 |
||||
| 2008 JASN IMPACT FACTOR 7.505 | HOME AUTHOR INFO EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP | |||
| CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | JASN Express | ONLINE SUBMISSION | |
|
||||
| 2008 JASN IMPACT FACTOR 7.505 | HOME AUTHOR INFO EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP | |||
| CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | JASN Express | ONLINE SUBMISSION | |
,
*University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; University of Texas School of Public Health. Houston, Texas; 
Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health. Boston, Massachusetts; Channing Laboratory, Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Boston, Massachusetts; and ¶Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Correspondence to Dr. Marcello Tonelli, University of Alberta, Division of Nephrology & Immunology, 11-103C Clinical Science Building, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T6B 2B7, Canada. Phone: 780-407-8716; Fax: 780-407-7878;
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Hyperlipidemia has been hypothesized to play an important role in the progression of renal insufficiency, either through toxic effects of lipids on mesangial cells or by promoting intrarenal atherosclerosis (8–10). In addition, there is emerging evidence that chronic renal insufficiency may be associated with chronic inflammation (11–13), although it is controversial whether inflammation mediates progressive renal disease. Drugs that inhibit HMG-CoA reductase (statins) reduce serum cholesterol directly and may have additional antiinflammatory effects (14). Although data from several small studies suggest that that statins might slow the rate of renal function loss (reviewed in reference 15), results from large randomized trials are unavailable.
The CARE study was a randomized trial of pravastatin versus placebo in 4159 individuals with hyperlipidemia and a history of myocardial infarction (16). Participants were prospectively followed for new coronary and cardiovascular events for a median of 5 yr. We analyzed data from the subset of CARE participants with at least moderate chronic renal insufficiency, as defined by estimated GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 body surface area (BSA). GFR was estimated using an equation from the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study (MDRD-GFR) (17). We tested the hypothesis that pravastatin would slow the rate of decline in renal function.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
2+ on routine dipstick or serum creatinine levels > 1.5 times the upper limit of normal for the central study laboratory were excluded from the CARE study. After stratification according to clinical center, eligible participants were assigned by computer-generated random order to receive either 40 mg of pravastatin (Pravachol, Bristol Myers Squibb) once daily, or placebo. Treatment allocation was concealed using a centrally maintained code. Serum creatinine measurements using the alkaline picrate method of Jaffe were made annually by individuals at a central study laboratory who were blinded to treatment assignment. During the first 26 mo of the CARE study, measurements were made using the Olympus analyzer (Olympus, Melville, NY), and the AXON analyzer (Technicon, Tarrytown, NY) was used after this time. An extensive evaluation of the comparability of the methods was made, and the CARE dataset was corrected for the systematic difference between assays. Quality assurance was maintained through use of standard Westgard quality control multi-rules (19), and external proficiency was provided through the Interlaboratory Survey Program of the American College of Pathologists (Northfield, IL). On the basis of monthly averages of control materials analyzed several times daily, the percent coefficient of variation for creatinine measurement ranged from 0.8% at 9.0 mg/dl to 1.8% at 1.4 mg/dl. Internal and external quality assurance showed the measurement of creatinine to be stable and acceptably calibrated throughout the study.
Previous work suggests that treatment with pravastatin does not interfere with serum creatinine measurements (20) and that pravastatin pharmacokinetics are not affected by renal insufficiency (21). Inspection of the data set and comparison of changes in renal function during the first year of follow-up between treatment groups confirmed the absence of an acute effect on serum creatinine in association with pravastatin use.
Definitions of Renal Insufficiency
The primary index of renal function was MDRD-GFR, as calculated by the following equation :
|
| (1) |
where PCr is plasma creatinine in mg/dl. This formula has been shown to agree closely with iothalamate measurements of GFR (17). Participants with MDRD-GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 BSA at baseline were considered to have moderate chronic renal insufficiency, in agreement with recent guidelines (17).
The primary end point was the rate of change in MDRD-GFR (ml/min per 1.73 m2 BSA per yr). Secondary end points included the rate of change in estimated creatinine clearance as calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation (22) (ml/min per yr) and the proportion of individuals with sustained increases in serum creatinine of 0.3, 0.4, or 0.5 mg/dl during follow-up, using time-to-event analyses. Slopes of the rate of loss in renal function during the study were calculated for MDRD-GFR and creatinine clearance.
