PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Shahnaz Shahinfar

Publications and source records attributed to Shahnaz Shahinfar.

30 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Renin angiotensin aldosterone system blockade and renal disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. An Asian perspective from the RENAAL Study.

OBJECTIVE: Asia is predicted to have the largest population of patients with diabetes who are at high risk for renal disease. In the Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study, approximately 17% of patients were Asians. In this subgroup analysis, we examined the characteristics, response, and adherence to treatment of the Asian population, as well as their baseline predictors of risk of renal end points. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 252 Asian patients were enrolled in the RENAAL study, which compared losartan (50 mg titrated to 100 mg) to placebo in addition to conventional antihypertensive medications in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy. Mean follow-up was 3.2 years. The effect of losartan therapy on renal and cardiovascular outcomes was examined, and baseline predictors of risk were determined using a Cox proportional hazards model with prespecified baseline covariates. RESULTS: Losartan reduced the risk of the primary composite end point composed of a doubling of serum creatinine, end-stage renal disease, or all-cause mortality in Asian patients by 35% (P = 0.02). No difference between losartan and placebo was observed for the cardiovascular composite outcomes. Losartan reduced the level of proteinuria by 47% (P < 0.001) and rate of decrease in renal function by 31% (0.0074). Discontinuations were lower in the losartan-treated patients. The strongest baseline predictors of risk of renal end points were proteinuria (hazard ratio 1.42, P < 0.0001) and low Hb (0.81, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup analysis of the RENAAL study, losartan conferred significant renal benefits and was well tolerated in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes and clinical nephropathy. Baseline proteinuria and low Hb were strong predictors of risk of renal outcomes.

Antihypertensive Agents↗
PubMed2003

Progression of chronic kidney disease: the role of blood pressure control, proteinuria, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: a patient-level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduce blood pressure and urine protein excretion and slow the progression of chronic kidney disease. PURPOSE: To determine the levels of blood pressure and urine protein excretion associated with the lowest risk for progression of chronic kidney disease during antihypertensive therapy with and without ACE inhibitors. DATA SOURCES: 11 randomized, controlled trials comparing the efficacy of antihypertensive regimens with or without ACE inhibitors for patients with predominantly nondiabetic kidney disease. STUDY SELECTION: MEDLINE database search for English-language studies published between 1977 and 1999. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on 1860 nondiabetic patients were pooled in a patient-level meta-analysis. Progression of kidney disease was defined as a doubling of baseline serum creatinine level or onset of kidney failure. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the association of systolic and diastolic blood pressure and urine protein excretion with kidney disease progression at 22 610 patient visits. DATA SYNTHESIS: Mean duration of follow-up was 2.2 years. Kidney disease progression was documented in 311 patients. Systolic blood pressure of 110 to 129 mm Hg and urine protein excretion less than 2.0 g/d were associated with the lowest risk for kidney disease progression. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors remained beneficial after adjustment for blood pressure and urine protein excretion (relative risk, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.84]). The increased risk for kidney progression at higher systolic blood pressure levels was greater in patients with urine protein excretion greater than 1.0 g/d (P < 0.006). CONCLUSION: Although reverse causation cannot be excluded with certainty, a systolic blood pressure goal between 110 and 129 mm Hg may be beneficial in patients with urine protein excretion greater than 1.0 g/d. Systolic blood pressure less than 110 mm Hg may be associated with a higher risk for kidney disease progression.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗
PubMed2003

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response study of the effectiveness and safety of lisinopril for children with hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread use in hypertensive children, the safety and effectiveness of lisinopril had not been previously tested in a controlled study. METHODS: This study explored the dose-response relationship and safety of lisinopril in 115 hypertensive children, aged 6 to 16 years. Patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion for 2 weeks to one of three doses by body weight at baseline: <50 kg: low (0.625 mg), middle (2.5 mg), high (20 mg), and > or =50 kg: low (1.25 mg), middle (5 mg), high (40 mg). The dose-response for lisinopril was evaluated by analyzing the change in slope in sitting diastolic and systolic blood pressure (BP) by dose after 2 weeks of therapy compared to baseline. Patients then entered a double-blind withdrawal, where patients were either switched to placebo or continued their current lisinopril treatment for up to 2 weeks. Patients completed period II when their BP returned to baseline. Antihypertensive effectiveness, between placebo and lisinopril was determined for all doses. Adverse events were carefully monitored. RESULTS: There was a dose-response relationship between the lowest and each of the higher doses of lisinopril. Blood pressure in the placebo group increased after withdrawal of lisinopril. The dose-response relationship was consistent across all subgroups (ie, age, Tanner stage, ethnicity, gender). CONCLUSIONS: Lisinopril, once daily, is an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive in children aged 6 to 16 years. An initial dose of 0.07 mg/kg, administered once daily, effectively lowered BP within 2 weeks. Blood pressure was reduced in a dose-dependent fashion.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

