Plasma cytokines as potential biomarkers of kidney damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Systemic lupus erythematosus is a heterogeneous chronic inflammatory autoimmune disorder characterized by an exacerbated expression of cytokines and chemokines in different tissues and organs. Renal involvement is a significant contributor to the morbidity and mortality of systemic lupus erythematosus, and its diagnosis is based on renal biopsy, an invasive procedure with a high risk of complications. Therefore, the development of alternative, non-invasive diagnostic tests for kidney disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus is a priority. AIM: To evaluate the plasma levels of a panel of cytokines and chemokines using multiplex xMAP technology in a cohort of Colombian patients with active and inactive systemic lupus erythematosus, and to evaluate their potential as biomarkers of renal involvement. RESULTS: Plasma from 40 systemic lupus erythematosus non-nephritis patients and 80 lupus nephritis patients with different levels of renal involvement were analyzed for 39 cytokines using Luminex xMAP technology. Lupus nephritis patients had significantly increased plasma eotaxin, TNF-α, interleukin-17-α, interleukin-10, and interleukin-15 as compared to the systemic lupus erythematosus non-nephritis group. Macrophage-derived chemokine, growth regulated oncogene alpha, and epidermal growth factor were significantly elevated in systemic lupus erythematosus non-nephritis patients when compared to lupus nephritis individuals. Plasma eotaxin levels allowed a discrimination between systemic lupus erythematosus non-nephritis and lupus nephritis patients, for which we performed a receiver operating characteristic curve to confirm. We observed a correlation of eotaxin levels with active nephritis (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index). Our data indicate that circulating cytokines and chemokines could be considered good predictors of renal involvement in individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus.

Use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to compare antihypertensive efficacy and safety of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, losartan and valsartan. Losartan Trial Investigators.

The efficacy and safety of losartan and valsartan were evaluated in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Blood pressure responses to once-daily treatment with either losartan 50 mg (n = 93) or valsartan 80 mg (n = 94) for 6 weeks were assessed through measurements taken in the clinic and by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). Both drugs significantly reduced clinic sitting systolic (SiSBP) and diastolic blood pressure (SiDBP) at 2, 4, and 6 weeks. Maximum reductions from baseline in SiSBP and SiDBP on 24-hour ABPM were also significant with the two treatments. The reduction in blood pressure was more consistent across patients in the losartan group, as indicated by a numerically smaller variability in change from baseline on all ABPM measures, which achieved significance at peak (P = .017) and during the day (P = .002). In addition, the numerically larger smoothness index with losartan suggested a more homogeneous antihypertensive effect throughout the 24-hour dosing interval. The antihypertensive response rate was 54% with losartan and 46% with valsartan. Three days after discontinuation of therapy, SiDBP remained below baseline in 73% of losartan and 63% of valsartan patients. Both agents were generally well tolerated. Losartan, but not valsartan, significantly decreased serum uric acid an average 0.4 mg/dL at week 6. In conclusion, once-daily losartan 50 mg and valsartan 80 mg had similar antihypertensive effects in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Losartan produced a more consistent blood pressure-lowering response and significantly lowered uric acid, suggesting potentially meaningful differences between these two A II receptor antagonists.

Increased efficacy and tolerability with losartan plus hydrochlorothiazide in patients with uncontrolled hypertension and therapy-related symptoms receiving two monotherapies.

The efficacy and tolerability of losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg and enalapril 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg were compared in a double-blind, randomized trial in hypertensive patients inadequately controlled and experiencing side effects on prior therapy. Patients with moderate or severe hypertension, currently treated with at least two single-agent drugs (excluding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors), with a sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) above 90 mm Hg, and at least one undesirable drug-related symptom were randomized to once-daily treatment with one of the combinations for 12 weeks. Losartan/HCTZ lowered sitting DBP from the prior therapy baseline by 13.7 mm Hg and sitting systolic blood pressure 19.3 mm Hg; similar reductions occurred with enalapril/HCTZ. Trough sitting DBP was reduced to normal levels (< 90 mm Hg) in 63% of patients switched to the losartan combination and in 58% of those treated with the enalapril combination. Each combination was associated with improved tolerability compared with prior therapy, although fewer patients reported each of 24 undesirable symptoms after 12 weeks of losartan/HCTZ. The improvement from prior therapy in the occurrence of cough was significantly greater with losartan/HCTZ (P = .005). Enalapril/HCTZ, but not losartan/HCTZ, increased serum uric acid levels at week 12. In conclusion, the combination of losartan 100 mg/HCTZ 25 mg offers a beneficial therapeutic option for patients with a history of moderate to severe hypertension whose blood pressure is not adequately controlled or who exhibit side effects while on two or more single-agent antihypertensive drugs. In this population, the switch from prior antihypertensive therapies to once daily losartan 100 mg/HCTZ 25 mg improves blood pressure control and reduces side effects.