We included only those participants from the original CARE study for whom the data needed to calculate these estimates of renal function were available on four or more occasions, representing at least 3 yr of follow-up. Proteinuria was defined as trace proteinuria or greater on routine urinalysis at baseline. We repeated analyses in subsets with more severe renal impairment (MDRD-GFR < 50 and < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m2), and using creatinine clearance to estimate renal function.
Statistical Analyses
We analyzed participants in the groups to which they were randomized, and P values are two-sided. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of treatment assignment on rates of renal function loss. Age, race, gender, baseline renal function, diabetic status, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, systolic and diastolic BP, baseline HDL, LDL, and total cholesterol, baseline triglycerides, and pravastatin use were prospectively selected as independent variables, and the rate of renal function loss was the dependent variable. Values are reported as mean ± SD or percentages; 95% CI are provided where appropriate. The rate of change in renal function was computed from a two-stage regression procedure. In the first stage, each individual who had follow-up data that permitted estimation of MDRD-GFR for at least 3 yr had annual MDRD-GFR computed and regressed onto time. This produced for each individual the slope of the MDRD-GFR and the variance of that slope. These slopes were then used as the dependent variable in a weighted regression model, with the inverse variance of the slopes used as the weights and the same group of independent variables. Tests for interaction between the effect of pravastatin use and other independent variables (proteinuria, baseline renal function) on the dependent variable were performed by inserting a cross-product term in the model. All analyses were performed with SAS version 8.2 software (Cary, NC).
Role of the Funding Source
The CARE trial and this substudy on renal insufficiency were investigator-initiated studies funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. The data were collected and analyzed by and are now maintained at the Coordinating Center, University of Texas School of Public Health. The authors had unlimited access to the data used in this analysis. The sponsor is entitled to comment on manuscripts before submission, and the authors may consider these comments, but the rights to publication reside contractually with the investigators. The sponsor maintained information on adverse events and other trial data, as required by federal regulation.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
|
Renal Function Loss in Individuals with Estimated GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2
Among the 690 individuals with moderate renal insufficiency at baseline, the mean rate of decline in MDRD-GFR was 0.6 ± 1.7 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per yr. Rates of MDRD-GFR decline were nonsignificantly higher in individuals with proteinuria at baseline (0.8 ± 1.9 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per yr) compared with those without (0.6 ± 1.6 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per yr; P = 0.17).
Overall, there was no difference in the rate of change in MDRD-GFR in those with renal insufficiency who received pravastatin, compared with controls (P = 0.49). Table 2 and Figure 2 show rates of renal loss in pravastatin and control groups among participants with moderate renal insufficiency.
|
|
The effect of pravastatin on renal function loss differed in individuals with and without proteinuria (P for interaction < 0.006). Pravastatin tended to reduce rates of MDRD-GFR decline to a greater extent in participants with proteinuria than those without (Table 3, Figure 3). For example, among individuals with MDRD-GFR < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at baseline, pravastatin resulted in rates of decline that were 2.4 and 3.0 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per yr slower than placebo in nonproteinuric and proteinuric participants, respectively, although the 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the effect of pravastatin in these two groups overlapped.
|
|
60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 who received pravastatin had a small but statistically significant increase of 0.2 ml/min per 1.73 m2/yr in the rate of renal function loss compared with placebo (Table 2, Figure 2). The effect of pravastatin did not differ between groups with MDRD-GFR 60 to 75 and 75 ml/min per 1.73 m2, regardless of proteinuric status.
Alternate Definitions of Renal Function
Defining renal insufficiency and changes in renal function in terms of estimated creatinine clearance produced similar results to analyses in which MDRD-GFR was used. There were 513 participants who had creatinine clearance < 60 ml/min (15.1% of the cohort). Mean rate of decline in creatinine clearance in this subgroup was 1.8 ± 1.5 ml/min per yr. Participants receiving pravastatin had a statistically significant decrease in the adjusted rate of decline in creatinine clearance (Tables 2 and 3). Within this subgroup, proteinuria and lower creatinine clearance at baseline continued to influence the effect of pravastatin on rates of renal function loss (P for interaction = 0.007 and 0.0006, respectively).
Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the relationship between treatment group and the likelihood of a sustained increase in serum creatinine during the study period in individuals with renal insufficiency at baseline. No differences were found in the risk of sustained increases of 0.3 mg/dl, 0.4 mg/dl, or 0.5 mg/dl between treatment groups.
Adverse Events in Renal Insufficiency
There were 120 participants with MDRD-GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 who died during the study, 61 in the placebo group and 59 in the pravastatin group (P = 0.99). Among those with renal insufficiency, there were no significant differences in the number of participants in pravastatin and placebo arms who experienced asymptomatic elevations in serum creatine phosphokinase levels greater than three times the upper limit of normal (3 versus 2; P = 0.99) and no cases of rhabdomyolysis on pravastatin (versus 2 in control group; P = 0.24). The number of participants who developed depression (6 versus 13; P = 0.16), non-dermatologic malignancy (61 versus 75; P = 0.67), and skin cancer (25 versus 29; P = 0.25) were also similar between treatment groups.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at baseline, pravastatin use was associated with a clinically insignificant increase in the rate of subsequent renal loss. However, individuals with MDRD-GFR < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m2 who received pravastatin had rates of renal loss that were significantly less rapid than those who received placebo. In addition, individuals with proteinuria on dipstick and moderate renal insufficiency were more likely to experience a beneficial effect of pravastatin on renal function loss than those without proteinuria. The results were similar when estimated creatinine clearance rather than MDRD-GFR was used as the index of renal function. Pravastatin reduced rates of decline in MDRD-GFR by 2.5 ml/min per yr (95% CI, 1.4 to 3.6) in participants with MDRD-GFR < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at baseline. To put the magnitude of this effect into context, interventions of accepted value such as tight BP control and the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with heavy proteinuria reduce rates of renal loss by 3.5 and 4.2 ml/min per yr, respectively (2,24,25). Our findings suggest that statins may also have a role in slowing rates of renal function loss in individuals with renal insufficiency.
Our findings are consistent with a recent meta-analysis of 13 controlled trials, which found that lipid-lowering therapy was associated with a protective effect on renal function loss (1.9 ml/min per yr; 95% CI, 0.3 to 3.4 ml/min per yr) (15). The majority of the 404 participants in the included trials had diabetic nephropathy or the nephrotic syndrome, in contrast to the CARE participants. Only 14% of those in CARE had diabetes mellitus and individuals with heavy proteinuria were specifically excluded. In addition, mean plasma total cholesterol concentrations were considerably higher in the meta-analysis than in CARE and not all patients received statins. However, the mean severity of renal impairment reported in the meta-analysis appears comparable to that of the individuals in the current study.
Members of the statin class have been shown to have beneficial effects on renal hemodynamics (26), endothelial function (27), monocyte recruitment, mesangial cell proliferation, and mesangial matrix accumulation (10), as well as antiinflammatory (14,28) and immunomodulatory (29,30) actions. In theory, any of these mechanisms might mediate the putative renoprotective effects of statins. Given that plasma levels of inflammatory biomarkers correlate with severity of renal insufficiency (11,31) and development of microalbuminuria (32,33), it is tempting to speculate that antiinflammatory activity is responsible. While recent work suggests that levels of C-reactive protein (a biochemical marker of inflammation) do not correlate with rates of renal function loss, the case-mix of underlying renal disease in that trial probably differed substantially from the current study (34). The mechanism for pravastatin’s effect on renal function loss in people with established coronary disease thus remains unknown. Finally, the immunomodulatory (35) and anti-proliferative effects may vary substantially from agent to agent; it is therefore possible that other statins might affect renal function to a lesser or greater extent than pravastatin.
Pravastatin use appeared to be safe in this population, as reflected by the low rates of adverse events. The explanation for the slightly more rapid renal loss in pravastatin recipients with higher levels of baseline renal function is unclear. Pravastatin does not appear to influence in vivo measurements of serum creatinine (20), nor is it known to affect creatinine metabolism, at least in the short term. Regardless, the magnitude of the increased rate of loss was small, and the likelihood of any clinical consequence is low.
