0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

The Relationship Between Magnitude of Proteinuria Reduction and Risk of End-stage Renal Disease:  Results of the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension FREE

Janice Lea, MD; Tom Greene, PhD; Lee Hebert, MD; Michael Lipkowitz, MD; Shaul Massry, MD; John Middleton, MD; Stephen G. Rostand, MD; Edgar Miller, MD, PhD; Winifred Smith, MPH; George L. Bakris, MD; African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension Study Group
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga (Dr Lea); Department of Biostatistics, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio (Dr Greene); Department of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus (Dr Hebert); Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY (Dr Lipkowitz); Department of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles (Dr Massry); Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC (Dr Middleton); Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham (Dr Rostand); Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University Medical Center, Baltimore, Md (Dr Miller); Department of Medicine, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta (Dr Smith); and Department of Preventive Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Ill (Dr Bakris).


Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(8):947-953. doi:10.1001/archinte.165.8.947.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background  The magnitude of proteinuria is associated with a graded increase in the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular events. The objective of this study was to relate baseline and early changes in proteinuria and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) to long-term progression of hypertensive nondiabetic kidney disease.

Methods  Post hoc analysis of a randomized 3 × 2 factorial trial. A total of 1094 African Americans with hypertensive renal disease (GFR, 20-65 mL/min per 1.73 m2) were followed up for a median of 3.8 years. Participants were randomized to a mean arterial pressure goal of 102 to 107 mm Hg (usual) or 92 mm Hg or less (lower) and to initial treatment with a β-blocker (metoprolol), an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ramipril), or a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (amlodipine)

Results  Baseline proteinuria and GFR predicted the rgate of GFR decline. For each 10–mL/min per 1.73 m2 lower baseline GFR, an associated mean ± SE 0.38 ± 0.08–mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year greater mean GFR decline occurred, and for each 2-fold higher proteinuria level, a mean ± SE 0.54 ± 0.05–mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year faster GFR decline was observed (P < .001 for both). In multivariate analysis, the effect of baseline proteinuria GFR decline persisted. Initial change in proteinuria from baseline to 6 months predicted subsequent progression, with this relationship extending to participants with baseline urinary protein levels less than 300 mg/d.

Conclusions  The change in the level of proteinuria is a predictor of subsequent progression of hypertensive kidney disease at a given GFR. A prospective trial is needed to confirm this observation.

Figures in this Article

A review of observational studies14 demonstrates that the magnitude of urinary protein excretion is associated with a linear increase in the risk of cardiovascular events and progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). During the past decade, there has been speculation that interventions that reduce proteinuria are more likely to slow the progression of renal disease in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.59

The African American Study of Kidney Disease (AASK)10 evaluated 2 different blood pressure (BP) goals and 3 different treatment regimens (a β-blocker [metoprolol succinate], a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker [amlodipine besylate], and an angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitor [ramipril]) in African Americans with nondiabetic kidney disease. In this trial, the magnitude of proteinuria reduction differed among the antihypertensive treatment groups in the context of renal outcomes. The interpretation of these results depended on the level of baseline proteinuria, expressed as the ratio of urine protein to urine creatinine (UP:Cr) assessed from a 24-hour urine collection sample. Approximately two thirds of the participants had a UP:Cr of 0.22 or less (approximately 300 mg/d) or microalbuminuria, and one third had a UP:Cr greater than 0.22 or proteinuria.10

In this study, we evaluate the relationship of the baseline proteinuria level and its change in the first 6 months on subsequent longer-term progression of renal disease during follow-up.

