Calcium channel blockers – the effect on renal changes in clinical and experimental diabetes: an overview

Birgitte Nielsen and Allan Flyvbjerg

Medical Research Laboratory M (Diabetes and Endocrinology), Institute of Experimental Clinical Research, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark

Introduction

Diabetic nephropathy is the most important cause of end-stage renal failure in the Western world. It is preceded by increased urinary albumin excretion (UAE) in the microalbuminuric range (30–300 mg/ 24 h, i.e. incipient nephropathy), often in association with hypertension. Antihypertensive treatment with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) is effective in preventing or postponing the development of overt nephropathy (i.e. UAE >300 mg/24 h) [1]. Other antihypertensive drugs, such as calcium channel blockers (CCBs), may also be effective in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease, but their preventive effect is controversial. In addition, it is still unknown whether dihydropyridine CCBs and non-dihydropyridine CCBs are equally effective. Further, the safety of CCB treatment in diabetics has been debated, since increased incidence of cardiovascular mortality has been reported during nisoldipine treatment in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). Thus, this paper will present an updated review of experimental and clinical data concerning the renoprotective effects of CCBs in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and NIDDM, and briefly discuss safety considerations. The few studies examining the effect of CCBs in a mixture of IDDM and NIDDM patients will not be discussed in this review.

Animal models of diabetic nephropathy

Experimental models used for the study of diabetic nephropathy have been heterogeneous in terms of animal species; some studies investigating rat strains with [2–6] or without [7–12] partial nephrectomy, and other studies using Beagle dogs [13,14]. Furthermore, both dihydropyridine CCBs and non-dihydropyridine CCBs have been administered, with considerable differences in study duration and CCB dosage.

Several experimental studies have compared the efficacy of a dihydropyridine CCB and an ACEI [6,11,15–17] in preventing the progression of diabetic renal disease in normotensive [6,11,17] or spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) [15,16]. In none of these studies was an effect achieved on UAE, glomerular hypertrophy, or glomerulosclerosis in response to lacidipine [15–17] or nifedipine [6,11], in contrast to the effects with ACEI treatment. However, in one study lacidipine treatment significantly reduced ocular albumin vascular clearance [15], indicating a beneficial effect on diabetic retinal microvascular changes. In addition, one study reported lacidipine to abolish diabetes-associated early renal hyperfiltration and hyperperfusion to the same degree as ACEI treatment on short-term basis, while no long-term effect was observed on UAE or glomerulosclerosis [16]. Our group reported nitrendipine to normalize UAE in normotensive, diabetic rats and to reduce renal and glomerular hypertrophy when treatment was initiated right after diabetes induction [9,18]. Furthermore, nitrendipine treatment for 6 weeks, after a period of 3 months with untreated diabetes, reduced UAE, while no effects on manifest renal and glomerular enlargement were observed [10]. In diabetic SHR nitrendipine treatment failed to show any impact on the progression of diabetic, renal changes, which could be caused by a delayed reduction in systemic blood pressure [18].

In a long-term study with diltiazem, a non-dihydropyridine CCB, in alloxan-diabetic Beagle dogs [13,14] CCB-treatment was found equally effective in comparison with the ACEI lisinopril, in preventing the development of focal glomerulosclerosis and mesangial volume expansion, and in normalizing UAE. When both treatments were combined an additional effect was observed [13,14]. This observation is in accordance with a study in streptozotocin-diabetic rats, where diltiazem was found to normalize UAE concomitantly with a reduction in systemic blood pressure and also the preservation of heparan sulfate in the glomerular basement membrane was observed [12]. In contrast, other studies reported no renoprotective effect of verapamil, a non-dihydropyridine CCB similar to diltiazem, despite a reduction in systemic blood pressure [2–4].

Only one experimental study has compared the renoprotective effect of a dihydropyridine CCB and a non-dihydropyridine CCB, namely nifedipine and diltiazem. They were found to be equally effective in reducing UAE in diabetic SHR, while no such effect was observed with hydralazine therapy [7]. However, only few animals were randomized to each treatment group in this study [7].