The risk of developing end-stage renal disease in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: the RENAAL study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic nephropathy has become the single most important cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) worldwide. Strategies to slow the rate of loss of renal function in these patients have been developed. We examined the risk factors that predict loss of kidney function (doubling of serum creatinine) or ESRD (dialysis or transplantation) in patients with type 2 diabetes in whom blood pressure was controlled. METHODS: We evaluated risk factors for doubling of serum creatinine or the development of ESRD in the Reduction of End Points in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study, which included 1513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. RESULTS: Univariate analyses demonstrated a group of 23 risk factors that significantly predicted doubling of serum creatinine or ESRD. From these univariate analyses, a multivariate model was developed that demonstrated four independent risk factors: proteinuria, serum creatinine, serum albumin, and hemoglobin level. Proteinuria was the strongest and most consistent risk factor. The multivariate risk model was derived from only the placebo group and was similar to that derived for the total population, suggesting that the risk predictors for progression of kidney disease were independent of therapy. CONCLUSION: After control of blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy, proteinuria, degree of renal failure, serum albumin, and hemoglobin level are independent risk factors that predict renal outcomes. The level of proteinuria proved to be the most important risk for progressive kidney injury in these diabetic patients.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

The rate of progression of renal disease may not be slower in women compared with men: a patient-level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Some studies suggest that progression of renal disease is slower in women than in men. However, other factors that are also associated with progression of renal disease have not always been taken into account. Therefore, we undertook this analysis to explore the independent association of renal disease progression with gender. METHODS: We analysed a pooled database of patients with non-diabetic renal disease enrolled in 11 randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) for slowing renal disease progression. The primary end point was the combined outcome of doubling of baseline serum creatinine or onset of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The secondary end point was the onset of ESRD alone. We performed multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis to study the independent effect of gender on these end points after adjusting for baseline patient characteristics, and changes from baseline to follow-up systolic blood pressure (SBP) and urine protein (UP) excretion. RESULTS: The total number of patients was 1860: 645 (35%) females and 1215 (65%) males. Mean duration of follow-up was 2.2 years. The proportions randomized to ACEI (51%), mean baseline serum creatinine (2.2 mg/dl) and mean age (52 years) were similar for both genders. Mean baseline SBP was greater in women than in men: 151 vs 147 mmHg (P < 0.001). Mean baseline UP was significantly lower in women compared with men: 1.3 vs 2.1 g/day (P < 0.001). A total of 311 (16.7%) patients developed the primary end point, and 176 (9.5%) developed the secondary end point. The unadjusted relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the primary end point in women vs men was 0.98 (0.77-1.24). It became 1.32 (1.03-1.69) after adjusting for the baseline variables and interaction between ACEIs and baseline UP, and 1.36 (1.06-1.75) after adjusting for baseline variables and changes in SBP and UP during follow-up. Similar results were found for the outcome of ESRD. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the rate of renal disease progression may not be slower, and may even be faster in women compared with men, after adjusting for other factors associated with a faster rate of progression. We caution that most women in our database were of post-menopausal age, and thus our findings may not extend to younger women.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Losartan reduces the costs associated with diabetic end-stage renal disease: the RENAAL study economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the within-trial effect of losartan and conventional antihypertensive therapy (CT) compared with placebo and CT on the economic cost associated with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Reduction of End Points in Type 2 Diabetes With the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study was a multinational double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial designed to evaluate the renal protective effects of losartan on a background of CT (excluding ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor agonists [AIIAs]) in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. The primary composite end point was doubling of serum creatinine, ESRD, or death. Data on the duration of ESRD were used to estimate the economic benefits of slowing the progression of nephropathy. The cost associated with ESRD was estimated by combining the days each patient experienced ESRD with the cost of ESRD over time. The cost of ESRD for individuals with diabetes was estimated using data from the U.S. Renal Data System. Total cost was estimated as the sum of the cost associated with ESRD and the cost of study therapy. RESULTS-We estimated that losartan and CT compared with placebo and CT reduced the number of days with ESRD by 33.6 per patient over 3.5 years (P = 0.004, 95% CI 10.9-56.3). This reduction in ESRD days resulted in a decrease in cost associated with ESRD of 5144 US dollars per patient (P = 0.003, 95% CI 1701 to 8587 US dollars). After accounting for the cost of losartan, the reduction in ESRD days resulted in a net savings of 3522 US dollars per patient over 3.5 years (P = 0.041, 143 to 6900 US dollars). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy not only reduced the incidence of ESRD, but also resulted in substantial cost savings.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Analysis of metabolic parameters as predictors of risk in the RENAAL study.