PARTICIPANTS

The 1094 randomized participants in the AASK were self-identified African Americans with hypertension, aged 18 to 70 years, with glomerular filtration rates (GFRs) of 20 to 65 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and no other identified causes of renal insufficiency. The exclusion criteria consisted of a UP:Cr greater than 2.5 and various conditions associated with severe cardiovascular disease. Additional details regarding participants and the design of the trial are provided elsewhere.10,11

STUDY DESIGN

Participants were randomized according to a 3 × 2 factorial design to a usual mean arterial pressure goal of 102 to 107 mm Hg or to a low mean arterial pressure goal of 92 mm Hg or less and to treatment with 1 of 3 antihypertensive drugs: a sustained-release β-blocker (metoprolol succinate, 50-200 mg/d), an ACE inhibitor (ramipril, 2.5-10.0 mg/d), or a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate, 5-10 mg/d). If the randomized drug could not achieve the BP goal, additional open-label antihypertensive agents (furosemide, doxazosin mesylate, clonidine, and hydralazine hydrochloride or minoxidil) were added sequentially.

The GFR was assessed by iothalamate sodium I 125 clearance twice during baseline, at 3 and 6 months, and every 6 months thereafter during follow-up. Proteinuria was expressed as the UP:Cr ratio derived from a 24-hour urine collection once during baseline and at 6-month intervals thereafter. All GFR and proteinuria measurements were performed at Cleveland Clinic Laboratories.

Participants were randomized during a 3-year recruitment period, with planned follow-up ranging from 3.0 to 6.4 years. For this study, follow-up was censored 1 year before the scheduled end of the trial for participants randomized to the amlodipine group, when this intervention was terminated on the recommendation of the Data Safety and Monitoring Board. The median duration of GFR follow-up was 3.8 years.

OUTCOMES AND PREDICTOR VARIABLES

Two renal outcomes were considered: (1) the mean GFR slope throughout follow-up, starting with the GFR obtained at the 6-month follow-up visit, and (2) the occurrence of ESRD. The GFR slope outcome expresses the average rate of change of the GFR in all patients, whereas the ESRD outcome represents the clinical end point of most direct relevance. The GFR slope was computed starting at 6 months to reflect changes in the GFR after the 6-month assessment of proteinuria (see the following paragraph).

The primary predictor variables include (1) baseline proteinuria, defined as the log-transformed baseline UP:Cr; (2) baseline GFR, defined as the mean of the 2 iothalamate GFR measurements before randomization; and (3) initial change in proteinuria, defined as the difference between the log 6-month follow-up UP:Cr and the log baseline UP:Cr (Δ UP:Cr). Throughout this article, GFR is expressed after standardization for body surface area in milliliters per minute per 1.73 m2.

ANALYSIS PLAN

The first set of analyses investigated the relationships of the renal outcome variables with baseline proteinuria and baseline GFR in 1090 patients with a valid baseline UP:Cr measurement. Baseline proteinuria and baseline GFR were analyzed individually and then jointly to assess the independent association of each factor with progression after controlling for the other factor. The following categories were defined to describe dose-response relationships: for proteinuria, UP:Cr less than or equal to 0.08, 0.08 to less than or equal to 0.22, greater than 0.22 to less than or equal to 0.66, and greater than 0.66; and for GFR, greater than 48, greater than 40 to less than or equal to 48, greater than 30 to less than or equal to 40, and less than or equal to 30 mL /min per 1.73 m2. We then examined the relationship of the long-term outcomes with the initial changes in proteinuria by relating the outcome variables to the baseline level and the initial changes in log UP:Cr from baseline to 6 months in multivariable analyses. These analyses were performed in the subset of 810 participants for whom 6-month follow-up UP:Cr measurements and at least 1 GFR at or after the 6-month visit were obtained and were repeated in the subgroups with baseline UP:Cr of 0.22 or less and greater than 0.22 to determine whether the association of the long-term outcomes with initial change in proteinuria depended on the baseline level of proteinuria. The multivariable analyses were also performed separately in the 3 drug groups to examine whether changes in proteinuria that resulted from different medication classes may have different relationships with long-term outcomes.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

All analyses of the GFR slope outcome were performed using a single-slope mixed-effects model with a random slope and intercept.12 Separate covariance matrices were fit for the subgroups of participants with baseline GFRs less than 40 mL /min per 1.73m2 and 40 mL /min per 1.73 m2 or greater to account for greater variability in the individual GFR measurements for participants with higher baseline GFRs. Indicator variables for the randomized treatment groups were included in all analyses so that the reported coefficients represent averages of the indicated relationships that were observed within the respective treatment groups.