Our study has limitations that should be considered. First, this was a secondary analysis, the limitations of which are well described. Second, unlike most previous work evaluating the impact of statins in kidney disease, renal function in the current analysis was estimated using the MDRD-GFR formula and the Cockcroft-Gault equation, which are less accurate than nuclear isotope estimates of GFR. However, their major sources of error are related to calibration and random variation (36). While calibration error might have resulted in misclassification of some subjects with respect to renal insufficiency, it should not produce differential rates of change between treatment groups. In addition, every attempt was made to minimize the influence of random error through careful laboratory methodology.
Finally, because of the inclusion criteria for the original CARE study, the number of participants with more severe renal insufficiency was small. Future trials that seek to overcome this limitation will face the challenge of selecting appropriate participants. For example, it seems unlikely that people with previous myocardial infarction could be prospectively studied, because statins improve clinical outcomes in this population and the magnitude of benefit appears similar in people with and without normal kidney function (37). However, the participants in this latter study had only mild to moderate renal insufficiency. Thus, future investigations might include participants with more severe kidney disease, without myocardial infarction, or both.
The cause of renal disease in the CARE participants is unknown, and all had coronary disease; therefore, the generalizability of these findings is uncertain. However, given the frequent coexistence of renal and cardiovascular disease, such individuals are common in the general population (38), making our findings particularly relevant. This analysis predominantly concerns individuals with moderate renal dysfunction, and only a single semiquantitative assessment of proteinuria was made, which may underestimate its prevalence. Despite these caveats, our data provide justification for the use of statins in moderate to severe advanced renal disease, because strategies that reduce rates of renal function loss are often highly cost effective (39,40).
In summary, pravastatin significantly reduced rates of decline in renal function in individuals with MDRD-GFR < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and in those with MDRD-GFR < 50 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in association with proteinuria. There was also a significant stepwise inverse relationship between baseline kidney function and the effect of pravastatin on renal function loss. Our data suggest that individuals with moderate to severe kidney disease may derive clinically relevant renal benefit from the use of pravastatin, especially those with proteinuria. These findings require confirmation by a large randomized trial conducted specifically in this patient population.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  F. C. Cormack-Aboud, P. T. Brinkkoetter, J. W. Pippin, S. J. Shankland, and R. V. Durvasula Rosuvastatin protects against podocyte apoptosis in vitro Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., February 1, 2009; 24(2): 404 - 412. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. H. Samson Author Response Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, January 1, 2009; 42(6): 621 - 621. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. A. Herzog Kidney disease in cardiology Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2009; 24(1): 34 - 37. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. I. Kassimatis and P. A. Konstantinopoulos Statins in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Double-Edged Sword? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 11, 2008; 52(20): 1679 - 1679. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Shepherd, J. J. P. Kastelein, V. A. Bittner, R. Carmena, P. C. Deedwania, A. Breazna, S. Dobson, D. J. Wilson, A. L. Zuckerman, N. K. Wenger, et al. Intensive Lipid Lowering With Atorvastatin in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease, Diabetes, and Chronic Kidney Disease Mayo Clin. Proc., August 1, 2008; 83(8): 870 - 879. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. P Hull and D. J A Goldsmith Nephrotic syndrome in adults BMJ, May 24, 2008; 336(7654): 1185 - 1189. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Paulsen, C. Holm, J. N. Bech, J. Starklint, and E. B. Pedersen Effects of statins on renal sodium and water handling: Acute and short-term effects of atorvastatin on renal haemodynamics, tubular function, vasoactive hormones, blood pressure and pulse rate in healthy, normocholesterolemic humans Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2008; 23(5): 1556 - 1561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. G. Athyros, A. I. Kakafika, K. Tziomalos, A. Karagiannis, and D. P. Mikhailidis CORONA, Statins, and Heart Failure: Who Lost the Crown? Angiology, March 1, 2008; 59(1): 5 - 8. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. M. Tershakovec, W. F. Keane, Z. Zhang, P. A. Lyle, G. B. Appel, J. B. McGill, H.