Nathan A Tullos1, Nicholas J Stewart1, Ryan Davidovich1, Alejandro R Chade2. 1. The Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA. 2. The Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA The Department of Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA The Department of Radiology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging research has identified the endothelin (ET)-1 pathway as a potential target for novel renoprotective therapies. We recently showed that selective ET-A receptor antagonism in chronic renovascular disease (RVD) improves renal function and reduces renal injury. Although ET-A and -B have opposing roles, in some clinical situations they may induce similar effects. Thus, we hypothesized that simultaneous blockade of the ET-A and -B receptors would protect the kidney during RVD. METHODS: Unilateral RVD was induced in pigs. After 6 weeks, single-kidney function was quantified in vivo using multi-detector computer tomography. Pigs were subsequently divided into untreated (RVD, n = 7) or daily-treated with the dual ET-A/B receptor antagonist macitentan (RVD + macitentan, n = 6) for 4 weeks. At 10 weeks, in vivo studies were repeated, then pigs were euthanized and ex vivo studies performed in the stenotic kidney to quantify inflammation, fibrosis, microvascular density and remodeling. RESULTS: Four weeks of macitentan therapy modestly improved renal blood flow (29%, P = 0.06 versus pre-treatment) and showed protective effects on the renal parenchyma by attenuating inflammation and glomerulosclerosis, reducing apoptosis and tubular casts and improving albuminuria and cortical microvessel density. No overt adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Possibly by inducing a pro-survival renal microenvironment, macitentan increased renal microvascular density, promoted cell survival and decreased injury, which in turn improved stenotic kidney hemodynamics in our model. Our results further support the safety of using macitentan in patients with concomitant chronic renal disease and supported the feasibility of a new strategy that may preserve the stenotic kidney in RVD.
BACKGROUND: Emerging research has identified the endothelin (ET)-1 pathway as a potential target for novel renoprotective therapies. We recently showed that selective ET-A receptor antagonism in chronic renovascular disease (RVD) improves renal function and reduces renal injury. Although ET-A and -B have opposing roles, in some clinical situations they may induce similar effects. Thus, we hypothesized that simultaneous blockade of the ET-A and -B receptors would protect the kidney during RVD. METHODS: Unilateral RVD was induced in pigs. After 6 weeks, single-kidney function was quantified in vivo using multi-detector computer tomography. Pigs were subsequently divided into untreated (RVD, n = 7) or daily-treated with the dual ET-A/B receptor antagonist macitentan (RVD + macitentan, n = 6) for 4 weeks. At 10 weeks, in vivo studies were repeated, then pigs were euthanized and ex vivo studies performed in the stenotic kidney to quantify inflammation, fibrosis, microvascular density and remodeling. RESULTS: Four weeks of macitentan therapy modestly improved renal blood flow (29%, P = 0.06 versus pre-treatment) and showed protective effects on the renal parenchyma by attenuating inflammation and glomerulosclerosis, reducing apoptosis and tubular casts and improving albuminuria and cortical microvessel density. No overt adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Possibly by inducing a pro-survival renal microenvironment, macitentan increased renal microvascular density, promoted cell survival and decreased injury, which in turn improved stenotic kidney hemodynamics in our model. Our results further support the safety of using macitentan in patients with concomitant chronic renal disease and supported the feasibility of a new strategy that may preserve the stenotic kidney in RVD.
Authors: James Ritchie; Darren Green; Constantina Chrysochou; Nicholas Chalmers; Robert N Foley; Philip A Kalra Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Erik N T P Bakker; Carsten L Buus; Jos A E Spaan; Jop Perree; Anuradha Ganga; Titia M Rolf; Oana Sorop; Linda H Bramsen; Michael J Mulvany; Ed Vanbavel Journal: Circ Res Date: 2004-11-18 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Maja T Lindenmeyer; Matthias Kretzler; Anissa Boucherot; Silvia Berra; Yoshinari Yasuda; Anna Henger; Felix Eichinger; Stefanie Gaiser; Holger Schmid; Maria P Rastaldi; Robert W Schrier; Detlef Schlöndorff; Clemens D Cohen Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2007-05-02 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Ovidiu C Baltatu; Christian E Zaugg; Christoph Schumacher; Pat Louie; Luciana A Campos; Michael Bader Journal: Pharmacol Res Date: 2013-12-22 Impact factor: 7.658
Authors: Xiang-Yang Zhu; Alejandro R Chade; Martin Rodriguez-Porcel; Michael D Bentley; Erik L Ritman; Amir Lerman; Lilach O Lerman Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2004-08-12 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Alejandro R Chade; Michael D Bentley; Xiangyang Zhu; Martin Rodriguez-Porcel; Sara Niemeyer; Beatriz Amores-Arriaga; Claudio Napoli; Erik L Ritman; Amir Lerman; Lilach O Lerman Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: A Caires; G S Fernandes; A M Leme; B Castino; E A Pessoa; S M Fernandes; C D Fonseca; M F Vattimo; N Schor; F T Borges Journal: Braz J Med Biol Res Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 2.590
Authors: Jason E Engel; Erika Williams; Maxx L Williams; Gene L Bidwell; Alejandro R Chade Journal: Hypertension Date: 2019-09-23 Impact factor: 10.190