Thus, experimental studies have reported conflicting results concerning the effects of CCBs on the progression of diabetic glomerulopathy, although several studies showed some renoprotective effect of both dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine CCBs. It may be hypothesized that the antiproteinuric effect is dependent on an attenuation of the diabetes-induced glomerular and renal hypertrophy and mesangial volume expansion, which could explain some of the divergent findings [19]. All CCBs appear to dilate the afferent arteriole, while their effects on the efferent arteriole and glomerular capillary pressure appear to be variable. Thus, CCBs renoprotective effect in hypertensive animals could be dependent on a concomitant reduction in systemic blood pressure. Finally, partial or subtotal nephrectomy was used in some studies [2–6], and this may cause changes in renal autoregulatory mechanisms causing increased intraglomerular pressure that is not sufficiently reduced by CCBs, despite a concomitant reduction in systemic blood pressure. Although the results obtained in animal studies can not directly be extrapolated to humans, further investigation is needed, with special reference to the effect of CCBs on renal morphological changes and the potential role of a combination of CCBs and ACEIs.

Insulin-dependent diabetic patients

Studies investigating the effect of CCBs in IDDM patients with incipient or overt, diabetic nephropathy are few, and they have almost uniformly been performed on a short-term basis.

Among the studies focusing on the effect of dihydropyridine CCBs in IDDM patients with incipient nephropathy, the authors of one study reported that nifedipine reduced UAE and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in normotensive IDDM patients without influencing systemic arterial blood pressure after 1 year [20], while the authors of a second study reported a 40% increase in UAE following 6 weeks of nifedipine treatment [21]. However, the study by Mimran et al. [21] included only few patients in each group, and the study by Schnack et al. [20] showed a significant reduction in UAE following 12 months of nifedipine treatment when compared to baseline values, but no difference was observed when compared to placebo-treated, diabetic patients by the end of the study. In another study comparing nifedipine treatment with an ACEI, both treatments were capable of attenuating the development of overt nephropathy, although lisinopril was found to be most effective when the yearly increase in UAE was measured [22]. Since nifedipine is a slow-acting first generation dihydropyridine CCB, it may cause oscillations in systemic blood pressure, with a repercussion on intraglomerular vessels, causing increased intraglomerular pressure. The effect of second-generation dihydropyridine CCBs, such as nitrendipine, has only been reported in one study in IDDM patients with incipient nephropathy, where nitrendipine and the ACEI enalapril were found to reduce UAE to a similar extent following a 1-year treatment [23].

In IDDM patients with overt nephropathy, the efficacy of CCBs in preventing the progression of renal disease has been compared with that of ACEIs in several reports [24–27]. All these studies failed to demonstrate an antiproteinuric effect of any of the CCBs investigated. In a study by Rossing et al. [24], nisoldipine was compared with lisinopril, and only lisinopril was found to significantly reduce UAE during the first year of treatment. Interestingly, nisoldipine treatment led to a better preservation of GFR than ACEI therapy. This observation is important since in overt diabetic nephropathy preservation of GFR is considered to be a better primary endpoint than a potential antiproteinuric effect. After 4 years of follow-up the preservation of GFR was similar between the two treatment groups, and no significant difference in UAE was observed [27]. The failure of nisoldipine [24,27], isradipine [26], and nifedipine [25] to reduce UAE could be explained by impaired proximal tubular reabsorption mechanisms observed in dihydropyridine CCB treated diabetic patients [25]. Thus, despite similar reductions in blood pressures observed with dihydropyridine CCBs and ACEI treatment in these studies, only ACEI treatment was able to reduce UAE. However, the preservation of GFR, as reported in nisoldipine and lisinopril treated patients [24,27], indicates that both ACEI and dihydropyridine CCBs exert a renoprotective effect in IDDM patients with overt nephropathy.

Non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients

The impact of CCBs on the development or progression of diabetic nephropathy has been investigated more frequently in NIDDM patients than in IDDM patients. Most studies have compared the effect of a CCB with that of an ACEI, although few studies compared dihydropyridine CCBs with non-dihydropyridine CCBs.

In NIDDM patients with incipient nephropathy and moderate hypertension, three well-designed studies compared the effect of a dihydropyridine CCB with an ACEI on the progression of renal disease. Patients were followed for at least one year. Dihydropyridine CCB and ACEI treatment were reported to be equally effective in terms of reducing UAE, concomitantly with a reduction in systemic blood pressure [28–30]. One short-term study [31] also reported comparable effects of a dihydropyridine CCB, nicardipine, and enalapril, in preventing the progression of diabetic nephropathy. In contrast, lisinopril was reported to induce a greater reduction of UAE than nifedipine in hypertensive NIDDM patients with incipient nephropathy [32], but the study results are difficult to evaluate since an additional antihypertensive treatment with diuretics was given as lisinopril failed to render patients normotensive. Thus, in several studies dihydropyridine CCBs and ACEI were reported to reduce UAE to a similar extent, and in one study nitrendipine and enalapril were found to induce an increase in GFR of comparable magnitude, concomitantly with a reduction in UAE [33].

