Preventing microalbuminuria with benazepril, valsartan, and benazepril-valsartan combination therapy in diabetic patients with high-normal albuminuria: A prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) study.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) prevent microalbuminuria in normoalbuminuric type 2 diabetic patients. We assessed whether combined therapy with the 2 medications may prevent microalbuminuria better than ACE inhibitor or ARB monotherapy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: VARIETY was a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial evaluating whether, at similar blood pressure (BP) control, combined therapy with benazepril (10 mg/day) and valsartan (160 mg/day) would prevent microalbuminuria more effectively than benazepril (20 mg/day) or valsartan (320 mg/day) monotherapy in 612 type 2 diabetic patients with high-normal albuminuria included between July 2007 and April 2013 by the Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS and 8 diabetology or nephrology units in Italy. Time to progression to microalbuminuria was the primary outcome. Analyses were intention to treat. Baseline characteristics were similar among groups. During a median [interquartile range, IQR] follow-up of 66 [42 to 83] months, 53 patients (27.0%) on combination therapy, 57 (28.1%) on benazepril, and 64 (31.8%) on valsartan reached microalbuminuria. Using an accelerated failure time model, the estimated acceleration factors were 1.410 (95% CI: 0.806 to 2.467, P = 0.229) for benazepril compared to combination therapy, 0.799 (95% CI: 0.422 to 1.514, P = 0.492) for benazepril compared to valsartan, and 1.665 (95% CI: 1.007 to 2.746, P = 0.047) for valsartan compared to combination therapy. Between-group differences in estimated acceleration factors were nonsignificant after adjustment for predefined confounders. BP control was similar across groups. All treatments were safe and tolerated well, with a slight excess of hyperkalemia and hypotension in the combination therapy group. The main study limitation was the lower than expected albuminuria at inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Risk/benefit profile of study treatments was similar. Dual renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade is not recommended as compared to benazepril or valsartan monotherapy for prevention of microalbuminuria in normoalbuminuric type 2 diabetic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2006-005954-62; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00503152.

Effects of valsartan, benazepril and their combination in overt nephropathy of type 2 diabetes: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

AIMS: To evaluate whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) combination therapy is more nephroprotective than ACE inhibitor or ARB monotherapy in people with type 2 diabetes and overt nephropathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, open, blind-endpoint phase III trial sponsored by the Italian Drug Agency, 103 consenting patients with type 2 diabetes, aged >40 years, with serum creatinine levels 159 to 309 µmol/L, spot morning urinary albumin-creatinine ratio > 1000 mg/g (or > 500 mg/g in those on ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy at inclusion) were stratified by centre and randomized to 4.5-year treatment with valsartan 320 mg/d (n = 36), benazepril 20 mg/d (n = 34) or halved doses of both medications (n = 33). The primary endpoint was end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Modified intention-to-treat analyses were performed. RESULTS: Recruitment took place between June 2007 and February 2013 at 10 centres in Italy and one in Slovenia. A total of 77 participants completed the study and 26 were prematurely withdrawn. During a median (interquartile range) of 41 (18-54) months, 12 participants on benazepril (35.3%) and nine on combination therapy (27.3%) progressed to ESRD, versus five on valsartan (13.9%). Differences between benazepril (hazard ratio [HR] 3.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-10.30; P = 0.018) or combination therapy (HR 3.28, 95% CI 1.07-10.0; P = 0.038) and valsartan were significant, even after adjustment for age, gender and baseline serum creatinine, systolic blood pressure and 24-hour proteinuria (HR 5.16, 95% CI 1.50-17.75, P = 0.009 and HR 4.75, 95% CI 1.01-22.39, P = 0.049, respectively). Adverse events were distributed similarly among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In people with type 2 diabetes with nephropathy, valsartan (320 mg/d) safely postponed ESRD more effectively than benazepril (20 mg/d) or than halved doses of both medications.

