Eberhard Ritz

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

BACKGROUND: Statins reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the benefit of statins in such patients receiving hemodialysis, who are at high risk for cardiovascular disease and death, has not been examined. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, prospective study of 1255 subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving maintenance hemodialysis who were randomly assigned to receive 20 mg of atorvastatin per day or matching placebo. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiac causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke. Secondary end points included death from all causes and all cardiac and cerebrovascular events combined. RESULTS: After four weeks of treatment, the median level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was reduced by 42 percent among patients receiving atorvastatin, and among those receiving placebo it was reduced by 1.3 percent. During a median follow-up period of four years, 469 patients (37 percent) reached the primary end point, of whom 226 were assigned to atorvastatin and 243 to placebo (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.10; P=0.37). Atorvastatin had no significant effect on the individual components of the primary end point, except that the relative risk of fatal stroke among those receiving the drug was 2.03 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.05 to 3.93; P=0.04). Atorvastatin reduced the rate of all cardiac events combined (relative risk, 0.82; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.68 to 0.99; P=0.03, nominally significant) but not all cerebrovascular events combined (relative risk, 1.12; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.55; P=0.49) or total mortality (relative risk, 0.93; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.08; P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin had no statistically significant effect on the composite primary end point of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with diabetes receiving hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Drugs that inhibit angiotensin-converting enzyme slow the progression of renal insufficiency in patients with diabetic neuropathy. Whether these drugs have a similar action in patients with other renal diseases is not known. We conducted a study to determine the effect of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor benazepril on the progression of renal insufficiency in patients with various underlying renal diseases. METHODS: In a three-year trial involving 583 patients with renal insufficiency caused by various disorders, 300 patients received benazepril and 283 received placebo. The underlying diseases included glomerulopathies (in 192 patients), interstitial nephritis (in 105), nephrosclerosis (in 97), polycystic kidney disease (in 64), diabetic nephropathy (in 21), and miscellaneous or unknown disorders (in 104). The severity of renal insufficiency was classified according to the base-line creatinine clearance: 227 patients had mild insufficiency (creatinine clearance, 46 TO 60 ml per minute), and 356 had moderate insufficiency (creatinine clearance, 30 to 45 ml per minute). The primary end point was a doubling of the base-line serum creatine concentration or the need for dialysis. RESULTS: At three years. 31 patients in the benazepril group and 57 in the placebo group had reached the primary end point (P<0.001). In the benazepril group, the reduction in the risk of reaching the end point was 53 percent overall (95 percent confidence interval, 27 to 70 percent), 71 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 21 to 90 percent) among the patients with mild renal insufficiency, and 46 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 12 to 67 percent) among those with moderate renal insufficiency. The reduction in risk was greatest among the male patients; those with glomerular diseases, diabetic nephropathy, or miscellaneous or unknown causes of renal disease; and those with base-line urinary protein excretion above 1 g per 24 hours. Benazepril was not effective in patients with polycystic disease. Diastolic pressure decreased by 3.5 to 5.0 mm Hg in the benazepril group and increased by 0.2 to 1.5 mm Hg in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Benazepril provides protection against the progression of renal insufficiency in patients with various renal diseases.

This paper presents the conclusions of a workshop entitled 'Impact of Molecular Genetics on the Classification of Renal Cell Tumours', which was held in Heidelberg in October 1996. The focus on 'renal cell tumours' excludes any discussion of Wilms' tumour and its variants, or of tumours metastatic to the kidneys. The proposed classification subdivides renal cell tumours into benign and malignant parenchymal neoplasms and, where possible, limits each subcategory to the most commonly documented genetic abnormalities. Benign tumours are subclassified into metanephric adenoma and adenofibroma, papillary renal cell adenoma, and renal oncocytoma. Malignant tumours are subclassified into common or conventional renal cell carcinoma; papillary renal cell carcinoma; chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; collecting duct carcinoma, with medullary carcinoma of the kidney; and renal cell carcinoma, unclassified. This classification is based on current genetic knowledge, correlates with recognizable histological findings, and is applicable to routine diagnostic practice.

BACKGROUND: A diminished number of nephrons has been proposed as one of the factors contributing to the development of primary hypertension. METHODS: To test this hypothesis, we used a three-dimensional stereologic method to compare the number and volume of glomeruli in 10 middle-aged white patients (age range, 35 to 59 years) with a history of primary hypertension or left ventricular hypertrophy (or both) and renal arteriolar lesions with the number and volume in 10 normotensive subjects matched for sex, age, height, and weight. All 20 subjects had died in accidents. RESULTS: Patients with hypertension had significantly fewer glomeruli per kidney than matched normotensive controls (median, 702,379 vs. 1,429,200). Patients with hypertension also had a significantly greater glomerular volume than did the controls (median, 6.50x10(-3) mm3 vs. 2.79x10(-3) mm3; P<0.001) but very few obsolescent glomeruli. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the hypothesis that the number of nephrons is reduced in white patients with primary hypertension.