PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Gozewijn D Laverman

Publications and source records attributed to Gozewijn D Laverman.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Cellular cholesterol efflux to plasma from proteinuric patients is elevated and remains unaffected by antiproteinuric treatment.

BACKGROUND: Lipid derangements are assumed to contribute to the elevated cardiovascular risk in proteinuric patients. The impact of proteinuria on reverse cholesterol transport (RCT) is unknown. The first step in RCT, cellular cholesterol efflux to plasma, may be altered in proteinuria, consequent to changes in pre-beta high-density lipoprotein (HDL) formation and plasma phospholipid transfer protein (PLTP) activity. METHODS: In six non-diabetic male patients with nephrotic-range proteinuria and 12 matched healthy men, plasma (apo)lipoproteins, pre-beta HDL formation, PLTP activity as well as the ability of plasma to promote cholesterol efflux out of cultured human skin fibroblasts were determined. These variables were also measured in response to antiproteinuric treatment, consisting of single and dual RAAS blockade by losartan and lisinopril. RESULTS: Plasma total cholesterol (P<0.05), triglycerides (P<0.05), apolipoprotein (apo) A-I (P<0.001), apo B (P<0.001), PLTP activity (P<0.005) and pre-beta HDL formation (P<0.001) were higher in proteinuric patients. Cellular cholesterol efflux to plasma from proteinuric patients was 41% higher than to plasma from healthy subjects (P<0.001). Reduction of proteinuria from 5.0 to 1.4 g/day by dual RAAS blockade was associated with a 23% reduction in plasma apo B levels (P<0.05). Pre-beta HDL formation and plasma PLTP activity did not change significantly. Combined antiproteinuric treatment did not reduce the elevated cellular cholesterol efflux. CONCLUSION: Cellular cholesterol efflux to plasma from patients with nephrotic-range proteinuria is enhanced, in conjunction with elevated pre-beta HDL formation and plasma PLTP activity. These changes may attenuate the cardiovascular risk associated with proteinuria-associated hyperlipidaemia. Antiproteinuric therapy lowers plasma apo B, but does not affect cell-derived cholesterol efflux, suggesting that this therapy beneficially affects cardiovascular risk in proteinuric patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

ACE inhibition versus angiotensin receptor blockade: which is better for renal and cardiovascular protection?

Chronic renal disease is characterized by a gradual loss of renal function and an increased cardiovascular risk. Renin-angiotensin system blockade by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition or angiotensin receptor blockade has distinct renoprotective and cardiovascular protective effects, but which of the two drug classes confers more protection is still a matter of debate. This review highlights and compares the effects of the two drug-classes in nondiabetic renal disease and in overt or incipient nephropathy of type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Both renal and cardiovascular outcomes are considered. Regardless of their relative efficacy, both drug classes have a dose-response relationship for intermediate renal and cardiovascular parameters. Moreover, combined treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and angiotensin receptor blockade seems to provide better long-term renoprotection than monotherapy. Actually, in most patients, achieving maximal renal and cardiovascular protection requires a multidrug regimen, usually including several antihypertensives. Within this approach, full dose titration of either RAS blocker followed by add-on with the second drug is more important than the choice of the initial drug.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists↗
PubMed2003

The COOPERATE trial.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists↗
PubMed2003

Inter-individual differences in anti-proteinuric response to ACEi in established adriamycin nephrotic rats are predicted by pretreatment renal damage.