Analyses of time to ESRD were performed using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. As in the analysis of GFR slope, indicator variables for the randomized treatment groups were included as covariates in the Cox models. Participants were administratively censored at loss to follow-up (12 participants), in September 2000 if randomized to the amlodipine group, and at study completion if randomized to the other drug groups.

The study analyses were conducted without adjustment for baseline patient factors other than proteinuria and GFR. However, in sensitivity analyses, all the analyses presented in this article were repeated after adjustment for age, sex, history of heart disease, and baseline mean arterial pressure. All analyses are intent-to-treat. Comparison-wise P values and 95% confidence intervals are reported.

BASELINE

Table 1 summarizes the levels of GFR and proteinuria at baseline for the 1094 randomized participants. The level of 24-hour urine protein excretion was positively associated with male sex, younger age, and higher body mass index. The dependence of proteinuria level on these factors was eliminated or substantially weakened when proteinuria was expressed as the UP:Cr ratio. For example, median 24-hour urine protein excretion was substantially higher in males (143 mg/d) compared with females (89 mg/d), whereas the UP:Cr ratio was similar in males (0.082) and females (0.080). There was an inverse relationship between baseline GFR and proteinuria, and UP:Cr ratios greater than 1.0 were seen almost exclusively in participants with GFRs less than 40 mL /min per 1.73 m2 (Figure 1).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.

Association of mean glomerular filtration rate (GFR) with proteinuria at baseline. Proteinuria is inversely related to GFR, and the distribution of proteinuria is positively skewed for any given level of GFR. Four randomized participants with missing baseline urine protein–urine creatinine ratios are excluded. The box plots indicate 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles; plus signs, means.

Graphic Jump Location
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Association of GFR and Proteinuria With Selected Factors at Baseline
ASSOCIATION OF PROGRESSION WITH BASELINE LEVELS OF PROTEINURIA AND GFR

The overall mean ± SE GFR slope after 6 months was –1.83 ± 0.12 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year. Considered individually, higher levels of baseline proteinuria and lower levels of baseline GFR were associated with faster progression. Across the GFR range in the AASK, each 10–mL /min per 1.73 m2 lower GFR was associated with a mean ± SE 0.38 ± 0.08–mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year greater decline in GFR (P<.001) and with more than a 2-fold greater risk of ESRD (relative risk, 2.70; 95% confidence interval, 2.33-3.13; P<.001). Across the range of proteinuria, for every 2-fold higher level in baseline UP:Cr, an associated mean ± SE 0.54 ± 0.05–mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year greater decline in GFR (P<.001) was noted, with a 1.80 relative risk (95% confidence interval, 1.66-1.95) of ESRD (P<.001). The effects of baseline GFR and doubling of baseline proteinuria on the GFR slope of 0.38 and 0.54 mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year represent approximately 21% and 30%, respectively, of the overall mean rate of decline of 1.83 mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year.

When baseline GFR and baseline proteinuria were considered jointly in a multivariable model, the relationship of GFR slope with proteinuria persisted, with each 2-fold higher UP:Cr associated with a mean ± SE 0.57 ± 0.06–mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year faster mean GFR decline (P < .001). However, after controlling for baseline proteinuria, the relationship between GFR slope and baseline GFR was eliminated, with a 10–mL /min per 1.73 m2 lower GFR associated with a mean ± SE 0.04 ± 0.08–mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year slower mean GFR slope (P = .61). This joint relationship between GFR slope and baseline GFR and proteinuria is illustrated in Figure 2. The mean GFR slopes become steeper as the degree of proteinuria increases at any given baseline GFR, but they were not related to the baseline GFR within fixed baseline proteinuria subgroups.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.