OBJECTIVE: Metabolic factors such as glycemic control, hyperlipidemia, and hyperkalemia are important considerations in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. In the RENAAL (Reduction of End Points in Type 2 Diabetes With the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan) study, losartan reduced renal outcomes in the patient population. This post hoc analysis of the RENAAL study reports the effects of losartan on selected metabolic parameters and assesses the relationship between baseline values of metabolic parameters and the primary composite end point or end-stage renal disease (ESRD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Glycemic control (HbA(1c)) and serum lipid, uric acid, and potassium levels were compared between the losartan and placebo groups over time, and baseline levels were correlated with the risk of reaching the primary composite end point (doubling of serum creatinine, ESRD, or death) or ESRD alone. RESULTS: Losartan did not adversely affect glycemic control or serum lipid levels. Losartan-treated patients had lower total (227.4 vs. 195.4 mg/dl) and LDL (142.2 vs. 111.7 mg/dl) cholesterol. Losartan was associated with a mean increase of up to 0.3 mEq/l in serum potassium levels; however, the rate of hyperkalemia-related discontinuation was similar between the placebo and losartan groups. Univariate analysis revealed that baseline total and LDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels were associated with increased risk of developing the primary composite end point. Similarly, total and LDL cholesterol were also associated with increased risk of developing ESRD. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, losartan was well tolerated by patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy and was associated with a favorable effect on the metabolic profile of this population.

Cholesterol↗
PubMed2003

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and antihypertensive efficacy of losartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide in hypertensive patients with renal impairment.

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of 7 days of treatment with losartan 50 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg were evaluated in 14 patients with normal renal function and in 12 patients with mild to moderate renal impairment. The efficacy of losartan 50 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg titrated to losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg was examined in 32 hypertensive patients with mild to moderate renal impairment who were treated for 12 weeks. Safety was assessed in both studies by the incidence of adverse experiences. After 7 days of treatment, the AUC for losartan, E-3174, and hydrochlorothiazide was slightly higher in patients with mild to moderate renal impairment, but the reduction in blood pressure (BP) after 7 days was not different between the two groups. The final (week 12) mean reductions in trough sitting diastolic and systolic BP were 15.0 +/- 7.1 mmHg (p < 0.01) and 20.8 +/- 16.7 mmHg (p < 0.01), respectively. There were no observed increases in drug-related adverse experiences in either study. Overall, the combination of losartan/hydrochlorothiazide was effective in lowering blood pressure and was well tolerated in patients with mild to moderate renal impairment.

Antihypertensive Agents↗
PubMed2002

Losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and proteinuria: observations from the RENAAL Study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) Study demonstrated the benefit of losartan in reducing renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and proteinuria. Additional questions concerning the reduction of proteinuria and its relationship to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) as well as cardio-renal outcomes and the safety and tolerability of losartan remain to be addressed. METHODS: Three analyses were performed: (a) the impact of losartan on the relationship between the reduction of proteinuria and ESRD; (b) a time-to-event analysis of the cardio-renal composite endpoint of ESRD, myocardial infarction, stroke or all-cause death; and (c) additional analyses of adverse events, particularly in patients with serum creatinine >or=2.0 mg/dL. RESULTS: After adjusting the values for proteinuria over the entire study, the reduction of proteinuria accounted for approximately half of the treatment effect of losartan on the risk reduction for ESRD. In addition, losartan was associated with a 21% risk reduction for the composite cardio-renal outcome (P=0.003). The addition of losartan to a conventional antihypertensive regimen did not increase the overall incidence of adverse events, regardless of severity of renal impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Losartan significantly reduced the risk of cardiorenal outcomes and was well tolerated by patients, including those with serum creatinine levels >or=2.0 g/dL. In addition, although this study shows that the reduction of proteinuria does not completely explain the impact of intervention on outcomes such as ESRD, reduction of proteinuria must remain an important consideration when treating patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. However, the reduction of outcomes such as ESRD should remain the goal of therapy when evaluating renal protection in this patient population.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Losartan reduces the burden and cost of ESRD: public health implications from the RENAAL study for the European Union.