ACE inhibition (ACEi) reduces proteinuria and provides reno-protection, but not all subjects benefit from ACEi. Individual differences in the reduction in proteinuria at the onset of treatment and in residual proteinuria during therapy predict differences in renal outcome. The present study investigated whether individual differences in the anti-proteinuric efficacy of ACEi are explained by differences in the severity of pretreatment renal structural damage and whether differences in the level of residual proteinuria during therapy are explained by the severity of renal structural damage at that time, in adriamycin nephrosis in the rat. Pretreatment renal structural damage was assessed in biopsies 6 weeks after exposure to adriamycin (2 mg/kg iv). Then ACEi (75 mg/l lisinopril, n = 23) or vehicle (n = 10) was administered; renal biopsies were repeated after stabilization of the anti-proteinuric response (week 8). Early renal damage (interstitial alpha-smooth muscle actin expression and macrophage accumulation) and established lesions [focal glomerulosclerosis (FGS) and interstitial fibrosis] were scored. During ACEi, proteinuria fell from 834 (487-851) mg/24 h pretreatment to 153 (66-265) mg/24 h at week 8 (p < 0.05); FGS stabilized from 27 (4-70) arbitrar units (AU) pretreatment to 26 (4-84) at week 12, whereas the vehicle did not affect proteinuria, resulting in progressive FGS: 18 (10-26) AU pretreatment versus 88 (46-130) at week 12 (p < 0.05). All parameters of pretreatment damage significantly predicted the anti-proteinuric response. Residual proteinuria during ACEi correlated significantly with renal structural damage parameters at that time. Pretreatment renal damage also predicted renal outcome during extended treatment. Thus, in this experimental setting, in rats with the same renal disorder and the same duration of disease, individual differences in pretreatment renal damage, albeit relatively modest, explain individual differences in renal responsiveness to ACEi. This implies that the limits of the efficacy of ACEi are set by prevalent renal damage. Further studies into the mechanisms of individual resistance to the anti-proteinuric action of ACEi are needed to develop additive intervention strategies.

Actins↗
PubMed2003

Renoprotective effects of VPI versus ACEI in normotensive nephrotic rats on different sodium intakes.

BACKGROUND: Control of blood pressure (BP) and optimal reduction of proteinuria (Uprot) are necessary for long-term renoprotection. Unfortunately, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II (Ang II) antagonists are not effective during sodium repletion. Vasopeptidase inhibitors (VPI) cause dual inhibition of ACE and neutral endopeptidase, the latter resulting in decreased atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) breakdown and thus enhanced natriuresis. Therefore, in contrast with ACEI, VPI may be effective during high sodium intake. METHODS: To test this hypothesis, the renoprotective actions of the new VPI gemopatrilat (GEM) were studied during low (0.05% NaCl) and high (3.0% NaCl) sodium diets in normotensive Wistar rats with established adriamycin nephrosis. The ACEI lisinopril (LIS) was used as control. Rats received either GEM (0.3 mg/g chow), an equihypotensive dose of LIS (75 mg/L drinking water), or vehicle (VEH) from week 6 (that is, established Uprot) until sacrifice. The effect of therapy was monitored by measuring systolic BP and Uprot (weekly) and structural renal damage at the end of study (week 16). RESULTS: During low sodium, GEM effectively reduced Uprot (-48 +/- 4%), but LIS was more effective (-80 +/- 2%), while Uprot slightly increased in VEH (+23 +/- 2%). The focal glomerulosclerosis (FGS) score after GEM (38 +/- 14) was lower than in the VEH group (79 +/- 27), although this was not significant. LIS (18 +/- 6) reduced FGS significantly. Remarkably, on high sodium, GEM was completely ineffective in reducing BP, Uprot and structural renal injury, just like LIS. CONCLUSIONS: The renoprotective actions of VPI depend on dietary sodium intake in normotensive nephrotic rats: therapeutic efficacy is fully blunted by a high sodium diet. During a low sodium diet, gemopatrilat was renoprotective, but less effective than lisinopril. Whether higher doses of the VPI could improve its renoprotective efficacy remains to be elucidated.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗
PubMed2003

Involvement of renal ACE activity in proteinuria-associated renal damage in untreated and treated adriamycin nephrotic rats.

Proteinuria is assumed to play a pathogenetic role in progressive renal damage. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition reduces proteinuria and provides renoprotection. This suggests that ACE activity might play a pathogenetic role in the development of proteinuria-induced renal structural damage. We investigated this hypothesis in untreated and treated established adriamycin nephrosis, a model of proteinuria-induced renal damage. In a time-course experiment, the development of renal structural damage in untreated adriamycin nephrotic rats was paralleled by a significant rise in renal ACE activity. Moreover, on cross-sectional analysis, a consistent positive correlation between renal, but not plasma, ACE activity and proteinuria, focal glomerulosclerosis and interstitial injury was present. Notably, these associations were present, not only in the untreated condition, but also during intervention with either ACE inhibition or AT(1)-receptor antagonism. Interestingly, we found that higher renal ACE activity is associated with more severe renal damage for a given amount of proteinuria, suggesting that renal ACE activity may be either a permissive or a promoting factor in the processes by which proteinuria eventually leads to renal structural damage. This relationship was abolished by renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-blockade, suggesting that RAS-mediated effects are involved in the relationship between renal ACE activity and proteinuria-induced renal damage. In conclusion, in untreated as well as treated adriamycin nephrotic rats, renal ACE activity is closely associated with renal outcome. This association appears to be independent of the specific mode of blockade of the RAS. Renal ACE activity is a consistent marker of individual differences in proteinuria-associated renal damage: further studies are needed to investigate a possible pathogenetic role in renal damage.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists↗
PubMed2002

