32 percent; P=0.005). The level of proteinuria declined by 35 percent with losartan (P<0.001 for the comparison with placebo). Losartan conferred significant renal benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy, and it was generally well tolerated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Association of estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in general population cohorts: a collaborative meta-analysis.

              (2010)
            Substantial controversy surrounds the use of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria to define chronic kidney disease and assign its stages. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the independent and combined associations of eGFR and albuminuria with mortality. In this collaborative meta-analysis of general population cohorts, we pooled standardised data for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality from studies containing at least 1000 participants and baseline information about eGFR and urine albumin concentrations. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality associated with eGFR and albuminuria, adjusted for potential confounders. The analysis included 105,872 participants (730,577 person-years) from 14 studies with urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) measurements and 1,128,310 participants (4,732,110 person-years) from seven studies with urine protein dipstick measurements. In studies with ACR measurements, risk of mortality was unrelated to eGFR between 75 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 105 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and increased at lower eGFRs. Compared with eGFR 95 mL/min/1.73 m(2), adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.18 (95% CI 1.05-1.32) for eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 1.57 (1.39-1.78) for 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2), and 3.14 (2.39-4.13) for 15 mL/min/1.73 m(2). ACR was associated with risk of mortality linearly on the log-log scale without threshold effects. Compared with ACR 0.6 mg/mmol, adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.20 (1.15-1.26) for ACR 1.1 mg/mmol, 1.63 (1.50-1.77) for 3.4 mg/mmol, and 2.22 (1.97-2.51) for 33.9 mg/mmol. eGFR and ACR were multiplicatively associated with risk of mortality without evidence of interaction. Similar findings were recorded for cardiovascular mortality and in studies with dipstick measurements. eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and ACR 1.1 mg/mmol (10 mg/g) or more are independent predictors of mortality risk in the general population. This study provides quantitative data for use of both kidney measures for risk assessment and definition and staging of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), US National Kidney Foundation, and Dutch Kidney Foundation. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes.

               I Raz,  E. Ritz,  Emily Atkins (2001)
              It is unknown whether either the angiotensin-II-receptor blocker irbesartan or the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine slows the progression of nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes independently of its capacity to lower the systemic blood pressure. We randomly assigned 1715 hypertensive patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes to treatment with irbesartan (300 mg daily), amlodipine (10 mg daily), or placebo. The target blood pressure was 135/85 mm Hg or less in all groups. We compared the groups with regard to the time to the primary composite end point of a doubling of the base-line serum creatinine concentration, the development of end-stage renal disease, or death from any cause. We also compared them with regard to the time to a secondary, cardiovascular composite end point. The mean duration of follow-up was 2.6 years. Treatment with irbesartan was associated with a risk of the primary composite end point that was 20 percent lower than that in the placebo group (P=0.02) and 23 percent lower than that in the amlodipine group (P=0.006). The risk of a doubling of the serum creatinine concentration was 33 percent lower in the irbesartan group than in the placebo group (P=0.003) and 37 percent lower in the irbesartan group than in the amlodipine group (P<0.001). Treatment with irbesartan was associated with a relative risk of end-stage renal disease that was 23 percent lower than that in both other groups (P=0.07 for both comparisons). These differences were not explained by differences in the blood pressures that were achieved. The serum creatinine concentration increased 24 percent more slowly in the irbesartan group than in the placebo group (P=0.008) and 21 percent more slowly than in the amlodipine group (P=0.02). There were no significant differences in the rates of death from any cause or in the cardiovascular composite end point. The angiotensin-II-receptor blocker irbesartan is effective in protecting against the progression of nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. This protection is independent of the reduction in blood pressure it causes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Am J Kidney Dis
                Am. J. Kidney Dis
                American Journal of Kidney Diseases
                W.B. Saunders
                0272-6386
                1523-6838
                1 July 2014
                July 2014
                : 64
                : 1
                : 40-48
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
                [2 ]North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
                [3 ]National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
                [4 ]First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
                [5 ]University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
                Author notes
                []Address correspondence to Martin J. Landray, PhD, FRCP, Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7LF, United Kingdom. sharpclinical@ 123456ctsu.ox.ac.uk
                [∗]

                A list of the members of the SHARP Collaborative Group appears in the Acknowledgements.

                Article
                S0272-6386(14)00025-0
                10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.12.013
                4068325
                24613056
                © 2014 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved.
                Categories
                Original Investigation
                Pathogenesis and Treatment of Kidney Disease

                Comments

                Comment on this article