Three-dimensional plot of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) slope vs baseline proteinuria and baseline GFR. Shown is the joint association between GFR slope after 6 months and baseline levels of GFR and proteinuria (expressed as the urine protein–urine creatinine ratio [UP:Cr]). At any given level of baseline GFR there is a clear graded relationship between baseline proteinuria and the rate of GFR decline that extends to the lowest proteinuria category (UP:Cr <0.08). However, for a given baseline proteinuria, there is no detectable association between baseline GFR and GFR slope.

Graphic Jump Location

The risk of ESRD increased with higher baseline proteinuria and lower baseline GFR even when both factors were considered jointly in a multivariate analysis (P<.001 for both baseline factors) (Table 2). The persistence of the relationship of baseline GFR with risk of ESRD after controlling for baseline proteinuria indicates that although participants with lower GFRs did not progress faster at a given level of proteinuria, they tended to reach ESRD sooner because they started from a lower baseline GFR.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Rates of ESRD Throughout Follow-up*
ASSOCIATION OF PROGRESSION WITH BASELINE UP:Cr AND Δ UP:Cr

There was substantial variability between participants when evaluating the percentage Δ UP:Cr between baseline and 6 months. In all treatment groups combined, approximately equal proportions of participants registered increases (47.6%) and decreases (52.2%) in UP:Cr. The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles for the percentage Δ UP:Cr were –73%, –43%, –2%, 73%, and 301%, respectively.

Table 3 provides multivariate analyses relating GFR slope and risk of ESRD after 6 months to the baseline level and Δ UP:Cr to 6 months. When the analysis was conducted in all 810 participants, the baseline level and the initial change in proteinuria were independent predictors of GFR slope and risk of ESRD. For a given level of the baseline UP:Cr, a doubling of UP:Cr in the first 6 months associated with a mean ± SE 0.63 ± 0.10–mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year greater decline in GFR and a relative risk for ESRD of 2.11 (95% confidence interval, 1.89-2.36) for the remainder of follow-up. Similar results are presented graphically in Figure 3, which displays the relative risks of ESRD during follow-up for different subgroups defined by changes in proteinuria (UP:Cr) from baseline to 6 months.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.

Association of the risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with initial change in proteinuria. The relative risks of ESRD during follow-up for different subgroups defined by the change in the urine protein–urine creatinine ratio (UP:Cr) from baseline to 6 months controlling for randomized treatment group and the initial level of proteinuria is shown. The reference group ranges from a 20% reduction in UP:Cr to a 25% increase. The cutoff values that define the change in proteinuria subgroups correspond to percentage changes that are symmetrical on the log scale. Error bars represent standard errors.

Graphic Jump Location
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Joint Effect of Baseline UP:Cr and Initial Change (Δ) in UP:Cr to 6 Months*

The absolute magnitudes of the effects of the baseline level and Δ UP:Cr to 6 months on GFR slope were approximately twice as large in the baseline UP:Cr greater than 0.22 subgroup as in the subgroup with lesser proteinuria (Table 3). These relationships, however, remained statistically significant even in the subgroup with baseline UP:Cr of 0.22 or less. Moreover, the magnitudes of the relationships were similar in the 2 baseline proteinuria strata when expressed as proportions of the respective mean GFR slopes (approximately –1.4 mL/min per 1.73 m2/year in the baseline UP:Cr ≤0.22 subgroup vs –4.0 mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year in the baseline UP:Cr >0.22 subgroup). The relative risks of ESRD associated with doubling of UP:Cr from baseline to 6 months were 1.55 and 1.86 in the UP:Cr of 0.22 or less and UP:Cr greater than 0.22 subgroups, respectively.

ASSOCIATION OF PROGRESSION WITH BASELINE AND Δ UP:CR WITHIN EACH DRUG GROUP

As reported previously,10 the geometric mean of the UP:Cr increased from baseline to 6 months in the amlodipine drug group compared with the ramipril and metoprolol groups and decreased in the low BP group compared with the usual BP group. However, although these effects of the AASK interventions were statistically significant, because of the large interpatient variability in the Δ UP:Cr, they accounted for only 8.6% of the total variation in the change of log-transformed UP:Cr from baseline to 6 months.

