Effects of Sevelamer Carbonate in Patients With CKD and Proteinuria: The ANSWER Randomized Trial.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Hyperphosphatemia is associated with increased risk for chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression and reduced antiproteinuric effects of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers. We investigated whether the phosphate binder sevelamer carbonate may enhance the antiproteinuric effect of RAS inhibitors in patients with CKD. STUDY DESIGN: Phase 2, randomized, controlled, open-label, crossover trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Between November 2013 and December 2014, we enrolled 53 patients with CKD with estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs)>15mL/min/1.73m2 and residual proteinuria with protein excretion≥0.5g/24h despite maximal tolerated ramipril and/or irbesartan therapy from 2 nephrology units in Italy. INTERVENTION: After stratification by serum phosphate level, ≤4 or>4mg/dL, patients were randomly assigned to 3 months of sevelamer (1,600mg thrice daily) treatment followed by 3 months without sevelamer separated by a 1-month washout period or 3 months without sevelamer followed by 3 months with sevelamer, also separated by a 1-month washout period. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was 24-hour proteinuria (n=49patients). Secondary outcomes included measured GFR (using iohexol plasma clearance), office blood pressure (BP), serum lipid levels, levels of inflammation and bone metabolism biomarkers, urinary electrolyte levels, and arterial stiffness. RESULTS: Changes in proteinuria during the 3-month treatment with (from 1.36 [IQR, 0.77-2.51] to 1.36 [IQR, 0.77-2.60] g/24h) or without (from 1.36 [IQR, 0.99-2.38] to 1.48 [IQR, 0.81-2.77] g/24h) sevelamer were similar (P=0.1). Sevelamer reduced urinary phosphate excretion without affecting serum phosphate levels. Sevelamer reduced C-reactive protein (CRP), glycated hemoglobin, and total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels without affecting levels of office BP, measured GFR, fibroblast growth factor 23, klotho, intact parathyroid hormone, serum vitamin D, or other urinary electrolytes. Results were similar in the low- and high-phosphate groups. Sevelamer was well tolerated. Adverse events were comparable between treatment periods. One case of transient hypophosphatemia was observed during treatment with sevelamer. LIMITATIONS: Short treatment duration, lower pretreatment proteinuria than expected. CONCLUSIONS: 3-month sevelamer treatment did not reduce proteinuria in patients with CKD on maximal RAS blockade. Amelioration of inflammation and dyslipidemia with sevelamer treatment raises the possibility that it may confer benefit in patients with CKD beyond reduction of proteinuria. FUNDING: Sanofi (Milan, Italy). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study number NCT01968759.

Role of remission clinics in the longitudinal treatment of CKD.

Heavy proteinuria is a major determinant of progression to ESRD for patients with chronic nephropathies and reducing proteinuria should be a key target for renoprotective therapy. In the Remission Clinic, we applied a multimodal intervention to target urinary proteins in 56 consecutive patients who had >3 g proteinuria/d despite angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. We compared the rate of GFR decline and incidence of ESRD in this cohort with 56 matched historical reference subjects who had received conventional therapy titrated to a target BP. During a median follow-up of 4 yr, the monthly rate of GFR decline was significantly lower in the Remission Clinic cohort (median -0.17 versus -0.56 ml/min per 1.73 m2; P < 0.0001), and ESRD events were significantly reduced (3.6 versus 30.4% reached ESRD). Follow-up BP, cholesterol, and proteinuria were lower in Remission Clinic patients than in reference subjects, such that disease remission or regression was achieved in up to 50% of patients who would have been otherwise expected to progress rapidly to ESRD on conventional therapy. Proteinuria reduction independently predicted a slower rate of GFR decline and ESRD incidence, but response to treatment differed depending on the underlying disease. Regarding safety, no patient was with drawn because of hyperkalemia. In summary, multidrug treatment titrated to urinary protein level can be safely and effectively applied to normalize proteinuria and to slow the loss of renal function significantly,especially among patients without type 2 diabetes and with otherwise rapidly progressing chronic nephropathies.

Blood-pressure control for renoprotection in patients with non-diabetic chronic renal disease (REIN-2): multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In chronic nephropathies, inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) is renoprotective, but can further renoprotection be achieved by reduction of blood pressure to lower than usual targets? We aimed to assess the effect of intensified versus conventional blood-pressure control on progression to end-stage renal disease. METHODS: We undertook a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of patients with non-diabetic proteinuric nephropathies receiving background treatment with the ACE inhibitor ramipril (2.5-5 mg/day). We randomly assigned participants either conventional (diastolic <90 mm Hg; n=169) or intensified (systolic/diastolic <130/80 mm Hg; n=169) blood-pressure control. To achieve the intensified blood-pressure level, patients received add-on therapy with the dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker felodipine (5-10 mg/day). The primary outcome measure was time to end-stage renal disease over 36 months' follow-up, and analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Of 338 patients who were randomised, three (two assigned intensified and one allocated conventional blood-pressure control) never took study drugs and they were excluded. Over a median follow-up of 19 months (IQR 12-35), 38/167 (23%) patients assigned to intensified blood-pressure control and 34/168 (20%) allocated conventional control progressed to end-stage renal disease (hazard ratio 1.00 [95% CI 0.61-1.64]; p=0.99). INTERPRETATION: In patients with non-diabetic proteinuric nephropathies receiving background ACE-inhibitor therapy, no additional benefit from further blood-pressure reduction by felodipine could be shown.

Effects of combined ACE inhibitor and angiotensin II antagonist treatment in human chronic nephropathies.

BACKGROUND: Proteinuria predicts renal disease progression, and its reduction by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARA) is renoprotective. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, cross-over study of 24 patients with nondiabetic, chronic nephropathies, we compared the effects on proteinuria, renal hemodynamics, and glomerular permselectivity of 8 weeks with comparable blood pressure control achieved by benazepril (10 mg/day) and valsartan (80 mg/day) combined therapy with those achieved by benazepril (20 mg/day) or valsartan (160 mg/day) alone. RESULTS: Despite comparable changes in blood pressure and glomerular filtration rate (GFR), combined therapy decreased proteinuria more than benazepril (-56% vs. -45.9%, P=0.02) and valsartan (-41.5%, P=0.002). Changes in urinary protein to creatinine ratio followed the same trend. Filtration fraction and renal vascular resistances (RVR) decreased more with combined (-14.7%,-23.7%) or benazepril (-12.4%, -20.5%) than with valsartan (-2.7%, -12.5%, P < 0.05 vs. both). RVR changes, adjusted for GFR changes, were associated with those in proteinuria (P < 0.05). Changes in glomerular permeability were comparable and did not predict different changes in proteinuria in the three groups. CONCLUSION: At comparable blood pressure, combined ACEi and ARA decreased proteinuria better than ACEi and ARA. The greater antiproteinuric effect most likely depended on an ACEi-related hemodynamic effect, in addition to glomerular size selectivity amelioration. Long-term combined ACEi and ARA therapy may be more renoprotective than treatment with each agent alone.

Effect of acetate-free biofiltration and bicarbonate hemodialysis on neutrophil activation.

BACKGROUND: Activation of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMNs) and monocytes has been described during hemodialysis (HD), which results in the release of reactive oxygen species and cytokines. Acetate-free biofiltration (AFB) has been shown to cause less monocyte activation and cytokine release than bicarbonate HD (BHD). No data are available to date on the effect of AFB on PMN activation. METHODS: We studied ex vivo superoxide anion release by PMNs isolated from nine patients treated in random order with AFB or BHD (three sessions each). Plasma interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta) levels and the nitric oxide (NO) synthetic pathway also were evaluated. A polyacrylonitrile (AN69; Hospal, Bologna, Italy) dialyzer was used for both treatments. Fourteen healthy volunteers were used as controls. Blood samples were drawn predialysis and 5 and 15 minutes after starting dialysis to obtain plasma and PMNs. RESULTS: Neither ex vivo superoxide anion release nor blood PMN count was affected by AFB. Conversely, a peak in superoxide anion production associated with a decrease in PMN count was observed at 5 minutes during BHD. Results of superoxide anion production by control PMNs exposed in vitro to AFB or bicarbonate dialysis bath or Hank's balanced salt solution supplemented with bicarbonate or acetate indicated that BHD-induced PMN activation could be attributed to the amount of bicarbonate present in the dialysis bath. IL-1beta plasma levels did not change during dialysis with AFB and were numerically higher at 5 and 15 minutes with respect to predialysis values during BHD. Uremic plasma obtained during either AFB or BHD induced greater NO synthesis by human umbilical vein endothelial cells than control plasma. CONCLUSION: AFB, unlike BHD, does not cause PMN and monocyte activation, which could have a positive impact on dialysis-associated cardiovascular disease of dialyzed patients.