The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 20 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Effects of Losartan on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease. Interruption of the renin-angiotensin system slows the progression of renal disease in patients with type 1 diabetes, but similar data are not available for patients with type 2, the most common form of diabetes. We assessed the role of the angiotensin-II-receptor antagonist losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. METHODS: A total of 1513 patients were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind study comparing losartan (50 to 100 mg once daily) with placebo, both taken in addition to conventional antihypertensive treatment (calcium-channel antagonists, diuretics, alpha-blockers, beta-blockers, and centrally acting agents), for a mean of 3.4 years. The primary outcome was the composite of a doubling of the base-line serum creatinine concentration, end-stage renal disease, or death. Secondary end points included a composite of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular causes, proteinuria, and the rate of progression of renal disease. RESULTS: A total of 327 patients in the losartan group reached the primary end point, as compared with 359 in the placebo group (risk reduction, 16 percent; P=0.02). Losartan reduced the incidence of a doubling of the serum creatinine concentration (risk reduction, 25 percent; P=0.006) and end-stage renal disease (risk reduction, 28 percent; P=0.002) but had no effect on the rate of death. The benefit exceeded that attributable to changes in blood pressure. The composite of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular causes was similar in the two groups, although the rate of first hospitalization for heart failure was significantly lower with losartan (risk reduction, 32 percent; P=0.005). The level of proteinuria declined by 35 percent with losartan (P<0.001 for the comparison with placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Losartan conferred significant renal benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy, and it was generally well tolerated.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
35 Own result · 16 Own method · 13 Own interpretation · 7 No full text of the sources · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported so far · 1 Sources not found · 1 Not checked yet
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In this regard, it should be noted that in related studies in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, 1,28,29 the benefits of captopril or irbesartan were not tested in the presence of concurrent calcium-channel-antagonist therapy.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [28] source
The Randomization and Treatment Plan states that calcium-channel blockers were discontinued before screening and excluded as additional antihypertensive treatment. Irbesartan and the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine were assigned as separate regimens, so this type 2 diabetes study did not test irbesartan's benefit with concurrent calcium-channel-blocker therapy. The captopril study in type 1 diabetes is covered by the sentence's other citations, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [29] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The level of proteinuria declined by 35 percent with losartan (P<0.001 for the comparison with placebo).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Losartan also reduced the risk of end-stage renal disease by 28 percent (P=0.002)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“according to the per-protocol analysis, among the patients who continued to receive their assigned study treatment, losartan conferred a 22 percent reduction in the risk of the primary composite end point (P=0.008).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We did find a significant difference in favor of losartan with regard to the rate of a first hospitalization for heart failure, a component of this secondary composite end point.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The risk of the combined end point of end-stage renal disease or death was 20 percent lower in the losartan group than in the placebo group (P=0.01)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this population, losartan (plus conventional antihypertensive therapy) demonstrated excellent tolerability, similar to that of placebo (plus conventional antihypertensive therapy), as evidenced by the similar numbers of patients in the two groups in whom the study treatment was discontinued because of adverse events.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Treatment with losartan resulted in a 16 percent reduction in the risk of the primary composite end point (P= 0.02)”
plaindirectn = 327 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, simultaneous therapy with calcium-channel antagonists did not detract from the beneficial effects of losartan, despite the recent controversy regarding the role of calcium-channel antagonists in the protection of the kidneys and the heart. 25-27”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Approximately one third of the patients had a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event (247 in the losartan group [32.9 percent] and 268 in the placebo group [35.2 percent]; risk reduction, 10 percent; P=0.26).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
- Probably not a substantial claim. 16
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a difference between the number of myocardial infarctions in the losartan group (50 patients [6.7 percent]) and the number in the placebo group (68 patients [8.9 percent]; risk reduction, 28 percent), but this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.08).”
plainn = 50- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a small, time-averaged difference in the trough blood pressure between the losartan group”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Approximately 20 percent of the patients died, but there was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (P=0.88).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Losartan also led to an average reduction in the level of proteinuria (the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio) of 35 percent, whereas in the patients in the placebo group, the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio tended to increase (P<0.001 for the overall treatment effect) (Fig. 3).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“mean arterial pressure, 95.9 mm Hg and 96.8 mm Hg, respectively [P=0.59]; pulse pressure, 66.7 mm Hg and 67 .4 mm Hg, respectively [P= 0.77]”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“mean arterial pressure, 99.1 mm Hg and 99.7 mm Hg, respectively [P= 0.38]; pulse pressure, 66.2 mm Hg and 67 .1 mm Hg, respectively [P=0.37]”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“mean arterial pressure, 100.9 mm Hg and 103.1 mm Hg, respectively [P<0.001]; pulse pressure, 67 .8 mm Hg and 69.8 mm Hg, respectively [P=0.05]”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no significant differences in the rates of most of the cardiovascular end points; the exception was the first hospitalization with heart failure (89 patients in the losartan group [11.9 percent], as compared with 127 in the placebo group [16.7 percent]), for which the risk was reduced by 32 percent (P=0.005)”
- Also stated in: § A BSTRACT · p. 1 · plain
“although the rate of first hospitalization for heart failure was significantly lower with losartan (risk reduction, 32 percent; P=0.005)”
plaindirectn = 89 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § A BSTRACT · p. 1 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At base line, 93.5 percent of the patients (92.3 percent in the losartan group and 94.6 percent in the placebo group) were receiving antihypertensive therapy.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The benefits of losartan were observed among our patients, many of whom were already receiving other therapies, such as aspirin, beta-blockers, and lipidlowering agents, as part of sound medical practice.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased serum concentrations of creatinine or potassium led to the discontinuation of the study medication in 1.5 percent and 1.1 percent, respectively, of the patients in the losartan group, as compared with 1.2 percent and 0.5 percent of the patients in the placebo group.”
plaindirectn = 1,513- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analyses of the primary and secondary end points were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle; we included data from all randomized patients (with the exception of three patients who were lost to follow-up), from the time of randomization through the date of study termination.”
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An independent end-points committee whose members were unaware of the patients' treatment assignments reviewed the data to determine which patients had reached the end points.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More patients discontinued the study treatment in the placebo group (53.5 percent) than in the losartan group (46.5 percent).”
plainn = 1,513- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan Study was an investigator-initiated, multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study designed to evaluate the renoprotective effects of losartan in 1513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.”
plainn = 1,513- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Because one interim analysis used a stopping boundary that was based on an alpha spending function of the O'Brien-Fleming type, 10 a critical P value of 0.048 was required for the primary hypothesis.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a second, per-protocol analysis, we excluded patients who violated the criteria for inclusion and exclusion and censored patients' data 14 days after they permanently discontinued the study medication.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of each center, and all patients gave written informed consent.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the study was discontinued early (February 10, 2001) by a unanimous vote of the steering committee, whose members were unaware of the treatment assignments.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We cannot exclude the possibility that this small difference had a beneficial effect on the renal outcomes.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study 32 and its substudy of patients with diabetes, MICRO-HOPE, 20 showed benefits of angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibition in terms of the signs and symptoms of heart failure but failed to show significant differences in hospitalizations for heart failure.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous studies involving angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors have demonstrated beneficial effects on proteinuria but have not demonstrated the superiority of blockade of the renin-angiotensin system in slowing the progression to end-stage renal disease over nonblockade forms of therapy. 14-20”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14] Walker WG, 1992, J Am Soc Nephrol
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [15] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [16] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] Estacio RO, 2000, Diabetes Care
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [20] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, in the absence of a direct comparison between angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II antagonists, any extrapolation from the results obtained with different classes of drugs is speculative at best.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We were able to determine the status of all patients (except for three patients in the losartan group who could not be contacted) with respect to dialysis, transplantation, and death.”
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subsequent hospitalizations for heart failure were not assessed.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the Cox model accounts for the base-line level of proteinuria (which was a stratification factor) and the geographic region, as prespecified in the data analysis plan.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The difference results in part from the fact that the Cox regression model accounts for the time at risk - i.e., the longer average follow-up in the losartan group than in the placebo group.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease.
“Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Type 2 diabetes is the most common form of diabetes.
“type 2, the most common form of diabetes”
The paper relies on this without support.
Similar data on interruption of the renin-angiotensin system are not available for patients with type 2 diabetes.
“similar data are not available for patients with type 2, the most common form of diabetes”
The paper relies on this without support.
Postponing end-stage renal disease in patients with type 2 diabetes remains an elusive goal.
“postponing end-stage renal disease in patients with type 2 diabetes, the leading cause of chronic renal failure in many countries, remains an elusive goal”
The paper relies on this without support.
Type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of chronic renal failure in many countries.
“type 2 diabetes, the leading cause of chronic renal failure in many countries”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“In the IDNT trial, treatment with irbesartan compared with placebo resulted in a 33% decrease in the risk of doubling of serum creatinine concentration and was associated with a nonsigni fi cant reduction in the incidence of kidney failure, which was independent of blood pressure.”
From KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease (2022) · cites this paper as [13]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Antihypertensive therapy reduces the risk of albuminuria (67)(68)(69)(70), and among people with type 1 or 2 diabetes with established CKD (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 and UACR $300 mg/g creatinine), ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy reduces the risk of progression to ESKD (71)(72)(73)(74)(75)(76)(77)(78)(79)(80).”
From 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [71]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has been shown to prevent major adverse kidney outcomes in people with diabetes, and these drugs are recommended by clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes who have, or are at high risk of, kidney disease.[4][5][6][7][8]”
From SGLT2 inhibitors for the prevention of kidney failure in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The only currently approved treatment for renoprotection in patients with type 2 diabetes is reninangiotensin system blockade, which was first shown to be effective 18 years ago.3,4”
From Canagliflozin and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy (2019) · cites this paper as [3]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, a sustained ≥57% decrease in eGFR (equivalent to doubling of serum creatinine) was selected in FIDELITY because it is a classic outcome in diabetic nephropathy studies2 , 12–14 and is a more robust kidney failure surrogate outcome than a ≥40% decrease in eGFR, particularly when initial changes in eGFR occur.14 , 15”
From Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the FIDELITY pooled analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [13]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Antihypertensive therapy reduces the risk of albuminuria (68-71), and among people with type 1 or 2 diabetes with established CKD (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 and UACR ≥300 mg/g creatinine), ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy reduces the risk of progression to kidney failure (72)(73)(74)(75)(76)(77)(78)(79)(80)(81).”
From 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [72]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“ACE inhibitors or ARBs are the preferred first-line agents for blood pressure treatment among people with diabetes, hypertension, eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 , and UACR ≥300 mg/g creatinine because of their proven benefits for prevention of CKD progression (72,73,75).”
From 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [72]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This recommendation is based on RCTs where findings demonstrated decreased risk of CKD progression, for which patients with albuminuria are at elevated risk, with a maximally dosed RAS inhibitor compared with placebo or an active antihypertensive drug comparator (42–44).”
From Diabetes management in chronic kidney disease: a consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) (2022) · cites this paper as [42]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In patients with diabetic kidney disease with increased levels of albuminuria, large placebo-controlled trials have shown that renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors,3–5 sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors,6,7 and the non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone8,9 all reduced the risk of progression to kidney failure.”
From Empagliflozin in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease (2023) · cites this paper as [3]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In the IDNT trial, treatment with irbesartan compared with placebo resulted in a 33% decrease in the risk of doubling of serum creatinine concentration and was associated with a nonsigni fi cant reduction in the incidence of kidney failure, which was independent of blood pressure.”
From KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease (2022) · cites this paper as [13]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“For many years, the only agents that had demonstrated benefit in slowing kidney disease progression were the renin angiotensin aldosterone system blockers of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) [11], [12], [13].”
From Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in diabetic kidney disease: a review of their kidney and heart protection (2023) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“ARBs (irbesartan/telmisartan) also slowed progression from microalbuminuria (albuminuria stage A2) to overt nephropathy.708,709”
From 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. (2023) · cites this paper as [708]
In the citing paper
“Antagonism of the RAAS with ACE inhibitors or AngII receptor blockers also attenuates, but may not completely halt, the progression of kidney injury in patients with obesity, hypertension and T2DM67,68.”
