Short-term Effects of Losartan on Cardiovascular Risk and Allograft Injury Biomarkers in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide in kidney transplantation: More than just cardiac markers

Although kidney transplantation (KT) is the best treatment option for most patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) due to reduced mortality, morbidity and increased quality of life, long- term complications such as chronic kidney allograft dysfunction (CKAD) and increased cardiovascular disease burden are still major challenges. Thus, routine screening of KT recipients (KTRs) is very important to identify and quantify risks and guide preventative measures. However, no screening parameter has perfect sensitivity and specificity, and there is unmet need for new markers. In this review, we evaluate brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) as promising markers for risk stratification in the kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The usefulness of these markers are already proven in heart failure, hypertension, coronary artery disease. In the context of KT, evidence is emerging. BNP and NT-proBNP has shown to be associated with kidney function, graft failure, echocardiographic parameters, major cardiovascular events and mortality but the underlying mechanisms are not known. Although BNP and NT-proBNP interact with immune system, renin angiotensin system and sympathetic system; it is not known whether these interactions are responsible for the clinical findings observed in KTRs. Future studies are needed whether these biomarkers show clinical efficacy, especially with regard to hard outcomes such as major adverse cardiovascular events and graft dysfunction and whether routine implementation of these markers are cost effective in KTRs.

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The comparative effects of specific blood pressure (BP) lowering treatments on patient-important outcomes following kidney transplantation are uncertain. Our 2009 Cochrane review found that calcium channel blockers (CCBs) improved graft function and prevented graft loss, while the evidence for other BP-lowering treatments was limited. This is an update of the 2009 Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different classes and combinations of antihypertensive drugs in kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 3 July 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating any BP-lowering agent in recipients of a functioning kidney transplant for at least two weeks were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risks of bias and extracted data. Treatment estimates were summarised using the random-effects model and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) processes. The primary outcomes included all-cause death, graft loss, and kidney function.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies (8706 participants) were included. One study evaluated treatment in children. The overall risk of bias was unclear to high across all domains. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, CCBs probably reduce all-cause death (23 studies, 3327 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) and graft loss (24 studies, 3577 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may make little or no difference to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (11 studies, 2250 participants: MD 1.89 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -0.70 to 4.48; I2 = 48%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (13 studies, 906 participants: RR 10.8, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may reduce systolic BP (SBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -5.83 mm Hg, 95% CI -10.24 to -1.42; I2 = 13%; low certainty evidence) and diastolic BP (DBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -3.98 mm Hg, 95% CI -5.98 to -1.99; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). CCBs have uncertain effects on proteinuria. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (7 studies, 702 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), graft loss (6 studies, 718 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGFR (4 studies, 509 participants: MD -2.46 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -7.66 to 2.73; I2 = 64%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (4 studies, 388 participants: RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.76 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ACEi may reduce proteinuria (5 studies, 441 participants: MD -0.33 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.01; I2 = 67%; low certainty evidence) but had uncertain effects on SBP and DBP. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (6 studies, 1041 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGRF (5 studies, 300 participants: MD -1.91 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -6.20 to 2.38; I2 = 57%; low certainty evidence), and acute rejection (4 studies, 323 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.29; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ARBs may reduce graft loss (6 studies, 892 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), SBP (10 studies, 1239 participants: MD -3.73 mm Hg, 95% CI -7.02 to -0.44; I2 = 63%; moderate certainty evidence) and DBP (9 studies, 1086 participants: MD -2.75 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.32 to -1.18; I2 = 47%; moderate certainty evidence), but has uncertain effects on proteinuria. The effects of CCBs, ACEi or ARB compared to placebo or standard care alone on cardiovascular outcomes (including fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke) or other adverse events were uncertain. The comparative effects of ACEi plus ARB dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone were rarely evaluated. Head-to-head comparisons of ACEi, ARB or thiazide versus CCB, ACEi versus ARB, CCB or ACEi versus alpha- or beta-blockers, or ACEi plus CCB dual therapy versus ACEi or CCB monotherapy were scarce. No studies reported outcome data for cancer or life participation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For kidney transplant recipients, the use of CCB therapy to reduce BP probably reduces death and graft loss compared to placebo or standard care alone, while ARB may reduce graft loss. The effects of ACEi and ARB compared to placebo or standard care on other patient-centred outcomes were uncertain. The effects of dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone and the comparative effects of different treatments were uncertain.

Impact of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade on Mortality and Allograft Loss among Renal Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has a beneficial effect on reducing the levels of proteinuria and blood pressure in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and reduces the risk of developing end-stage kidney disease in CKD patients. Nonetheless, a debate persists regarding the impact of RAS inhibitors on outcomes such as mortality and graft survival in renal transplant patients. To assess the effect of RAS inhibitors on graft recipients in the past decade, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials from January 1, 2012, to August 1, 2022. We included 14 articles, comprising 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 9 cohort studies, including 45,377 patients. These studies compared patient or graft survival between an RAS inhibitor treatment arm and a control arm.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis revealed that RAS blockade was significantly associated with lower mortality in cohort studies (risk ratio [RR] = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.79), reduced allograft loss in cohort studies (RR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.54-0.71), and significant changes in systolic blood pressure in RCTs. Subgroup analysis of the groups of interest (interventions involving RAS blockade, follow-up period of ≥5 years) showed consistently reduced mortality (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.56-0.81) and reduced allograft loss (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.54-0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that the application of RAS blockade among renal transplant recipients was associated with lower mortality and allograft loss in cohort studies but not in RCTs. More powered clinical trials are needed to evaluate the effects of RAS blockade in renal transplant recipients.

Corneal fibrosis: From in vitro models to current and upcoming drug and gene medicines

Fibrotic diseases are characterised by myofibroblast differentiation, uncontrolled pathological extracellular matrix accumulation, tissue contraction, scar formation and, ultimately tissue / organ dysfunction. The cornea, the transparent tissue located on the anterior chamber of the eye, is extremely susceptible to fibrotic diseases, which cause loss of corneal transparency and are often associated with blindness. Although topical corticosteroids and antimetabolites are extensively used in the management of corneal fibrosis, they are associated with glaucoma, cataract formation, corneoscleral melting and infection, imposing the need of far more effective therapies. Herein, we summarise and discuss shortfalls and recent advances in in vitro models (e.g. transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) / ascorbic acid / interleukin (IL) induced) and drug (e.g. TGF-β inhibitors, epigenetic modulators) and gene (e.g. gene editing, gene silencing) therapeutic strategies in the corneal fibrosis context. Emerging therapeutical agents (e.g. neutralising antibodies, ligand traps, receptor kinase inhibitors, antisense oligonucleotides) that have shown promise in clinical setting but have not yet assessed in corneal fibrosis context are also discussed.