Similarly consistent reports with dihydropyridine CCBs have not been demonstrated for NIDDM patients with overt nephropathy. In three studies with dihydropyridine CCBs the authors failed to observe an antiproteinuric effect, despite a reduction in systemic blood pressure [34–36], while in one short-term, placebo-controlled study nicardipine and captopril were reported to be equally effective in reducing UAE [37]. Of concern is a study reporting a 50% increase in UAE in isradipine-treated NIDDM patients, while a 30% reduction was observed with captopril [35]. It has to be noted, however, that this study in African Americans [35] was of only short duration. The prevalence of diabetes and the responsiveness to antihypertensive drugs are known to be influenced by ethnic background. Therefore the extrapolation of findings in this study [35] to the condition of Caucasian patients may be of limited value.

At the time when the ABCD-trial [38] was terminated prematurely, concern arose as to the safety of CCBs as antihypertensive drugs in diabetic patients, since increased cardiovascular morbidity was reported in nisoldipine-treated hypertensive NIDDM patients. As proposed by the authors of that study, this observation could be due to a protective effect of ACEI more than a hazardous effect of nisoldipine. In the ABCD-trial, nisoldipine and enalapril were reported to be similarly effective in slowing the progression of renal disease in NIDDM patients after 5 years of treatment [39]. In view of the very few long-term studies and the heterogeneity of data and study designs, it is premature to firmly comment on the effectiveness and safety of dihydropyridine CCBs in NIDDM patients with overt nephropathy.

In contrast the available reports on the effects of non-dihydropyridine CCBs in NIDDM patients with overt nephropathy are more consistent. In no less than six studies, five from the same institution, found the authors a significant reduction in proteinuria and an attenuation of declining GFR when verapamil [40–43] or diltiazem [44,45] were compared with an ACEI. In these studies, CCBs were as effective as ACEIs, and superior to the effect of a ß-blocker [41]. In a recently published paper by Bakris et al. [43] a more marked decrease in UAE was observed when verapamil was combined with trandolapril than with either agent alone, despite similar reductions in blood pressure.

Conclusions and outlook

In this review we have updated the large amount of published data on the renal effects of CCBs in human and experimental diabetes. Despite some conflicting results most studies showed lowering effects of dihydropyridine CCBs on UAE in IDDM patients with incipient nephropathy. In IDDM patients with overt nephropathy dihydropyridines had no effect on proteinuria, but more importantly slowed the decline in renal function. Dihydropyridine CCBs appear to be effective in NIDDM patients with incipient nephropathy while their efficacy in overt nephropathy remains uncertain. In contrast, the beneficial effect of non-dihydropyridine CCBs in NIDDM patients with overt nephropathy appears to be well established. Furthermore, new experimental data support the notion that some dihydropyridine CCBs, in addition to effects on UAE, also affect early glomerular changes. Thus both dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine CCBs may be useful in the treatment of incipient and overt diabetic nephropathy. Both the ABCD-trial [38] and the FACET-study [46] were terminated due to a reported increase in cardiovascular events in NIDDM patients treated with a dihydropyridine CCB. However, both studies recorded cardiovascular events as secondary end-points, and failed to distinguish between a deleterious effect of CCB-treatment or a protective effect of ACEI treatment, or a combination of both. A recent review of CCBs effect on cardiovascular outcome in diabetic patients concluded that CCBs had an important place in antihypertensive treatment [47]. The ongoing ALLHAT study, which has included 15 000 diabetic patients, addresses the important issue whether some antihypertensive drugs provide better cardiovascular outcomes than others [48]. The ABCD-trial showed no differences in the effect of nisoldipine and enalapril on the progression of diabetic nephropathy after five years of treatment [39]. Only one study has investigated the long-term renoprotective effect of a CCB, namely nisoldipine, in IDDM patients. It was found that nisoldipine was as effective as an ACEI in preserving kidney function [27]. Although ACEI represent the drug of first choice in the treatment of hypertension in diabetic patients with or without incipient nephropathy, a combination of two or more drugs is often required to attain a sufficient reduction in blood pressure. CCBs may carry an advantage over other antihypertensive drugs in combination with ACEIs. Despite the premature termination of the ABCD-trial and the FACET-study, no change in the use of CCBs has been recommended after these studies were published [49]. Finally, the Syst-Eur trial reported the finding that nitrendipine reduced mortality and cardiovascular events in NIDDM patients [50]. No serious adverse effects of CCBs have been reported in IDDM patients. Future studies are warranted to fully characterize the effects of CCBs on renal haemodynamics and morphology. Similarly, the role of CCB treatment in combination with an ACEI in diabetic patients with various levels of renal impairment requires further investigation.