Dual renin-angiotensin system blockade at optimal doses for proteinuria.

BACKGROUND: The antiproteinuric effect of combining the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor lisinopril and the angiotensin II (Ang II) antagonist losartan was compared to that of the optimal antiproteinuric doses of monotherapy. METHODS: To this purpose, lisinopril and losartan were studied in 9 nondiabetic renal patients with median proteinuria 4.5 g/day (95% CI, 3.5, 6.4), creatinine clearance of 80 mL/min (95% CI, 66, 96), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 102 mm Hg (95% CI, 93, 112). First, in two protocols with six-week treatment periods per dose, the optimal antiproteinuric dose of each drug was established in each patient. Losartan and lisinopril were used in randomized order, each preceded by a baseline period without medication. The doses of losartan (mg/day) were 50, 100, 150, and again 50. The lisinopril doses were 10, 20, 40, and again 10. After the second protocol, patients were treated with a combination, using the optimal antiproteinuric doses established for the individual drugs. RESULTS: The antiproteinuric response by losartan was optimal at 100 mg (-46%; 95% CI, -60, -24%), being larger than at the 50 mg dose (-27%; 95% CI, -42, -4%, P < 0.05), but not different from the 150 mg dose (-46%; 95% CI, -58; -20%). Proteinuria decreased further at each up-titration step of lisinopril to -75% (95% CI, -85, -43%) at the 40 mg dose. Combination therapy reduced proteinuria more effectively (-85%; 95% CI, -96, -58) than monotherapy with losartan, and to a lesser extent than with lisinopril. Optimal blood pressure responses were obtained at similar doses. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-titration with a renin-angiotensin system blocker, followed by add-on therapy is highly effective in order to reduce proteinuria. The safety of this regimen needs to be addressed in future studies.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Between-patient differences in the renal response to renin-angiotensin system intervention: clue to optimising renoprotective therapy?

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin II (Ang II), AT(1)-receptor blockers (ARB) is the cornerstone of renoprotective therapy. Still, the number of patients with end-stage renal disease is increasing worldwide, prompting the search for improved renoprotective strategies. In spite of proven efficacy at group level, the long-term renoprotective effect of RAAS blockade displays a marked between-patient heterogeneity, which is closely linked to between-patient differences in the intermediate parameters of blood pressure, proteinuria and renal haemodynamics. Of note, the between-patient differences by far exceed the between-regimen differences, and thus may provide a novel target for exploration and intervention. The responsiveness to RAAS blockade appears to be an individual characteristic as demonstrated by studies applying a rotation-schedule design. The type and severity of renal disease, obesity, insulin-resistance, glycaemic control, and genetic factors may all be involved in individual differences in responsiveness, as well as dietary factors, such as dietary sodium and protein intake. Several strategies, such as dietary sodium restriction and diuretic therapy, dose-titration for proteinuria, and dual RAAS blockade with ACE-I and ARB, can improve the response to therapy at a group level. However, when analysed for their effect in individuals, it appears that these measures do not allow poor responders to catch up with the good responders, i.e. in spite of their efficacy at group level, the available measures are usually not sufficient to overcome individual resistance to RAAS blockade. We conclude that between-patient differences in responsiveness to renoprotective intervention should get specific attention as a target for intervention. Unravelling of the underlying mechanisms may allow development of specific intervention. Based on the currently available data, we propose that response-based treatment schedules, with a multidrug approach titrated and adapted at individual responses rather than fixed treatment schedules, may provide a fruitful strategy for more effective renoprotection.

Chronic Disease↗