The renin-angiotensin system and antihypertensive drugs in Alzheimer's disease:current standing of the angiotensin hypothesis?

There is an urgent need to improve upon Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatments. Limitations of existing drugs are that they target specific downstream neurochemical abnormalities while the upstream underlying pathology continues unchecked. Preferable treatments would be those that can target a number of the broad range of molecular and cellular abnormalities that occur in AD such as amyloid-ß (Aß) and hyperphosphorylated tau-mediated damage, inflammation, and mitochondrial dysfunction, as well more systemic abnormalities such as brain atrophy, impaired cerebral blood flow (CBF), and cerebrovascular disease. Recent pre-clinical, epidemiological, and a limited number of clinical investigations have shown that prevention of the signaling of the multifunctional and potent vasoconstrictor angiotensin II (Ang II) may offer broad benefits in AD. In addition to helping to ameliorate co-morbid hypertension, these drugs also likely improve diminished CBF which is common in AD and can contribute to focal Aß pathology. These drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, or angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARAs) may also help deteriorating cognitive function by preventing Ang II-mediated inhibition of acetylcholine release as well as interrupt the upregulation of deleterious inflammatory pathways that are widely recognized in AD. Given the current urgency to find better treatments for AD and the relatively immediate availability of drugs that are already widely prescribed for the treatment of hypertension, one of the largest modifiable risk factors for AD, this article reviews current knowledge as to the eligibility of ACE-inhibitors and ARAs for consideration in future clinical trials in AD.

Drugs affecting the renin-angiotensin system and survival from cancer: a population based study of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer patient cohorts

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to the growing number of cancer patients (more than two million in the UK alone) often to treat hypertension. However, increased fatal cancer in ARB users in a randomized trial and increased breast cancer recurrence rates in ACEI users in a recent observational study have raised concerns about their safety in cancer patients. We investigated whether ACEI or ARB use after breast, colorectal or prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific mortality.

Methods: Population-based cohorts of 9,814 breast, 4,762 colorectal and 6,339 prostate cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2006 were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registry linkage. Cancer-specific and all-cause mortality were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data in 2011 (allowing up to 13 years of follow-up). A nested case–control analysis was conducted to compare ACEI/ARB use (from general practitioner prescription records) in cancer patients dying from cancer with up to five controls (not dying from cancer). Conditional logistic regression estimated the risk of cancer-specific, and all-cause, death in ACEI/ARB users compared with non-users.

Results: The main analysis included 1,435 breast, 1,511 colorectal and 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths (and 7,106 breast, 7,291 colorectal and 5,849 prostate cancer controls). There was no increase in cancer-specific mortality in patients using ARBs after diagnosis of breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 1.35), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.82 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.79 95% CI 0.61, 1.03). There was also no evidence of increases in cancer-specific mortality with ACEI use for breast (adjusted OR = 1.06 95% CI 0.89, 1.27), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92).

Conclusions: Overall, we found no evidence of increased risks of cancer-specific mortality in breast, colorectal or prostate cancer patients who used ACEI or ARBs after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that these medications are safe in patients diagnosed with these cancers.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Breast cancer; Prostate cancer; Mortality; Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers

Level of renal function and serum erythropoietin levels independently predict anaemia post-renal transplantation

Background. Post-renal transplant anaemia is a potentially reversible cardiovascular risk factor. Graft function, immunosuppressive agents and inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system have been implicated in its aetiology. The evaluation of erythropoietin (EPO) levels may contribute to understanding the relative contributions of these factors. Methods. Two-hundred and seven renal transplant recipients attending the Belfast City Hospital were studied. Clinical and laboratory data were extracted from the medical records and laboratory systems. Results. Of the 207 patients (126 male), 47 (22.7%) were found to be anaemic (males, haemoglobin (Hb) <12 g/dl, females Hb <11g/dl). The anaemic group had a significantly higher mean serum creatinine level (162.8 µmol/l vs 131.0 µmol/l, P <0.001) and lower mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (41.5 ml/min vs 54.9 ml/min, P <0.001) than the non-anaemic group. Individual immunosuppressive regimens were comparable between those with and those without anaemia. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) administration was not more prevalent in those with anaemia compared with those without (36.2 vs 38.8, P = 0.88). There was a significant inverse correlation between Hb levels and serum EPO levels (R = -0.29, P <0.001), but not between EPO levels and eGFR (R = 0.02, P = 0.74). Higher EPO levels were predictive of anaemia, independent of eGFR in multivariate analysis. Conclusion. Anaemia is common in post-renal transplant patients. The levels of renal function and serum EPO and not immunosuppressive regimens or ACE-I/ARB use, are strong and independent predictors of anaemia. © The Author [2007]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved.

Effect of angiotensin-related antihypertensives on brain neurotransmitter levels in rats.

The extensive clinical experience of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin AT(1) receptor antagonists as antihypertensive agents provide numerous examples of anecdotal evidence of improvements in cognition and mood. This study aimed to determine the effect of chronic treatment with the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, perindopril, and the angiotensin AT(1) receptor antagonist, candesartan, on central neurotransmitter levels in the rat. Perindopril (1.0mg/kg/day) or candesartan (10mg/kg/day) was administered via the drinking water at for 1 week, while controls received water alone. At the end of treatment rats were sacrificed, brains removed and discrete regions dissected and analysed for noradrenaline, dopamine and its major metabolites, and serotonin content. As shown previously we found an increase in striatal dopamine levels after perindopril treatment, though this did not extend to the mesolimbic system with neurotransmitter levels unchanged in the hippocampus, nucleus accumbens and frontal cortex. Conversely, candesartan administration produced no change in dopamine, but significant decreases in both DOPAC and HVA in the striatum. In addition chronic candesartan infusion produced a significant increase in the levels of hippocampal noradrenaline and serotonin; and frontal cortex serotonin content. These results demonstrate that while angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin AT(1) receptor antagonists act as antihypertensives by affecting the renin-angiotensin system, they have divergent actions on brain neurochemistry.

Identifying additional patients with diabetic nephropathy using the UK primary care initiative

AIMS:
The aim of this study was to use general practice data to estimate the prevalence of diabetic nephropathy within the registered diabetes patients and examine variation in practice prevalence and management performance since introduction of this initiative.
METHODS:
Reported quality indicators from the Northern Ireland General Practice Quality and Outcomes Framework were analysed for diabetes and diabetic nephropathy prevalence and management in the period 2004-2008. Variation in prevalence at practice level was assessed using multiple linear regression adjusting for age, practice size, deprivation and glycaemic control.
RESULTS:
In 2006-2007, 57,454 (4.1%) adult diabetic patients were registered in the denominator population of 1.4 million compared with 51,923 (3.8%) in 2004-2005 (mean practice range 0.5-7.7%). Diabetic nephropathy prevalence was 15.1 and 11.5%, respectively (8688 and 5955 patients). Documented diabetic nephropathy prevalence showed marked variation across practices (range 0-100%) and was significantly negatively correlated with diabetes list size, albumin creatinine ratio testing rates and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade use and positively correlated with exception reporting rates. Specifically, for every increase in 100 diabetic patients to a register, documented diabetic nephropathy prevalence reduced by 40% (P=0.003). On the positive side, median albumin-creatinine ratio testing rates doubled to 82% compared with figures in the pre-Framework era.
CONCLUSIONS:
Implementation of the Northern Ireland General Practice Quality and Outcomes Framework has positively benefitted testing for diabetic nephropathy and increased numbers of detected patients in a short space of time. Large variation in diabetic nephropathy prevalence remains and is associated with diabetes registry size, screening and treatment practices, suggesting that understanding this variation may help detect and better manage diabetic nephropathy.

SUBLINGUAL CAPTOPRIL - A PHARMACOKINETIC AND PHARMACODYNAMIC EVALUATION

In this study we compared the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of captopril after sublingual and peroral administration. Single 25 mg doses of captopril were administered sublingually and perorally on two different occasions in a randomised cross-over fashion to eight healthy volunteers aged 22-35 years. The kinetics of unchanged captopril, plasma renin activity (PRA), BP and heart rate were studied over three hours after both peroral and sublingual administration of captopril.

Does angiotensin blockade influence graft outcome in renal transplant recipients with IgA nephropathy?

IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is a frequent cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and recurrent disease causes deterioration and graft loss in transplant recipients. No definitive management is known to reduce the risk or severity of recurrent IgAN, and the evidence to support the use of renin-angiotensin system blockade in such patients is limited.