Notes

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Birgitte Nielsen MD, Medical Research Laboratory M (Diabetes and Endocrinology), Institute of Experimental Clinical Research, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. E-mail: BirgitteNielsen{at}dadlnet.dk. Back

References

  1. Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Bain RP, Rohde RD. The effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition on diabetic nephropathy. The Collaborative Study Group. N Engl J Med1993; 329: 1456–1462[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Whitty MR, Jackson B. Diabetic nephropathy in the rat: differing renal effects of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and a calcium inhibitor. Diabetes Res1988; 8: 91–96[ISI][Medline]
  3. Gallego B, Flores O, Lopez NJ, Perez BF. Renal effects of antihypertensive therapy in uninephrectomized diabetic rats. Res Exp Med Berl1997; 197: 199–209[Medline]
  4. Jackson B, Cubela R, Debrevi L, Whitty M, Johnston CI. Disparate effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and calcium blocker treatment on the preservation of renal structure and function following subtotal nephrectomy or streptozotocin-induced diabetes in the rat. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol1987; 10 [Suppl 10]: 167–169
  5. Dworkin LD, Benstein JA, Parker M, Tolbert E, Feiner HD. Calcium antagonists and converting enzyme inhibitors reduce renal injury by different mechanisms. Kidney Int1993; 43: 808–814[ISI][Medline]
  6. Anderson S, Rennke HG, Brenner BM. Nifedipine versus fosinopril in uninephrectomized diabetic rats. Kidney Int1992; 41: 891–897[ISI][Medline]
  7. Sato T, Nara Y, Note S, Yamori Y. Effect of calcium antagonists on hypertension and diabetes in new hypertensive diabetic models. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol1987; 10 [Suppl 10]: 192–194
  8. Rosenthal T, Rosenmann E, Cohen AM. Effects of nisoldipine on hypertension and glomerulosclerosis in Cohen diabetic rats with Goldblatt hypertension. Clin Exp Hypertens1993; 15: 395–408[ISI][Medline]
  9. Nielsen B, Grønbæk H, Østerby R, Ørskov H, Flyvbjerg A. The calcium channel blocker nitrendipine attenuates renal and glomerular hypertrophy in diabetic rats. Exp Nephrol1999; 7: 242–250[ISI][Medline]
  10. Nielsen B, Grønbæk H, Østerby R, Ørskov H, Flyvbjerg A. The effect of late intervention with the calcium channel blockers, nitrendipine and nisoldipine, on renal changes in experimental diabetes in rats. J Am Soc Nephrol1998; 9: A3258
  11. Petitjean P, Vloemans M, Barthelmebs M, et al. Short-term effects of quinapril and nifedipine on early renal changes in streptozotocin-induced diabetes in rats. Fundam Clin Pharmacol1994; 8: 356–365[ISI][Medline]
  12. Jyothirmayi GN, Reddi AS. Effect of diltiazem on glomerular heparan sulfate and albuminuria in diabetic rats. Hypertension1993; 21: 795–802[Abstract]
  13. Gaber L, Walton C, Brown S, Bakris G. Effects of different antihypertensive treatments on morphologic progression of diabetic nephropathy in uninephrectomized dogs. Kidney Int1994; 46: 161–169[ISI][Medline]
  14. Brown SA, Walton CL, Crawford P, Bakris GL. Long-term effects of antihypertensive regimens on renal hemodynamics and proteinuria. Kidney Int1993; 43: 1210–1218[ISI][Medline]
  15. Gin T, Joon TL, Panagiotopoulos S, Cooper M, Taylor H, Jerums G. Organ specificity of antihypertensive therapy on ocular albumin vascular clearance and albuminuria in the hypertensive diabetic rat. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci1996; 37: 281–289[Abstract]
  16. Perico N, Amuchastegui CS, Malanchini B, Bertani T, Remuzzi G. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and calcium channel blockade both normalize early hyperfiltration in experimental diabetes, but only the former prevents late renal structural damage. Exp Nephrol1994; 2: 220–228[ISI][Medline]
