European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 61, Issue 2, pp 87–96

Enalapril dosage in progressive chronic nephropathy: a randomised, controlled trial

  • Thomas Elung-Jensen
  • Jens Heisterberg
  • Jesper Sonne
  • Svend Strandgaard
  • Anne-Lise Kamper
Clinical Trials

Abstract

Objective

In chronic renal failure, clearance of enalapril is reduced. Hence, a renoprotective effect may be achieved with lower doses than conventionally used. Since marked inter-patient variation in concentrations of enalaprilat has been shown in patients with renal failure despite equivalent dosage of enalapril, a direct comparison of the effect of high versus low plasma concentrations of enalaprilat on the progression of renal failure was undertaken.

Methods

Forty patients with a median glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of 17 (6–35) ml/min/1.73 m2 were studied in an open-label, randomised trial comparing patients with a high (>50 ng/ml) with patients with a low (<10 ng/ml) target trough plasma concentration of enalaprilat. The dose of enalapril was titrated accordingly. The patients were followed for 12 months or until they needed renal replacement therapy. GFR was measured at 3-month intervals by the plasma clearance of 51 Cr-EDTA, and the individual rates of progression of renal failure were calculated as the slope of GFR versus time plot.

Results

In the high-concentration group, the median enalaprilat trough concentration was 92.9 ng/ml (21.8–371.0 ng/ml) and in the low-concentration group it was 9.1 ng/ml (2.5–74.8 ng/ml) at 3 months follow-up (P<0.001). The median daily doses of enalapril were 10 mg (2.5–30 mg) and 1.88 mg (1.25–5 mg) in the high and low groups, respectively (P<0.001). In the high-concentration group, the mean±SE decline in renal function was 6.1±1.5 ml/min/1.73 m2 per year and in the low-concentration group it was 4.3±14.4 ml/min/1.73 m2 per year (P=0.48). Five patients in the high-concentration group reached end-stage renal failure whereas none in the low-concentration group did (P=0.04). There were no statistically significant differences in blood pressure level, concomitant antihypertensive therapy or urinary albumin excretion. However, the high-enalaprilat concentration group had an overall higher plasma potassium concentration of 0.42 mmol/l than the low group (P<0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with moderate to severe renal insufficiency, a low concentration of enalaprilat afforded the same degree of renoprotection, blood pressure control and minimisation of proteinuria as a high concentration, during 12 months of follow-up. The high-dosage treatment was associated with a more pronounced tendency to hyperkalaemia. Thus, there seems to be no indication for increasing the daily dose of enalapril beyond what achieves adequate blood pressure control in this group of patients.

