Authors
Zhezha V.V. 1, Evsikov E.M.2, Teplova N.V.2, Stolbova M.V.1
1 Orenburg State Medical University, Orenburg
2 N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow
Abstract
Backgraund: The renoprotective activity of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors), angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARBs), beta-blockers (BBs), and diuretics has been proven, preventing kidney damage in patients with hypertension (HTN) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the protective effects of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in patients with hypertension and CKD have not been clearly defined.
Aims: To compare the effect of the third-generation CCB lercanidipine and the second-generation CCB amlodipine on the dynamics of the levels of urinary markers of tubulointerstitial damage, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), in patients with arterial hypertension (AH) of varying severity and CKD with stage C2 and C3a during 6 months of treatment.
Materials and methods: A total of 77 patients (21 men and 56 women, aged 40 to 78, mean age 57.0±9.9 years) with essential and nephrogenic hypertension and C2,C3a stage CKD were examined. They were divided into 2 groups according to the severity of hypertension: patients with stage 2 hypertension (SBP not higher than 179 mmHg) and with stage 3 hypertension (SBP 180 mmHg and higher). To compare the nephroprotective effect of CCBs of two generations, subgroups of patients prescribed amlodipine or lercanidipine were identified in each of these categories. The nephroprotective effect of the drugs was assessed by changes in the urinary levels of biomarkers NGAL, KIM-1 and albumin initially and after 6 months of antihypertensive treatment using standard methods and commercial reagent kits for ELISA diagnostics.
Results: The decrease in the concentration of NGAL and KIM-1 in urine during antihypertensive therapy with amlodipine in patients with stage 2 and 3 hypertension combined with CKD was 65.6% (p<0.001) and 54.3% (p<0.001) for KIM-1, and 58.5% (p<0.001) and 65.8% (p<0.001) for NGAL compared with baseline, respectively. The dynamics of these biomarkers in patients receiving lercanidipine was similar and was characterized by a significant decrease in KIM-1 by 60.8% (p<0.001) and 67.6% (p<0.001), and NGAL by 80.5% (p<0.001) and 65.8% (p<0.001), respectively, from baseline values. Moreover, the degree of reduction in urinary NGAL concentration was 17.2% (p = 0.042) higher with lercanidipine therapy. A 25.7% (p = 0.017) reduction in albuminuria from baseline was observed in patients with stage 2 hypertension after 6 months of treatment with lercanidipine.
Conclusions: In groups of patients with hypertension and CKD who took amlodipine and lercanidipine for 6 months, a significant decrease in urinary excretion of KIM-1 and NGAL was observed. However, the decrease in urinary NGAL concentration was more pronounced with lercanidipine therapy. A decrease in albuminuria was observed with the administration of lercanidipine in patients with stage 2 hypertension. Key words: antihypertensive therapy; chronic kidney disease; lecarandipine; amlodipine; tubular damage biomarkers.
Keywords: antihypertensive therapy, chronic kidney disease, lecarandipine, amlodipine, biomarkers of tubular damage.
References
1. Roberts MA, Pilmore HL, Ierino FL, at al. The β-Blocker to Lower Cardiovascular Dialysis Events (BLOCADE) Feasibility Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial. BLOCADE Study Collaborative Group.Am J Kidney Dis. 2016; 67(6): 902-11. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.10.029.
2. Hayashi M, Uchida S, Kawamura T. PROTECT-CKD Study Group. Prospective randomized study of the tolerability and efficacy of combination therapy for hypertensive chronic kidney disease: results of the PROTECT-CKD study. Clin Exp Nephrol. 2015; 19(5): 925-32. doi: 10.1007/s10157-015-1091-5.
3. Raikou VD. Renoprotective strategies. orld J Nephrol. 2024; 13(1): 89637. doi: 10.5527/wjn.v13.i1.89637.
4. Marín R, Gorostidi M, Fernández-Vega F, et al. Systemic and Glomerular Hypertension and Progression of Chronic Renal Disease: The Dilemma of Nephrosclerosis, Kidney International Supplements. 2005; 99(99): S52-S56. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.09910.
5. Robles NR, Fici F, Grassi G. Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and renal disease. Hypertens Res. 2017; 40(1): 21-28. doi: 10.1038/ hr.2016.85.
6. Hayashi K, Wakino S, Homma K, еt al. Pathophysiological significance of T-type Ca2+ channels: role of T-type Ca2+ channels in renal microcirculation. J Pharmacol Sci. 2005; 99: 221. doi: 10.1254/jphs.fmj05002x6.
7. Salomonsson M, Sorensen CM, Arendshorst WJ, еt al. Calcium handling in afferent arterioles. Acta Physiol Scan. 2004; 181: 421-429. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-201X.2004.01314.x.
8. Hayashi K, Ozawa Y, Fujiwara K. Role of actions of calcium antagonists on efferent arterioles—with special references to glomerular hypertension. Am J Nephrol. 2003; 23: 229. doi: 10.1159/000072054.
9. Honda M, Hayashi K, Matsuda H, еt al. Divergent renal vasodilator action of L- and T-type calcium antagonists in vivo. J Hypertens. 2001; 19: 2031. doi: 10.1097/00004872-200111000-00014.
10. Furukawa T, Nukada T, Miura R, at al. Differential blocking action of dihydropyridine Ca2+ antagonists on a T-type Ca2+ channel (alpha1G) expressed in Xenopus oocytes. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2005; 45: 241. doi: 10.1097/ 01.fjc. 0000154374.88283.15.
11. Sabbatini M, Vitaioli L, Baldoni E, еt al. Nephroprotective effect of treatment with calcium channel blockers in spontaneously hypertensive rats. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2000; 294: 948-954.
12. Stopic B, Medic-Brkic B, Savic-Vujovic K, еt al. Biomarkers and Predictors of Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Different Stages of Chronic Kidney Disease. Dose Response. 2022; 20(3): 15593258221127568. doi: 10.1177/ 15593258221127568.
13. Park M, Hsu CY, Go AS, еt al. Urine Kidney Injury Biomarkers and Risks of Cardiovascular Disease Events and All-Cause Death: The CRIC Study. Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study Investigators; CKD Biomarkers Consortium. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017; 12(5): 761-771. doi: 10.2215/CJN.08560816.
14. Dieterle F, Sistare F, Goodsaid F, et al. Renal biomarker qualification submission: a dialog between the FDA-EMEA and Predictive Safety Testing Consortium. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010; 28: 455-62. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1625.
15. Romejko K, Markowska M, Niemczyk S. The Review of Current Knowledge on Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin (NGAL). Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(13): 10470. doi: 10.3390/ijms241310470.
16. Flo TH, Smith KD, Sato S, еt al. Lipocalin 2 mediates an innate immune response to bacterial infection by sequestrating iron. Nature. 2004; 432: 917-921. doi: 10.1038/nature03104.
17. Grassi G, Robles NR, Seravalle G, еt al. Lercanidipine in the Management of Hypertension: An Update. Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2017; 8(4): 155-165. doi: 10.4103/jpp.JPP_34_17.
18. Robles NR, Calvo C, Sobrino J, at al. Lercanidipine valuable effect on urine protein losses: the RED LEVEL study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016; 32(s2): 29-34. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2016.1218838.
19. Fici F, Ari Bakir E, Ilkay Yüce E, at al. PAIT-Survey Follow-Up: Changes in Albuminuria in Hypertensive Diabetic Patients with Mild-Moderate Chronic Kidney Disease. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2020; 27(1): 43-49. doi: 10.1007/s40292-020-00358-1.
