Comparative efficacy and safety of blood pressure-lowering agents in adults with diabetes and kidney disease: a network meta-analysis. Issue 9982 (23rd May 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Palmer, Suetonia C; Mavridis, Dimitris; Navarese, Eliano; Craig, Jonathan C; Tonelli, Marcello; Salanti, Georgia; Wiebe, Natasha; Ruospo, Marinella; Wheeler, David C; Strippoli, Giovanni F M
• Is Part Of: Lancet. Volume 385:Issue 9982(2015)
• Page Start: 2047
• Page End: 2056
• Publication Date: 2015-05-23
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine; Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62459-4
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0140-6736

Abstract

Summary: Background: The comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological agents to lower blood pressure in adults with diabetes and kidney disease remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of blood pressure-lowering drugs in this population of patients. Methods: We did a network meta-analysis of randomised trials from around the world comparing blood pressure-lowering agents in adults with diabetic kidney disease. Electronic databases (the Cochrane Collaboration, Medline, and Embase) were searched systematically up to January, 2014, for trials in adults with diabetes and kidney disease comparing orally administered blood pressure-lowering drugs. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and end-stage kidney disease. We also assessed secondary safety and cardiovascular outcomes. We did random-effects network meta-analysis to obtain estimates for primary and secondary outcomes and we presented these estimates as odds ratios or standardised mean differences with 95% CIs. We ranked the comparative effects of all drugs against placebo with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Findings: 157 studies comprising 43 256 participants, mostly with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease, were included in the network meta-analysis. No drug regimen was more effective than placebo for reducing all-cause mortality. However, compared with placebo, end-stage renal disease was significantly less likely after dual treatment with an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) and an angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (odds ratio 0·62, 95% CI 0·43–0·90) and after ARB monotherapy (0·77, 0·65–0·92). No regimen significantly increased hyperkalaemia or acute kidney injury, although combined ACE inhibitor and ARB treatment had the lowest rank among all interventions because of borderline increases in estimated risks of these harms (odds ratio 2·69, 95% CI 0·97–7·47 for hyperkalaemia; 2·69, 0·98–7·38 for acute kidney injury). Interpretation: No blood pressure-lowering strategy prolonged survival in adults with diabetes and kidney disease. ACE inhibitors and ARBs, alone or in combination, were the most effective strategies against end-stage kidney disease. Any benefits of combined ACE inhibitor and ARB treatment need to be balanced against potential harms of hyperkalaemia and acute kidney injury. Funding: Canterbury Medical Research Foundation, Italian Medicines Agency.