Table 4 presents the analysis from Table 3 separately for the 3 drug groups. The results for the ESRD outcome were similar in each group. The directions of the relationships for the GFR slope outcome were the same for each drug group, but the magnitude of the association of the Δ UP:Cr to 6 months with GFR slope was greater in the amlodipine group (a mean ± SE 1.38 ± 0.26–mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year greater decline in GFR per doubling of UP:Cr) than in either the ramipril (mean ± SE 0.47 ± 0.16 mL /min per 1.73 m2 per year per doubling) or metoprolol (mean ± SE 0.49 ± 0.15 mL /min per 1.73m2 per year per doubling) groups.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Joint Effect of Baseline UP:Cr and Initial Change (Δ) in UP:Cr to 6 Months by Randomized Drug Group*
ESRD OR DEATH OUTCOME AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSES FOR COVARIATE ADJUSTMENT

Because analyses of ESRD alone may be biased by the competing risk of death, each of the analyses for risk of ESRD reported previously herein were also conducted for the composite outcome including ESRD and death. Similar results were observed for ESRD alone and for the composite of ESRD and death for each analysis.

The results presented in this article were essentially unchanged after controlling for age, sex, history of heart disease, and baseline mean arterial pressure.

This article presents evidence that changes in low levels of proteinuria are predictive of ESRD development and the annual rate of decline in GFR in people with nondiabetic kidney disease. Although it is well known thathigher levels of proteinuria are associated with increased risk of ESRD and that reductions in proteinuria are associated with reduced risk of ESRD development, the distinctive role of a given level or change in proteinuria level on rate of decline in kidney function has not been clarified.2,3,7,10 This is the first article to present evidence that in nondiabetic kidney disease, changes in low levels of proteinuria are predictive of ESRD development and the annual rate of decline in the GFR.

Many clinical trials in the past decade define kidney disease progression as the time to doubling of the serum creatinine level or halving of the GFR, ESRD, or death. All these trials have reported significant relationships between slower rates of kidney disease progression and early reductions in proteinuria in secondary analyses.2,3,6,7 Conversely, such renal outcome benefits have not been universally described with reductions in microalbuminuria.13,14 The AASK examines a cohort of exclusively nondiabetic participants with hypertensive nephrosclerosis where the renal outcome benefit was associated with reductions in proteinuria across all levels of baseline proteinuria.

Consistent with previous studies of diabetic2,3,15 and nondiabetic6,7,16 persons with chronic kidney disease, our data show that the level of proteinuria at baseline was associated with a greater mean decline in GFR and a higher rate of ESRD. Unlike some previous studies,17 a lower GFR at baseline was also associated with a faster subsequent average decline in GFR. However, in multivariate analysis, the rate of decline in the GFR remained significantly related to baseline proteinuria for any given level of baseline GFR but not to the level of baseline GFR once the level of baseline proteinuria was taken into account. One interpretation of this result is that although participants with higher proteinuria tend to have lower GFRs at a given cross-sectional assessment and thus may progress faster, it is the level of proteinuria, and not the GFR, that is most relevant for determining the future course of decline in renal function.

Also consistent with previous studies of cohorts with chronic kidney disease, for any given level of proteinuria at baseline, the early change in proteinuria from baseline to the 6-month point predicts the subsequent rate of decline in the GFR and the incidence of ESRD across a 3- to 6-year period. In the AASK, the association of the initial change in proteinuria with subsequent kidney disease progression was seen in the entire cohort studied regardless of baseline levels of UP:Cr.