Type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in most industrialized countries in Europe. The RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan) Study evaluated the renal protective effects of losartan versus placebo on a background of non-ACE-I/non-AIIA conventional antihypertensive therapy in 1513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Losartan reduced the incidence of doubling of serum creatinine, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), or death by 16% (P=0.022) and reduced the risk of progression to ESRD, defined as the initiation of dialysis or transplantation, by 29% (P=0.002). We set out to estimate the potential effect of losartan on the burden and costs associated with ESRD over 3.5 years in the European Union (EU). The risk reduction in new cases of ESRD was calculated by combining type 2 diabetes population estimates for the EU with the percent absolute risk reduction of ESRD in patients treated with losartan as observed in RENAAL. The number of days each patient experienced ESRD was defined as the length of time from onset of ESRD until the minimum of death or 3.5 years. ESRD-free person-years avoided with losartan treatment were calculated by combining the population estimate with the ESRD days avoided divided by number of days in a year. ESRD costs from Germany were used to approximate the potential cost savings from reduced time with ESRD and fewer ESRD cases on a EU wide basis. There are approximately 700,000 diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients with proteinuria (urine albumin/creatinine >or=300 mg/g) in the EU. The addition of losartan to the treatment regimen of these patients is expected to lead to a reduction of 44,100 cases of ESRD, 64,400 fewer person-years with ESRD, and reduce ESRD-related costs by euro 2.6 billion over 3.5 years based on RENAAL data. Treatment with losartan not only reduced the incidence of ESRD, but also can result in substantial cost savings in the European Union.

Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers↗
PubMed2002

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response study of the effectiveness and safety of enalapril for children with hypertension.

Despite widespread use to treat childhood hypertension, enalapril has never been studied systematically to determine effectiveness, dose response, and safety in a pediatric population. This study was conducted prospectively in 110 hypertensive children ages 6 to 16 years in two sequential phases. The primary outcome variable for both phases of the study was trough (24-h postdose) sitting diastolic blood pressure. The primary objective of the first phase of the study was to determine whether enalapril lowered blood pressure in children in a dose-dependent manner. During a 2-week, double-blind, randomized, dose-response period, patients were stratified by weight (< 50 kg or > or = 50 kg), then assigned to one of three dosing groups: low(0.625 or 1.25 mg), middle (2.5 or 5 mg), or high dose (20 or 40 mg). Reduction in blood pressure was examined as a function of dose ratio (1:4:32) and on a weight-adjusted basis. On completion of the dose-response phase of the study, patients entered a 2-week, double-blind, randomized withdrawal to either enalapril or placebo. Antihypertensive effectiveness, defined as the difference in sitting diastolic blood pressure between the placebo and enalapril groups, was determined. Adverse events were carefully recorded throughout the study. The dose-response relationship for enalapril had a negative slope and was linear over the chosen dosing range, suggesting that larger doses of enalapril were associated with a greater reduction in blood pressure. Randomized withdrawal to active drug orplacebo confirmed the antihypertensive effectiveness of enalapril in the middle- and high-dose groups. The antihypertensive effect of enalapril was maintained across age, gender, race, and Tanner stage. Enalapril appears to be an effective and generally well-tolerated antihypertensive agent in children ages 6 to 16 years. An initial dose of 2.5 mg in children weighing < 50 kg and 5 mg in children weighing > 50 kg (mean = 0.08 mg/kg) administered once daily effectively lowered blood pressure within 2 weeks in most patients. Blood pressure was reduced in a dose-dependent fashion, with larger doses resulting in a greater reduction.

Adolescent↗