The effects of ibuprofen and indomethacin on renal function in the presence and absence of frusemide in healthy volunteers on a restricted sodium diet

1. Since salt depletion stimulates the renal prostaglandin system to maintain renal function, the effects of indomethacin and ibuprofen upon renal haemodynamics, electrolyte excretion and renin release were examined in eight healthy male volunteers on a salt restricted diet, before and after frusemide administration. 2. Neither indomethacin (50 mg) nor ibuprofen (400 mg and 800 mg) affected renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate or electrolyte excretion before frusemide. 3. Renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate were significantly increased in the first 20 min after frusemide. These changes were significantly attenuated by indomethacin compared with placebo and ibuprofen 400 mg. Frusemide-induced diuresis but not natriuresis was inhibited by all treatments. 4. Both nonsteroidal agents inhibited equally the rise in renin activity seen after frusemide. 5. In this group of healthy volunteers on a salt restricted diet, ibuprofen and indomethacin had no detrimental effects on renal function in the absence of frusemide. The changes in renal haemodynamics due to frusemide were suppressed more by indomethacin than by ibuprofen, probably reflecting the more potent nature of indomethacin as an inhibitor of prostaglandin synthesis.

A comparison of the effects of ibuprofen and indomethacin upon renal haemodynamics and electrolyte excretion in the presence and absence of frusemide

1. This study has compared the effects of ibuprofen and indomethacin upon renal haemodynamics, electrolyte excretion and renin release in the presence and absence of frusemide under sodium replete conditions in eight healthy volunteers. 2. Neither ibuprofen (400 mg and 800 mg) nor indomethacin (50 mg) affected renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate or electrolyte excretion in the basal state. 3. Frusemide had no effect on renal blood flow, but significantly increased glomerular filtration rate. This latter change was suppressed significantly only by ibuprofen 400 mg. Frusemide-induced diuresis was inhibited by all treatments, while natriuresis following frusemide was inhibited by indomethacin only. 4. Significant increments in plasma renin activity, which were suppressed by all treatments, were observed after frusemide. The degree of inhibition of the renin responses was significantly greater in the presence of indomethacin than with either dose of ibuprofen. 5. In a sodium replete setting in healthy volunteers, indomethacin and ibuprofen had no detrimental effects on basal renal function. In the presence of frusemide, indomethacin had more anti-natriuretic and renin-suppressing effect than ibuprofen. There was no evidence for a dose-related effect of ibuprofen.

Comparison of the acute renal and peripheral vascular responses to frusemide and bumetanide at low and high dose

1. The effects of equipotent doses of frusemide (10 mg and 100 mg) and bumetanide (250 micrograms and 2.5 mg) upon renal and peripheral vascular responses, urinary prostaglandin excretion, plasma renin activity, angiotensin II and noradrenaline were compared in nine healthy volunteers. 2. Frusemide (10 mg and 100 mg) and bumetanide (2.5 mg) increased renal blood flow acutely compared with placebo but bumetanide (250 micrograms) had no effect. The changes in peripheral vascular responses were not significantly different from placebo. 3. Urinary prostaglandin metabolite excretion was acutely increased by all treatments, with no inter-treatment difference. Plasma renin activity was increased acutely by both doses of frusemide and by bumetanide (2.5 mg) compared with placebo and to bumetanide (250 micrograms). There were no differences between the latter two treatments. Angiotensin II was increased significantly 30 min after frusemide 100 mg and bumetanide 2.5 mg, and by all four treatments at 50 min when compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between either of the low doses or the higher doses. Plasma noradrenaline was unchanged by all treatments. 4. Frusemide 100 mg and bumetanide 2.5 mg have the same effects on the renal vasculature and the renin-angiotensin-prostaglandin system. Under the conditions of this study, frusemide 10 mg had different effects on plasma renin activity than bumetanide 250 micrograms.

Renal and cardiovascular effects of caffeine:a dose-response study

The effects of increasing oral doses of caffeine (45, 90, 180 and 360 mg) on effective renal plasma flow (ERPF), plasma renin activity (PRA), serum electrolytes, plasma noradrenaline, blood pressure and heart rate were studied in eight healthy male volunteers. Urine volume was increased by 360 mg of caffeine only. At caffeine doses greater than 90 mg urinary sodium excretion was significantly increased. There were no changes in ERPF. Serum potassium was significantly reduced by 360 mg of caffeine. Caffeine increased systolic pressure in a dose related manner. Diastolic pressure was also increased, but not in relation to dose. A 360 mg dose of caffeine produced a late increase in heart rate. These changes were not associated with any alterations in PRA or in plasma noradrenaline.