-H. Parving, M. E. Cooper, S. Shahinfar, and B. M. Brenner Effect of LDL Cholesterol and Treatment With Losartan on End-Stage Renal Disease in the RENAAL Study Diabetes Care, March 1, 2008; 31(3): 445 - 447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. RIFKIN and M. SARNAK Q: Should all patients with chronic kidney disease take a statin? Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, February 1, 2008; 75(2): 118 - 120. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 I. H. de Boer, B. C. Astor, H. Kramer, W. Palmas, S. L. Seliger, M. G. Shlipak, D. S. Siscovick, M. Y. Tsai, and B. Kestenbaum Lipoprotein Abnormalities Associated with Mild Impairment of Kidney Function in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., January 1, 2008; 3(1): 125 - 132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. M. Campese and J. Park HMG-CoA Reductase Inhibitors and Renal Function Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2007; 2(6): 1100 - 1103. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Shepherd, J. J.P. Kastelein, V. Bittner, P. Deedwania, A. Breazna, S. Dobson, D. J. Wilson, A. Zuckerman, N. K. Wenger, and for the Treating to New Targets Investigators Effect of Intensive Lipid Lowering with Atorvastatin on Renal Function in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: The Treating to New Targets (TNT) Study Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2007; 2(6): 1131 - 1139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Agarwal Effects of Statins on Renal Function Mayo Clin. Proc., November 1, 2007; 82(11): 1381 - 1390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Romayne Kurukulasuriya, G. Athappan, G. Saab, A. Whaley Connell, and J. R. Sowers Review: HMG CoA reductase inhibitors and renoprotection: the weight of the evidence Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease, October 1, 2007; 1(1): 49 - 59. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. W. B. Nanayakkara, C. van Guldener, P. M. ter Wee, P. G. Scheffer, F. J. van Ittersum, J. W. Twisk, T. Teerlink, W. van Dorp, and C. D. A. Stehouwer Effect of a Treatment Strategy Consisting of Pravastatin, Vitamin E, and Homocysteine Lowering on Carotid Intima-Media Thickness, Endothelial Function, and Renal Function in Patients With Mild to Moderate Chronic Kidney Disease: Results From the Anti-Oxidant Therapy in Chronic Renal Insufficiency (ATIC) Study Arch Intern Med, June 25, 2007; 167(12): 1262 - 1270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Garcia-Garcia, G. Briseno-Renteria, V. H. Luquin-Arellan, Z. Gao, J. Gill, and M. Tonelli Survival among Patients with Kidney Failure in Jalisco, Mexico J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., June 1, 2007; 18(6): 1922 - 1927. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. M. Wahba and R. H. Mak Obesity and Obesity-Initiated Metabolic Syndrome: Mechanistic Links to Chronic Kidney Disease Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., May 1, 2007; 2(3): 550 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M.-L. Koepke, M. Weber, E. Schulze-Lohoff, B. Beirowski, S. Segerer, and O. Gross Nephroprotective effect of the HMG-CoA-reductase inhibitor cerivastatin in a mouse model of progressive renal fibrosis in Alport syndrome Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2007; 22(4): 1062 - 1069. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Gianella, E. Nobili, M. Abbate, C. Zoja, P. Gelosa, L. Mussoni, S. Bellosta, M. Canavesi, D. Rottoli, U. Guerrini, et al. Rosuvastatin Treatment Prevents Progressive Kidney Inflammation and Fibrosis in Stroke-Prone Rats Am. J. Pathol., April 1, 2007; 170(4): 1165 - 1177. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. G. Athyros, D. P. Mikhailidis, E. N. Liberopoulos, A. I. Kakafika, A. Karagiannis, A. A. Papageorgiou, K. Tziomalos, E. S. Ganotakis, and M. Elisaf Effect of statin treatment on renal function and serum uric acid levels and their relation to vascular events in patients with coronary heart disease and metabolic syndrome: A subgroup analysis of the GREek Atorvastatin and Coronary heart disease Evaluation (GREACE) Study Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2007; 22(1): 118 - 127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Ritz and C. Wanner Lipid Changes and Statins in Chronic Renal Insufficiency J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., December 1, 2006; 17(12_suppl_3): S226 - S230. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Atthobari, A. H. Brantsma, R. T. Gansevoort, S. T. Visser, F. W. Asselbergs, W. H. van Gilst, P. E. de Jong, L. T. W. de Jong-van den Berg, and on behalf of PREVEND study group The effect of statins on urinary albumin excretion and glomerular filtration rate: results from both a randomized clinical trial and an observational cohort study Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2006; 21(11): 3106 - 3114. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Tonelli Do statins protect the kidney as well as the heart? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2006; 21(11): 3005 - 3006. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. I. Parikh, S.-J. Hwang, M. G. Larson, J. B. Meigs, D. Levy, and C. S. Fox Cardiovascular disease risk factors in chronic kidney disease: overall burden and rates of treatment and control. Arch Intern Med, September 25, 2006; 166(17): 1884 - 1891. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Molitch Management of Dyslipidemias in Patients with Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., September 1, 2006; 1(5): 1090 - 1099. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Tovar and D. B. Schering Management of Dyslipidemia in Special Populations Journal of Pharmacy Practice, April 1, 2006; 19(2): 63 - 78. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. M. Ruilope and J. Segura Blood pressure lowering or selection of antihypertensive agent: which is more important? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 843 - 845. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Zoccali, R. Maio, G. Tripepi, F. Mallamaci, and F. Perticone Inflammation as a Mediator of the Link between Mild to Moderate Renal Insufficiency and Endothelial Dysfunction in Essential Hypertension. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2006; 17(4_suppl_2): S64 - S68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. D'Amico Statins and Renal Diseases: From Primary Prevention to Renal Replacement Therapy. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2006; 17(4_suppl_2): S148 - S152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. D. Vaziri Dyslipidemia of chronic renal failure: the nature, mechanisms, and potential consequences Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, February 1, 2006; 290(2): F262 - F272. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Shlipak and C. Stehman-Breen Observational Research Databases in Renal Disease J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., December 1, 2005; 16(12): 3477 - 3484. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Tonelli, C. Isles, T. Craven, A. Tonkin, M. A. Pfeffer, J. Shepherd, F. M. Sacks, C. Furberg, S. M. Cobbe, J. Simes, et al. Effect of Pravastatin on Rate of Kidney Function Loss in People With or at Risk for Coronary Disease Circulation, July 12, 2005; 112(2): 171 - 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Kurella, J. C. Lo, and G. M. Chertow Metabolic Syndrome and the Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease among Nondiabetic Adults J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2005; 16(7): 2134 - 2140. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Tsirpanlis, F. Boufidou, F. Alevyzaki, and E. Psimenou Statins and progression of renal failure: is a reconsideration of clinical practice guidelines justified? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2005; 20(5): 1015 - 1016. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. W. Branten, G. Vervoort, and J. F. M. Wetzels Serum creatinine is a poor marker of GFR in nephrotic syndrome Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2005; 20(4): 707 - 711. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. M. Stuveling, S. J. L. Bakker, H. L. Hillege, P. E. de Jong, R. O. B. Gans, and D. de Zeeuw Biochemical risk markers: a novel area for better prediction of renal risk? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., March 1, 2005; 20(3): 497 - 508. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. M. Campese, M. K. Nadim, and M. Epstein Are 3-Hydroxy-3-Methylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors Renoprotective? J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2005; 16(3_suppl_1): S11 - S17. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. S. Anavekar, J. J.V. McMurray, E. J. Velazquez, S. D. Solomon, L. Kober, J.-L. Rouleau, H. D. White, R. Nordlander, A. Maggioni, K. Dickstein, et al. Relation between Renal Dysfunction and Cardiovascular Outcomes after Myocardial Infarction N. Engl. J. Med., September 23, 2004; 351(13): 1285 - 1295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Afzali, A. A. Haydar, K. Vinen, and D. J.A. Goldsmith From Finland to Fatland: Beneficial Effects of Statins for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., August 1, 2004; 15(8): 2161 - 2168. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B Afzali and D J A Goldsmith Beneficial effects of statins on the kidney J. Clin. Pathol., July 1, 2004; 57(7): 673 - 674. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Afzali, A. A. Haydar, K. Vinen, and D. J. A. Goldsmith Beneficial effects of statins on the kidney: the evidence moves from mouse to man Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2004; 19(5): 1032 - 1036. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Vogt, G. D. Laverman, R. P. F. Dullaart, and G. Navis Lipid management in the proteinuric patient: do not overlook the importance of proteinuria reduction Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2004; 19(1): 5 - 8. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. A. Wilmer, B. H. Rovin, C. J. Hebert, S. V. Rao, K. Kumor, and L. A. Hebert Management of Glomerular Proteinuria: A Commentary J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., December 1, 2003; 14(12): 3217 - 3232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HOME
CURRENT ISSUE
ARCHIVES
JASN Express
ONLINE SUBMISSION
AUTHOR INFO
EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP |
