The chaos of hypertension guidelines for chronic kidney disease patients.

Three major guidelines deal with blood pressure thresholds and targets for antihypertensive drug therapy in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients: the 2012 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease; the 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults; and the 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension. However, a careful reading of the three guidelines leaves the practicing physician confused about the definition of CKD, how hypertension and secondary hypertension should be diagnosed in CKD patients and what the blood pressure thresholds, targets and compelling indications of antihypertensive drug therapy should be for this population. Current guidelines refer to different CKD populations and propose different definitions of hypertension, different thresholds to initiate antihypertensive therapy in CKD patients and different BP targets compelling antihypertensive drug use. The different bodies producing guidelines should work together towards a unified definition of CKD, a unified concept of hypertension and unified BP thresholds and targets for hypertensive drug therapy for CKD patients. Otherwise they risk promoting confusion and therapeutic nihilism among physicians and patients.

Clarifying the concept of chronic kidney disease for non-nephrologists.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) expands the prior concept of chronic renal insufficiency by including patients with relatively preserved renal function, as assessed by the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), as even these early CKD stages are associated with an increased risk for all-cause death and cardiovascular death, CKD progression and acute kidney injury. A decreased eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m2) is by itself diagnostic of CKD when persisting for >3 months. However, when eGFR is ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2, an additional criterion is required to diagnose CKD. In a recent clinical trial published in The New England Journal of Medicine, all 6190 participants were reported to have CKD: 47% had Stages 1 and 2 CKD and 53% had Stage 3 CKD. This illustrates a widespread misunderstanding of the concept of CKD. Moreover, CKD categories in this study were assigned based on the estimated creatinine clearance. Since both estimated creatinine clearance and creatinine clearance overestimate eGFR, this illustrates another frequent misunderstanding: equating GFR with creatinine clearance. In this commentary, we clarify the concept of CKD and of CKD categories for non-nephrologists. Assigning a diagnosis of CKD to a patient with normal renal function and absence of other evidence of CKD may have negative consequences for the individual (e.g. insurance and others) as well as for the medical community at large by creating confusion about the concept.

Potential Dangers of Serum Urate-Lowering Therapy.

In observational studies, high serum urate levels are associated with adverse outcomes, including mortality. However, the hypothesis that urate-lowering may improve nongout outcomes has not been confirmed by placebo-controlled clinical trials. On the contrary, 7 recent placebo-controlled trials of urate-lowering drugs with different mechanisms of action (uricosuric: lesinurad; xanthine oxidase inhibition: febuxostat; uricase: pegloticase) have observed higher mortality or trends to higher mortality in gout patients, with the largest decreases in serum urate. Because all urate-lowering mechanisms were implicated, this raises safety concerns about urate-lowering itself. Far from unexpected, the higher mortality associated with more intense urate-lowering is in line with the U-shaped association of urate with mortality in some observational studies. Urate accounts for most of the antioxidant capacity of plasma, and strategies to increase urate are undergoing clinical trials in neurological disease. Post hoc analysis of recent trials should explore whether the magnitude of urate-lowering is associated with adverse outcomes, and safety trials are needed before guidelines recommend lowering serum urate below certain thresholds.

Impact of Altered Intestinal Microbiota on Chronic Kidney Disease Progression.

In chronic kidney disease (CKD), accumulation of uremic toxins is associated with an increased risk of CKD progression. Some uremic toxins result from nutrient processing by gut microbiota, yielding precursors of uremic toxins or uremic toxins themselves, such as trimethylamine N-Oxide (TMAO), p-cresyl sulphate, indoxyl sulphate and indole-3 acetic acid. Increased intake of some nutrients may modify the gut microbiota, increasing the number of bacteria that process them to yield uremic toxins. Circulating levels of nutrient-derived uremic toxins are associated to increased risk of CKD progression. This offers the opportunity for therapeutic intervention by either modifying the diet, modifying the microbiota, decreasing uremic toxin production by microbiota, increasing toxin excretion or targeting specific uremic toxins. We now review the link between nutrients, microbiota and uremic toxin with CKD progression. Specific focus will be placed on the generation specific uremic toxins with nephrotoxic potential, the decreased availability of bacteria-derived metabolites with nephroprotective potential, such as vitamin K and butyrate and the cellular and molecular mechanisms linking these toxins and protective factors to kidney diseases. This information provides a conceptual framework that allows the development of novel therapeutic approaches.

Deleting Death and Dialysis: Conservative Care of Cardio-Vascular Risk and Kidney Function Loss in Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD).