References

  1. 1.
    Anonymous (1997) The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. Arch Intern Med 157:2413–2446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guidelines subcommittee (1999) World Health Organization—International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of hypertension. J Hypertens 17(2):151–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peters H, Ritz E (1990) Dosing angiotensin II blockers–beyond blood pressure. Nephrol Dial Transplant 14:2568–2570Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    GISEN (1997) Randomised placebo-controlled trial of effect of ramipril on decline in glomerular filtration rate and risk of terminal renal failure in proteinuric, non-diabetic nephropathy. The GISEN Group (Gruppo Italiano di Studi Epidemiologici in Nefrologia). Lancet 349:1857–1863PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hannedouche T, Landais P, Goldfarb B et al (1994) Randomised controlled trial of enalapril and beta blockers in non-diabetic chronic renal failure. BMJ 309:833–837Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ihle BU, Whitworth JA, Shahinfar S, Cnaan A, Kincaid-Smith PS, Becker GJ (1996) Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition in nondiabetic progressive renal insufficiency: a controlled double-blind trial. Am J Kidney Dis 27:489–495Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kamper AL, Strandgaard S, Leyssac PP (1992) Effect of enalapril on the progression of chronic renal failure. A randomized controlled trial. Am J Hypertens 5:423–430Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maschio G, Alberti D, Janin G et al (1996) Effect of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor benazepril on the progression of chronic renal insufficiency. The angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in progressive renal insufficiency study group. N Engl J Med 334:939–945CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Todd PA, Goa KL (1992) Enalapril. A reappraisal of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in hypertension. Drugs 43:346–381Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elung-Jensen T, Heisterberg J, Kamper AL, Sonne J, Strandgaard S, Larsen NE (2001) High serum enalaprilat in chronic renal failure. J Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Sys 4:240–245Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kampmann J, Siersbaek-Nielsen K, Kristensen M, Hansen JM (1974) Rapid evaluation of creatinine clearance. Acta Med Scand 196:517–520Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brøchner-Mortensen J (1972) A simple method for the determination of glomerular filtration rate. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 30:271–274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brøchner-Mortensen J, Freund LG (1981) Reliability of routine clearance methods for assessment of glomerular filtration rate in advanced renal insufficiency. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 41:91–97Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lundberg P-A, Lindstedt G, Andersson T, Branegård B, Lundquister G, Nyström E (1984) Single-reagent microcentrifugal assay for angiotensin converting enzyme in serum. Clin Chem 30:163Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Churg J, Cotran RS, Sinniah R, Sakaguchi H, Sobin L Renal disease: classification and atlas of tubulo-interstitial diseases. Igaru-Shoin, Tokyo: 185Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ajayi AA, Campbell BC, Kelman AW, Howie C, Meredith PA, Reid JL (1985) Pharmacodynamics and population pharmacokinetics of enalapril and lisinopril. Int J Clin Pharmacol Res 5:419–427Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Edeki T, Johnston A, Li-Kam WE, Turner P (1994) Enalapril pharmacokinetics and ACE inhibition, following single and chronic oral dosing. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 32:142–146Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Biollaz J, Schelling JL, Jacot Des CB et al (1982) Enalapril maleate and a lysine analogue (MK-521) in normal volunteers; relationship between plasma drug levels and the renin angiotensin system. Br J Clin Pharmacol 14:363–368Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    EUCLID (1997) Randomised placebo-controlled trial of lisinopril in normotensive patients with insulin-dependent diabetes and normoalbuminuria or microalbuminuria. The EUCLID study group. Lancet 349:1787–1792Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klahr S, Levey AS, Beck GJ et al (1994) The effects of dietary protein restriction and blood-pressure control on the progression of chronic renal disease. Modification of diet in renal disease study group. N Engl J Med 330:877–884CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laffel LM, McGill JB, Gans DJ (1995) The beneficial effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition with captopril on diabetic nephropathy in normotensive IDDM patients with microalbuminuria. North American Microalbuminuria Study Group. Am J Med 99:497–504Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mogensen CE (1982) Long-term antihypertensive treatment inhibiting progression of diabetic nephropathy. BMJ 285:685–688Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parving HH, Andersen AR, Smidt UM, Svendsen PA (1983) Early aggressive antihypertensive treatment reduces rate of decline in kidney function in diabetic nephropathy. Lancet 1:1175–1179Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elung-Jensen T, Heisterberg J, Kamper AL, Sonne J, Strandgaard S (2003) Blood pressure response to conventional and low-dose enalapril in chronic renal failure. Br J Clin Pharmacol 55:139–146Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hersh AD, Kelly JG, Laher MS, Carmody M, Doyle GD (1996) Effect of hydrochlorothiazide on the pharmacokinetics of enalapril in hypertensive patients with varying renal function. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 27:7–11Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Riley LJ Jr, Fruncillo RJ, Smith R, Vlasses PH, Conner DP, Narins RG, Rocci ML Jr, Mojaverian P, Krishna G, Till A, Ferguson RK (1999) Enalapril maleate in renal failure: relationships between blood pressure response, aldosterone and accumulation of active metabolite. Clin Res 33(2):A368Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    The ATLANTIS Study Group (2000) Low-dose ramipril reduces microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetic patients without hypertension: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 23:1823–1829Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kincaid-Smith PS, Fairley KF, Packham D (2001) Comparison of the effect of 50% increase in angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) with a combination of candesartan and ACEI on proteinuria and blood pressure in chronic renal disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: A0392Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Keilani T, Danesh FR, Schlueter WA, Molteni A, Batlle D (1999) A subdepressor low dose of ramipril lowers urinary protein excretion without increasing plasma potassium. Am J Kidney Dis 33:450–457Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Reardon LC, Macpherson DS (1998) Hyperkalemia in outpatients using angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. How much should we worry? Arch Intern Med 158:26–32Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kamper AL, Nielsen OJ (1990) Effect of enalapril on haemoglobin and serum erythropoietin in patients with chronic nephropathy. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 50:611–618Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Elung-Jensen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 2
  • Jens Heisterberg
    • 2
  • Jesper Sonne
    • 2
  • Svend Strandgaard
    • 1
  • Anne-Lise Kamper
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of Nephrology and Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Herlev HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Gentofte HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations