Hipertensión arterial refractaria en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica: pautas de optimización del tratamiento diurético

La HTA resistente se asocia de forma muy estrecha con la ERC. Existen diversos mecanismos implicados en esta asociación y resistencia, pero el principal es la sobrecarga de volumen intravascular. Por ello, la optimización del tratamiento diurético en estos pacientes debería ser clave para mejorar el control de la PA. Planteamos que diferentes estrategias basadas en la optimización del tratamiento diurético son capaces de mejorar el control de la PA y enlentecer la progresión de la ERC. Para confirmar esta hipótesis realizamos varios estudios cuyos objetivos principales fueron: - Analizar la prevalencia de la HTA resistente en una población con ERC y analizar las características de estos pacientes - Evaluar el estado de hidratación de los pacientes con ERC e HTA resistente mediante la realización de bioimpedancia. - Evaluar el efecto sobre el control de la PA en pacientes con HTA resistente de dos estrategias terapéuticas basadas en la optimización del tratamiento diurético: intensificación del tratamiento diurético vs antagonistas de la aldosterona. - Analizar el impacto del control de presión arterial de las dos estrategias terapéuticas: intensificación del tratamiento diurético vs antagonistas de la aldosterona, en la progresión de la enfermedad renal Las principales conclusiones de nuestros estudios fueron: - La prevalencia de HTA resistente aumenta con la edad, el grado de ERC y albuminuria. - El aumento del VEC es frecuente en los pacientes con ERC e HTA resistente, incluso en estadios iniciales de la ERC. - La BIS es potencialmente un método útil para identificar a los pacientes con ERC y sobrecarga de volumen y puede ayudar como guía para ajustar el tratamiento diurético. - El ajuste del tratamiento diurético guiado por BIS en pacientes con HTA resistente reduce de forma eficaz las cifras de PA - La espironolactona es más eficaz que la furosemida para el control de la presión arterial y albuminuria en pacientes con HTA resistente. - El tratamiento con espironolactona a largo plazo en pacientes con HTA resistente reduce más la PA y la proteinuria que la furosemida y estos efectos se asocian con una progresión más lenta de la enfermedad renal

An old disease, a new diagnosis; A 49 year-old man with nephrotic syndrome

Background: IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a systemic immune-mediated disease that typically manifests as fibro-inflammatory masses that can affect nearly any organ system. Case Report: We present here a case of a 49-year old man with forgotten old disease (Mikulicz disease) with membranous nephropathy (MN). Conclusions: This entity is currently included within the spectrum of IgG4-related disease. The development of renal disease shortly after the suspension of rituximab suggests another probable pathway involved. To our knowledge the transforming growth factor may be responsible for existing pattern of fibrosis in this disease. The lack of response or at least partial response to rituximab can be explained by greater involvement of regulatory T lymphocyte in the pathophysiology of this entit

Effect of Allopurinol in Chronic Kidney Disease Progression and Cardiovascular Risk

Background and objectives: Hyperuricemia is associated with hypertension, inflammation, renal disease progression, and cardiovascular disease. However, no data are available regarding the effect of allopurinol in patients with chronic kidney disease

A meta-analysis of GFR slope as a surrogate endpoint for kidney failure

Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline is causally associated with kidney failure and is a candidate surrogate endpoint for clinical trials of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression. Analyses across a diverse spectrum of interventions and populations is required for acceptance of GFR decline as an endpoint. In an analysis of individual participant data, for each of 66 studies (total of 186,312 participants), we estimated treatment effects on the total GFR slope, computed from baseline to 3 years, and chronic slope, starting at 3 months after randomization, and on the clinical endpoint (doubling of serum creatinine, GFR &lt; 15 ml min−1 per 1.73 m2 or kidney failure with replacement therapy). We used a Bayesian mixed-effects meta-regression model to relate treatment effects on GFR slope with those on the clinical endpoint across all studies and by disease groups (diabetes, glomerular diseases, CKD or cardiovascular diseases). Treatment effects on the clinical endpoint were strongly associated with treatment effects on total slope (median coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.97 (95% Bayesian credible interval (BCI) 0.82–1.00)) and moderately associated with those on chronic slope (R2 = 0.55 (95% BCI 0.25–0.77)). There was no evidence of heterogeneity across disease. Our results support the use of total slope as a primary endpoint for clinical trials of CKD progression.</p

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

BackgroundSparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis.MethodsPROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850.FindingsBetween Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals.InterpretationOver 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function

Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial

Background: Sparsentan is a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin and angiotensin receptor antagonist being examined in an ongoing phase 3 trial in adults with IgA nephropathy. We report the prespecified interim analysis of the primary proteinuria efficacy endpoint, and safety. Methods: PROTECT is an international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled study, being conducted in 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. The study examines sparsentan versus irbesartan in adults (aged ≥18 years) with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of 1·0 g/day or higher despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment for at least 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sparsentan 400 mg once daily or irbesartan 300 mg once daily, stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate at screening (30 to 1·75 g/day). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 36 in urine protein-creatinine ratio based on a 24-h urine sample, assessed using mixed model repeated measures. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were safety endpoints. All endpoints were examined in all participants who received at least one dose of randomised treatment. The study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 404 participants were randomly assigned to sparsentan (n=202) or irbesartan (n=202) and received treatment. At week 36, the geometric least squares mean percent change from baseline in urine protein-creatinine ratio was statistically significantly greater in the sparsentan group (-49·8%) than the irbesartan group (-15·1%), resulting in a between-group relative reduction of 41% (least squares mean ratio=0·59; 95% CI 0·51-0·69; p<0·0001). TEAEs with sparsentan were similar to irbesartan. There were no cases of severe oedema, heart failure, hepatotoxicity, or oedema-related discontinuations. Bodyweight changes from baseline were not different between the sparsentan and irbesartan groups. Interpretation: Once-daily treatment with sparsentan produced meaningful reduction in proteinuria compared with irbesartan in adults with IgA nephropathy. Safety of sparsentan was similar to irbesartan. Future analyses after completion of the 2-year double-blind period will show whether these beneficial effects translate into a long-term nephroprotective potential of sparsentan. Funding: Travere Therapeutics

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. Methods PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. Interpretation Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function.</p