As described in a previous article,18 the amlodipine intervention led to a substantial increase in the average level of proteinuria during the first 6 months of the trial. However, the interindividual variability of the percentage change in proteinuria was large, and only a small proportion of the variation in the change of log-transformed proteinuria was accounted for by the AASK interventions. It will be useful to determine the extent to which this finding of change in proteinuria and renal outcome in the AASK is observed in other interventional trials.

Mechanisms by which proteinuria may contribute to declines in renal function have been postulated.19 Large leakage of protein by the kidney is indicative of a diffuse disease process in the vasculature of the kidney and the body.14,20 Leakage of large quantities of protein into the interstitium has been shown to stimulate cytokines and oxidant stress associated with interstitial fibrosis.19 Reduction of BP reduces proteinuria by decreasing systemic and consequently intraglomerular pressure. However, certain antihypertensive agents, such as dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, fail to reduce membrane permeability in the glomerulus and vasculature, whereas others, such as ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, reduce permeability.2022 The mechanisms that mediate these changes are not fully characterized.

In summary, the baseline level and the initial change from baseline to 6 months in proteinuria were predictors of subsequent progression of hypertensive kidney disease in African Americans. The relationship between the initial change in proteinuria and subsequent progression extended to participants with normoalbuminuria to microalbuminuria. The level of baseline GFR was not predictive of the subsequent rate of GFR decline after accounting for baseline proteinuria. The association of the early change in proteinuria with subsequent renal outcomes suggests that effects of antihypertensive agents on proteinuria should be considered when selecting agents for their potential to slow the progression of renal disease. However, because the AASK randomized patients to antihypertensive drug regimens and BP targets, it does not provide a direct randomized comparison of the effect of titrating to different levels of proteinuria. Additional investigations that involve multiple studies are needed to address the question of whether the ability of an intervention to reduce proteinuria is sufficient to conclude that the intervention will delay progression to ESRD.

Correspondence: George L. Bakris, MD, Rush University Medical Center, 1700 W Van Buren St, Suite 470, Chicago, IL 60612 (George_Bakris@rush.edu).

Accepted for Publication: December 21, 2004.

Financial Disclosure: None.

Group Information: A complete list of the members of the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension Study Group is available in JAMA (2002;288:2430).

Culleton  BFLarson  MGParfrey  PSKannel  WBLevy  D Proteinuria as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality in older people: a prospective study. Am J Med 2000;1091- 8
PubMed Link to Article
Brenner  BMCooper  MEde Zeeuw  D  et al.  Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2001;345861- 869
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  EJHunsicker  LGClarke  WR  et al.  Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001;345851- 860
PubMed Link to Article
Ruggenenti  PPerna  AGherardi  GBenini  RRemuzzi  G Chronic proteinuric nephropathies: outcomes and response to treatment in a prospective cohort of 352 patients with different patterns of renal injury. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;351155- 1165
PubMed Link to Article
De Zeeuw  DRemuzzi  GParving  HH  et al.  Proteinuria, a target for renoprotection in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy: lessons from RENAAL. Kidney Int 2004;652309- 2320
PubMed Link to Article
Jafar  THStark  PCSchmid  CH  et al.  Proteinuria as a modifiable risk factor for the progression of non-diabetic renal disease. Kidney Int 2001;601131- 1140
PubMed Link to Article
Peterson  JCAdler  SBurkart  JM  et al.  Blood pressure control, proteinuria, and the progression of renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study. Ann Intern Med 1995;123754- 762
PubMed Link to Article
Valentino  VAWilson  MDWeart  WBakris  GL A perspective on converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel antagonists in diabetic renal disease. Arch Intern Med 1991;1512367- 2372
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  JBBerl  TBain  RPRohde  RDLewis  EJ Effect of intensive blood pressure control on the course of type 1 diabetic nephropathy. Am J Kidney Dis 1999;34809- 817
PubMed Link to Article
Wright  JT  JrBakris  GGreene  T  et al.  Effect of blood pressure lowering and antihypertensive drug class on progression of hypertensive kidney disease: results from the AASK trial. JAMA 2002;2882421- 2431
PubMed Link to Article
Gassman  JJGreene  TWright  JT  Jr  et al.  Design and statistical aspects of the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK). J Am Soc Nephrol 2003;14 ((suppl 2)) S154- S165
PubMed Link to Article
Laird  NMWare  JH Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics 1982;38963- 974
PubMed Link to Article
Lebovitz  HEWiegmann  TBCnaan  A  et al.  Renal protective effects of enalapril in hypertensive NIDDM: role of baseline albuminuria. Kidney Int Suppl 1994;45S150- S155
PubMed Link to Article
Garg  JPBakris  GL Microalbuminuria: marker of vascular dysfunction, risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Vasc Med 2002;735- 43
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  EJHunsicker  LGBain  RPRohde  RD The effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition on diabetic nephropathy: the Collaborative Study Group. N Engl J Med 1993;3291456- 1462
PubMed Link to Article
Akhter  J The American Diabetes Association's Clinical Practice Recommendations and the developing world. Diabetes Care 1997;201044- 1045
PubMed
Lazarus  JMBourgoignie  JJBuckalew  VM  et al.  Achievement and safety of a low blood pressure goal in chronic renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group. Hypertension 1997;29641- 650
PubMed Link to Article
Agodoa  LYAppel  LBakris  GL  et al.  Effect of ramipril vs amlodipine on renal outcomes in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001;2852719- 2728
PubMed Link to Article
Remuzzi  GSchieppati  ARuggenenti  P Clinical practice: nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2002;3461145- 1151
PubMed Link to Article
Smith  ACToto  RBakris  GL Differential effects of calcium channel blockers on size selectivity of proteinuria in diabetic glomerulopathy. Kidney Int 1998;54889- 896
PubMed Link to Article
Bakris  GLWeir  MRSecic  MCampbell  BWeis-McNulty  A Differential effects of calcium antagonist subclasses on markers of nephropathy progression. Kidney Int 2004;651991- 2002
PubMed Link to Article
Morelli  ELoon  NMeyer  TPeters  WMyers  BD Effects of converting-enzyme inhibition on barrier function in diabetic glomerulopathy. Diabetes 1990;3976- 82
PubMed Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.

Association of mean glomerular filtration rate (GFR) with proteinuria at baseline. Proteinuria is inversely related to GFR, and the distribution of proteinuria is positively skewed for any given level of GFR. Four randomized participants with missing baseline urine protein–urine creatinine ratios are excluded. The box plots indicate 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles; plus signs, means.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.

Three-dimensional plot of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) slope vs baseline proteinuria and baseline GFR. Shown is the joint association between GFR slope after 6 months and baseline levels of GFR and proteinuria (expressed as the urine protein–urine creatinine ratio [UP:Cr]). At any given level of baseline GFR there is a clear graded relationship between baseline proteinuria and the rate of GFR decline that extends to the lowest proteinuria category (UP:Cr <0.08). However, for a given baseline proteinuria, there is no detectable association between baseline GFR and GFR slope.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.

Association of the risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with initial change in proteinuria. The relative risks of ESRD during follow-up for different subgroups defined by the change in the urine protein–urine creatinine ratio (UP:Cr) from baseline to 6 months controlling for randomized treatment group and the initial level of proteinuria is shown. The reference group ranges from a 20% reduction in UP:Cr to a 25% increase. The cutoff values that define the change in proteinuria subgroups correspond to percentage changes that are symmetrical on the log scale. Error bars represent standard errors.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Association of GFR and Proteinuria With Selected Factors at Baseline
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Rates of ESRD Throughout Follow-up*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Joint Effect of Baseline UP:Cr and Initial Change (Δ) in UP:Cr to 6 Months*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Joint Effect of Baseline UP:Cr and Initial Change (Δ) in UP:Cr to 6 Months by Randomized Drug Group*