The uremic syndrome, which is the clinical expression of chronic kidney disease (CKD), is a complex amalgam of accelerated aging and organ dysfunctions, whereby cardio-vascular disease plays a capital role. In this narrative review, we offer a summary of the current conservative (medical) treatment options for cardio-vascular and overall morbidity and mortality risk in CKD. Since the progression of CKD is also associated with a higher cardio-vascular risk, we summarize the interventions that may prevent the progression of CKD as well. We pay attention to established therapies, as well as to novel promising options. Approaches that have been considered are not limited to pharmacological approaches but take into account lifestyle measures and diet as well. We took as many randomized controlled hard endpoint outcome trials as possible into account, although observational studies and post hoc analyses were included where appropriate. We also considered health economic aspects. Based on this information, we constructed comprehensive tables summarizing the available therapeutic options and the number and kind of studies (controlled or not, contradictory outcomes or not) with regard to each approach. Our review underscores the scarcity of well-designed large controlled trials in CKD. Nevertheless, based on the controlled and observational data, a therapeutic algorithm can be developed for this complex and multifactorial condition. It is likely that interventions should be aimed at targeting several modifiable factors simultaneously.

Inflammatory Cytokines as Uremic Toxins: "Ni Son Todos Los Que Estan, Ni Estan Todos Los Que Son".

Chronic kidney disease is among the fastest growing causes of death worldwide. An increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death is thought to depend on the accumulation of uremic toxins when glomerular filtration rate falls. In addition, the circulating levels of several markers of inflammation predict mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease. Indeed, a number of cytokines are listed in databases of uremic toxins and uremic retention solutes. They include inflammatory cytokines (IL-1ß, IL-18, IL-6, TNFα), chemokines (IL-8), and adipokines (adiponectin, leptin and resistin), as well as anti-inflammatory cytokines (IL-10). We now critically review the cytokines that may be considered uremic toxins. We discuss the rationale to consider them uremic toxins (mechanisms underlying the increased serum levels and evidence supporting their contribution to CKD manifestations), identify gaps in knowledge, discuss potential therapeutic implications to be tested in clinical trials in order to make this knowledge useful for the practicing physician, and identify additional cytokines, cytokine receptors and chemokines that may fulfill the criteria to be considered uremic toxins, such as sIL-6R, sTNFR1, sTNFR2, IL-2, CXCL12, CX3CL1 and others. In addition, we suggest that IL-10, leptin, adiponectin and resistin should not be considered uremic toxins toxins based on insufficient or contradictory evidence of an association with adverse outcomes in humans or preclinical data not consistent with a causal association.

Kidney Injury Marker 1 and Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin in Chronic Kidney Disease.

The current categorization of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is based on biomarkers of the glomerular function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR) and injury (urinary albumin creatinine ratio, UACR) and provides information on the risk of death and of progression of kidney disease. However, there are gaps in knowledge regarding the risk stratification of elderly patients with eGFR 45-60 ml/min/1.73 m2 and of younger patients with higher eGFR but physiological albuminuria. In this regard, most of the kidney cell mass is composed of tubules. Recent studies have explored whether biomarkers derived from the acute kidney injury literature, which are mainly tubular injury markers, may improve the information provided by eGFR and UACR. We now review the potential role of kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1), hepatitis A virus cellular receptor 1, T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-1 and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL)/lipocalin 2 as biomarkers for kidney or cardiovascular outcomes in CKD patients. In general, neither urinary KIM-1 nor urinary NGAL (uNGAL) outperform or add relevant information to eGFR or UACR. However, promising results were obtained for circulating KIM-1 prediction of renal outcomes in type 1 diabetes. Additionally, uNGAL may have some value in non-proteinuric patients and increased values have been observed in persons at risk for Mesoamerican nephropathy. Further studies are warranted in these niche populations.

Creatinine Clearance Is Not Equal to Glomerular Filtration Rate and Cockcroft-Gault Equation Is Not Equal to CKD-EPI Collaboration Equation.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may require dose reduction or avoidance when glomerular filtration rate is low. However, glomerular filtration rate is not usually measured in routine clinical practice. Rather, equations that incorporate different variables use serum creatinine to estimate either creatinine clearance in mL/min or glomerular filtration rate in mL/min/1.73 m2. The Cockcroft-Gault equation estimates creatinine clearance and incorporates weight into the equation. By contrast, the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations estimate glomerular filtration rate and incorporate ethnicity but not weight. As a result, an individual patient may have very different renal function estimates, depending on the equation used. We now highlight these differences and discuss the impact on routine clinical care for anticoagulation to prevent embolization in atrial fibrillation. Pivotal DOAC clinical trials used creatinine clearance as a criterion for patient enrollment, and dose adjustment and Federal Drug Administration recommendations are based on creatinine clearance. However, clinical biochemistry laboratories provide CKD-EPI glomerular filtration rate estimations, resulting in discrepancies between clinical trial and routine use of the drugs.