  17. Rumble JR, Doyle AE, Cooper ME. Comparison of effects of ACE inhibition with calcium channel blockade on renal disease in a model combining genetic hypertension and diabetes. Am J Hypertens1995; 8: 53–57[ISI][Medline]
  18. Nielsen B, Grønboek H, Østerby R, Flyvbjerg A. Effect of the calcium channel blocker nitrendipine in normotensive and spontaneously hypertensive, diabetic rats on kidney morphology and urinary albumin excretion. J Hypertens1999; 17: 973–981[ISI][Medline]
  19. Epstein M. Calcium antagonists and renal disease. Kidney Int1998; 54: 1771–1784[ISI][Medline]
  20. Schnack C, Capek M, Banyai M, Kautzky Willer A, Prager R, Schernthaner G. Long-term treatment with nifedipine reduces urinary albumin excretion and glomerular filtration rate in normotensive type 1 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. Acta Diabetol1994; 31: 14–18[ISI][Medline]
  21. Mimran A, Insua A, Ribstein J, Monnier L, Bringer J, Mirouze J. Contrasting effects of captopril and nifedipine in normotensive patients with incipient diabetic nephropathy. J Hypertens1988; 6: 919–923[ISI][Medline]
  22. Crepaldi G, Carta Q, Deferrari G, et al. Effects of lisinopril and nifedipine on the progression to overt albuminuria in IDDM patients with incipient nephropathy and normal blood pressure. Diabetes Care1998; 21: 104–110[Abstract]
  23. Jungmann E, Malanyn M, Mortasawi N, et al. Effect of 1-year treatment with nitrendipine versus enalapril on urinary albumin and alpha 1-microglobulin excretion in microalbuminuric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. A randomized, single-blind comparative study. Arzneimittelforschung1994; 44: 313–317[Medline]
  24. Rossing P, Tarnow L, Boelskifte S, Jensen BR, Nielsen FS, Parving H-H. Differences between nisoldipine and lisinopril on glomerular filtration rates and albuminuria in hypertensive IDDM patients with diabetic nephropathy during the first year of treatment. Diabetes1997; 46: 481–487[Abstract]
  25. Holdaas H, Hartmann A, Lien MG, et al. Contrasting effects of lisinopril and nifedipine on albuminuria and tubular transport functions in insulin dependent diabetics with nephropathy. J Intern Med1991; 229: 163–170[ISI][Medline]
  26. Nørgaard K, Jensen T, Christensen P, Feldt-Rasmussen B. A comparison of spirapril and isradipine in patients with diabetic nephropathy and hypertension. Blood Pressure1993; 2: 301–308[Medline]
  27. Tarnow L, Rossing P, Jensen C, Hansen BV, Parving H-H. Long-term renoprotective effect of nisoldipine and lisinopril in patients with diabetic nephropathy. Diabetologia1999; 42: A275
  28. Mosconi L, Ruggenenti P, Perna A, Mecca G, Remuzzi G. Nitrendipine and enalapril improve albuminuria and glomerular filtration rate in non-insulin dependent diabetes. Kidney Int1996; 49: 91–93
  29. Velussi M, Brocco E, Frigato F, et al. Effects of cilazapril and amlodipine on kidney function in hypertensive NIDDM patients. Diabetes1996; 45: 216–222[Abstract]
  30. Chan JC, Cockram CS, Nicholls MG, Cheung CK, Swaminathan R. Comparison of enalapril and nifedipine in treating non-insulin dependent diabetes associated with hypertension: one year analysis. Br Med J1992; 305: 981–985[ISI][Medline]
  31. Baba T, Murabayashi S, Takebe K. Comparison of the renal effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and calcium antagonist in hypertensive type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients with microalbuminuria: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia1989; 32: 40–44[ISI][Medline]
  32. Agardh CD, Garcia-Puig J, Charbonnel B, Angelkort B, Barnett AH. Greater reduction of urinary albumin excretion in hypertensive type II diabetic patients with incipient nephropathy by lisinopril than by nifedipine. J Hum Hypertens1996; 10: 185–192[ISI][Medline]
  33. Ruggenenti P, Mosconi L, Bianchi L, et al. Long-term treatment with either enalapril or nitrendipine stabilizes albuminuria and increases glomerular filtration rate in non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients. Am J Kidney Dis1994; 24: 753–761[ISI][Medline]
  34. Abbott K, Smith A, Bakris GL. Effects of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists on albuminuria in patients with diabetes. J Clin Pharmacol1996; 36: 274–279[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Guasch A, Parham M, Zayas CF, Campbell O, Nzerue C, Macon E. Contrasting effects of calcium channel blockade versus converting enzyme inhibition on proteinuria in African Americans with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol1997; 8: 793–798[Abstract]
  36. Fogari R, Zoppi A, Pasotti C, et al. Comparative effects of ramipril and nitrendipine on albuminuria in hypertensive patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and impaired renal function. J Hum Hypertens1995; 9: 131–135[ISI][Medline]
  37. Stornello M, Valvo EV, Scapellato L. Hemodynamic, renal, and humoral effects of the calcium entry blocker nicardipine and converting enzyme inhibitor captopril in hypertensive type II diabetic patients with nephropathy. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol1989; 14: 851–855[ISI][Medline]
  38. Estacio RO, Jeffers BW, Hiatt WR, Biggerstaff S, Giffort N, Schrier RW. The effect of nisoldipine as compared with enalapril on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes and hypertension. N Engl J Med1998; 338: 645–652[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Estacio RO, Jeffers B, Biggerstaff S, Schrier RW. Effects of a calcium channel antagonist versus an ACE inhibitor on diabetic nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol1998; 9: 114A
  40. Bakris GL, Mangrum A, Copley JB, Vicknair N, Sadler R. Effect of calcium channel or beta-blockade on the progression of diabetic nephropathy in African Americans. Hypertension1997; 29: 744–750[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Bakris GL, Copley JB, Vicknair N, Sadler R, Leurgans S. Calcium channel blockers versus other antihypertensive therapies on progression of NIDDM associated nephropathy. Kidney Int1996; 50: 1641–1650[ISI][Medline]
  42. Bakris GL, Barnhill BW, Sadler R. Treatment of arterial hypertension in diabetic humans: importance of therapeutic selection. Kidney Int1992; 41: 912–919[ISI][Medline]
  43. Bakris GL, Weir MR, DeQuattro V, McMahon G. Effects of an ACE inhibitor/calcium antagonist combination on proteinuria in diabetic nephropathy. Kidney Int1998; 54: 1283–1289[ISI][Medline]
  44. Slataper R, Vicknair N, Sadler R, Bakris GL. Comparative effects of different antihypertensive treatments on progression of diabetic renal disease. Arch Intern Med1993; 153: 973–980[Abstract]
  45. Bakris GL. Effects of diltiazem or lisinopril on massive proteinuria associated with diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med1990; 112: 707–708[ISI][Medline]
  46. Tatti P, Pahor M, Byington RP, et al. Outcome results of the Fosinopril Versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial (FACET) in patients with hypertension and NIDDM. Diabetes Care1998; 21: 597–603[Abstract]
  47. Mason RP, Mason PE. Calcium antagonists and cardiovascular risk in diabetes. A review of the evidence. Diabetes Care1999; 22: 1206–1208[Free Full Text]
  48. Davis BR, Cutler JA, Gordon DJ, et al. Rationale and design for the Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). ALLHAT Research Group. Am J Hypertens1996; 9: 342–360[ISI][Medline]
  49. Cutler JA. Calcium-channel blockers for hypertension – uncertainty continues. N Engl J Med1998; 338: 679–681[Free Full Text]
  50. Tuomilehto J, Rastenyte D, Thisj L, Staessen J. Reduction of mortality and cardiovascular events in older diabetic patients with isolated systolic hypertension in Europe treated with nitrendipine-based antihypetensive therapy (Syst-Eur Trial). Diabetes1998; 47: A54[ISI]




This Article
Extract
FREE Full Text (PDF)
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Disclaimer
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Nielsen, B.
Articles by Flyvbjerg, A.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Nielsen, B.
Articles by Flyvbjerg, A.