References

Culleton  BFLarson  MGParfrey  PSKannel  WBLevy  D Proteinuria as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality in older people: a prospective study. Am J Med 2000;1091- 8
PubMed Link to Article
Brenner  BMCooper  MEde Zeeuw  D  et al.  Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2001;345861- 869
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  EJHunsicker  LGClarke  WR  et al.  Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001;345851- 860
PubMed Link to Article
Ruggenenti  PPerna  AGherardi  GBenini  RRemuzzi  G Chronic proteinuric nephropathies: outcomes and response to treatment in a prospective cohort of 352 patients with different patterns of renal injury. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;351155- 1165
PubMed Link to Article
De Zeeuw  DRemuzzi  GParving  HH  et al.  Proteinuria, a target for renoprotection in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy: lessons from RENAAL. Kidney Int 2004;652309- 2320
PubMed Link to Article
Jafar  THStark  PCSchmid  CH  et al.  Proteinuria as a modifiable risk factor for the progression of non-diabetic renal disease. Kidney Int 2001;601131- 1140
PubMed Link to Article
Peterson  JCAdler  SBurkart  JM  et al.  Blood pressure control, proteinuria, and the progression of renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study. Ann Intern Med 1995;123754- 762
PubMed Link to Article
Valentino  VAWilson  MDWeart  WBakris  GL A perspective on converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel antagonists in diabetic renal disease. Arch Intern Med 1991;1512367- 2372
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  JBBerl  TBain  RPRohde  RDLewis  EJ Effect of intensive blood pressure control on the course of type 1 diabetic nephropathy. Am J Kidney Dis 1999;34809- 817
PubMed Link to Article
Wright  JT  JrBakris  GGreene  T  et al.  Effect of blood pressure lowering and antihypertensive drug class on progression of hypertensive kidney disease: results from the AASK trial. JAMA 2002;2882421- 2431
PubMed Link to Article
Gassman  JJGreene  TWright  JT  Jr  et al.  Design and statistical aspects of the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK). J Am Soc Nephrol 2003;14 ((suppl 2)) S154- S165
PubMed Link to Article
Laird  NMWare  JH Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics 1982;38963- 974
PubMed Link to Article
Lebovitz  HEWiegmann  TBCnaan  A  et al.  Renal protective effects of enalapril in hypertensive NIDDM: role of baseline albuminuria. Kidney Int Suppl 1994;45S150- S155
PubMed Link to Article
Garg  JPBakris  GL Microalbuminuria: marker of vascular dysfunction, risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Vasc Med 2002;735- 43
PubMed Link to Article
Lewis  EJHunsicker  LGBain  RPRohde  RD The effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition on diabetic nephropathy: the Collaborative Study Group. N Engl J Med 1993;3291456- 1462
PubMed Link to Article
Akhter  J The American Diabetes Association's Clinical Practice Recommendations and the developing world. Diabetes Care 1997;201044- 1045
PubMed
Lazarus  JMBourgoignie  JJBuckalew  VM  et al.  Achievement and safety of a low blood pressure goal in chronic renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group. Hypertension 1997;29641- 650
PubMed Link to Article
Agodoa  LYAppel  LBakris  GL  et al.  Effect of ramipril vs amlodipine on renal outcomes in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001;2852719- 2728
PubMed Link to Article
Remuzzi  GSchieppati  ARuggenenti  P Clinical practice: nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2002;3461145- 1151
PubMed Link to Article
Smith  ACToto  RBakris  GL Differential effects of calcium channel blockers on size selectivity of proteinuria in diabetic glomerulopathy. Kidney Int 1998;54889- 896
PubMed Link to Article
Bakris  GLWeir  MRSecic  MCampbell  BWeis-McNulty  A Differential effects of calcium antagonist subclasses on markers of nephropathy progression. Kidney Int 2004;651991- 2002
PubMed Link to Article
Morelli  ELoon  NMeyer  TPeters  WMyers  BD Effects of converting-enzyme inhibition on barrier function in diabetic glomerulopathy. Diabetes 1990;3976- 82
PubMed Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 143

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com