Moderate salt restriction with or without paricalcitol in type 2 diabetes and losartan-resistant macroalbuminuria (PROCEED): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Macroalbuminuria predicts renal and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to assess the albuminuria-lowering effects of salt restriction, paricalcitol therapy, or both, in this population. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, we recruited adult patients with type 2 diabetes from six diabetology outpatient clinics in northern Italy, with 24 h albuminuria of more than 300 mg despite 100 mg per day losartan therapy, blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg, serum creatinine concentration of less than 2 mg/dL, stable renal function on stable renin-angiotensin system inhibitor therapy with a fixed dose of losartan, parathyroid hormone concentration of 20 pg/mL to <110 pg/mL, serum calcium concentration of less than 9·5 mg/dL, and serum phosphate concentration of less than 5 mg/dL, who had been more than 80% compliant with placebo treatment during a 1 month placebo run-in. We allocated patients 1:1 with computer-generated randomisation to an open-label 3 month high-sodium (>200 mEq [4·8 g] per day) or low-sodium (<100 mEq [2·4 g] per day) diet and, within each diet group, to a 1 month double-blind treatment period of oral paricalcitol (2 µg per day) or placebo, followed by 1 month of placebo washout and then a further 1 month double-blind treatment period of paricalcitol or placebo in which patients crossed over to the opposite treatment period. The primary outcome was 24 h albuminuria (median of three consecutive measurements). Analyses were modified intention-to-treat (including all randomly allocated patients who took at least one dose of study drug and had an efficacy measurement after the first treatment period). Patients and investigators were masked to paricalcitol and placebo assignment. Those assessing outcomes were masked to both study drug and diet assignment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01393808, and the European Union Clinical Trials Register, number 2011-001713-14. FINDINGS: Between Dec 13, 2011, and Feb 17, 2015, we randomly allocated 57 (50%) patients to a low-sodium diet (28 [49%] to paricalcitol then placebo and 29 [51%] to placebo then paricalcitol) and 58 (50%) to a high-sodium diet (29 [50%] to paricalcitol then placebo and 29 [50%] to placebo then paricalcitol). In the low-sodium group (30 mEq of daily sodium intake reduction, equivalent to approximately 1·7-1·8 g per day), 24 h albuminuria was reduced by 36·6% (95% CI 28·5-44·9) from 724 mg (441-1233) at baseline to 481 mg (289-837) at month 3 (p<0·0001), but no significant change occurred in the high-sodium group (from 730 mg [416-1227] to 801 mg [441-1365]; 2·9% [-16·8 to 16·4] increase; p=0·50). Changes between diet groups differed by 32·4% (17·2-48·8; p<0·0001) and correlated with changes in natriuresis (r=0·43; p<0·0001). On the high-sodium diet, paricalcitol reduced the salt-induced albuminuria increase by 17·8% (3·9-32·3) over the month of treatment compared with placebo (p=0·02), whereas on the low-sodium diet, paricalcitol did not have a significant effect versus placebo (increase of 4·1% [-9·3 to 21·6]; p=0·59). During placebo treatment, albuminuria decreased with the low-sodium diet (p=0·0002) and did not significantly change with the high-sodium diet, but changes were significantly different between diet groups (p=0·0004). Treatment was well tolerated and no patients withdrew from the study because of treatment-related effects. 67 adverse events occurred in 52 (45%) patients during paricalcitol treatment and 44 events occurred in 36 (31%) patients during placebo treatment. During paricalcitol therapy, 14 cases of hypercalciuria, six cases of hypercalcaemia, and five cases of hyperphosphataemia were reported in one patient each, all of which were possibly treatment related. One case of hypercalciuria was reported in one patient during the placebo treatment period. One stroke and one coronary event occurred during paricalcitol therapy. No patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: In patients with macroalbuminuria and type 2 diabetes, moderate salt restriction enhances the antialbuminuric effect of losartan, an effect that could be nephroprotective and cardioprotective in the long term. The finding that paricalcitol prevents a sodium-induced increase in albuminuria provides support for trials to test the long-term risk-benefit profile of paricalcitol add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and macroalbuminuria refractory to dietary salt restriction, including patients refractory to even moderate salt restriction. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Effects of combined ezetimibe and simvastatin therapy as compared with simvastatin alone in patients with type 2 diabetes: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of inhibited gastrointestinal cholesterol absorption in statin-treated dyslipidemic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a multicenter prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, we primarily compared by ANCOVA the effect of 2-month ezetimibe (10 mg/day) or placebo therapy on LDL cholesterol serum levels in 108 type 2 diabetic patients with albuminuria <200 microg/min and total cholesterol concentrations >135 mg/dl despite simvastatin treatment (40 mg/day). RESULTS: Unlike placebo, ezetimibe decreased LDL cholesterol from 99 +/- 31 to 66 +/- 22 mg/dl, total cholesterol from 162 +/- 36 to 124 +/- 30 mg/dl, and apolipoprotein B from 83 +/- 22 to 64 +/- 18 mg/dl (P < 0.0001 for all changes versus placebo). A total of 72 and 17% of patients on ezetimibe or placebo achieved LDL levels <70 mg/dl, respectively (P < 0.0001). Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Adding ezetimibe to simvastatin therapy helps to improve the pro-atherogenic lipoprotein profile in type 2 diabetic patients who fail to reach recommended lipid targets with statin therapy alone.