From Obesity, kidney dysfunction and hypertension: mechanistic links (2019) · cites this paper as [67]
In the citing paper
“Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB)s improve endothelium-dependent vasodilation and reduce morbidity and mortality in heart failure and nephropathy, including diabetic nephropathy.218-221”
From The Vasculature in Prediabetes (2018) · cites this paper as [219]
In the citing paper
“Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB)s improve endothelium-dependent vasodilation and reduce morbidity and mortality in heart failure and nephropathy, including diabetic nephropathy.218-221”
From The Vasculature in Prediabetes (2018) · cites this paper as [219]
In the citing paper
“ARBs have also been shown to reduce the rate of progression from micro- to macroalbuminuria as well as ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes (234–236).”
From Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2009 (2009) · cites this paper as [235]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“The mean follow-up time was 3.4 years (42 months).”
Reported 42 · recomputed 40.8
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Patients · p. 2
“who had any history of heart failure before enrollment.”
§ DISCUSSION · p. 6
“There were 88 patients (44 in each group) who had preexisting heart failure at the time of randomization.”
Citations
Cites
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1992) · Springer series in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_25 · Cited by 45,239
Regression Models and Life-Tables
Cox, D. R. (1972) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x · Cited by 39,793
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1958) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452 · Cited by 39,158
Regression Models and Life-Tables
Cox, D. R. (1992) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_37 · Cited by 26,297
Levey, A. S., Bosch, J. P., Lewis, J. B., Greene, T., Rogers, N., Roth, D., & for the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group* (1999) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-130-6-199903160-00002 · Cited by 15,079
(2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200001203420301 · Cited by 8,663
The SOLVD Investigators* (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199108013250501 · Cited by 8,029
Lewis, E. J., Hunsicker, L. G., Clarke, W. R., Berl, T., Pohl, M. A., Lewis, J. B., Ritz, E., Atkins, R. C., Rohde, R., & Raz, I. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa011303 · Cited by 5,987
The effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition on diabetic nephropathy
Lewis, E. J., Hunsicker, L. G., Bain, R. P., & Rohde, R. D. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199311113292004 · Cited by 5,394
(1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199209033271003 · Cited by 3,725
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Black HR, 1999, J Hypertens, 17, S3
- Levey AS, 2000, J Am Soc Nephrol, 11, 155A
- Walker WG, 1992, J Am Soc Nephrol, 3, 339
- Estacio RO, 2000, Diabetes Care, 23, B54
- Bauer JH, Reams GP. Antihypertensive drugs. In: Brenner BM, ed. The kidney. 6th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2000:2253-97.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 4,101–4,200 of 7,495
Fried, L. F., & Lewis, J. B. (2015) · Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · doi:10.2215/cjn.01610215 · Cited by 11
Shlipak, M. G. (2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 11
Role of Glomerular Filtration Rate in Controlling Blood Pressure Early in Diabetes
Brands, M. W., & Labazi, H. (2008) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.090647 · Cited by 9
Preventing end-stage renal disease: flexible strategies to overcome obstacles
Hirsch, S. (2006) · Current Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · doi:10.1097/01.mnh.0000242171.29329.1d · Cited by 11
Kidney and Blood Pressure Regulation
Suzuki, H., & Saruta, T. (2004) · Contributions to nephrology · doi:10.1159/isbn.978-3-318-01086-2 · Cited by 11
Carides, G. W., Shahinfar, S., Dasbach, E. J., et al. (2006) · PharmacoEconomics · doi:10.2165/00019053-200624060-00003 · Cited by 11
Self-citationSleight, P. (2002) · European Heart Journal Supplements · doi:10.1016/s1520-765x(02)90074-x · Cited by 11
Curtis, B. M., Levin, A., & Parfrey, P. S. (2005) · Medical Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.mcna.2004.12.002 · Cited by 11
Ohishi, M., TAKAGI, T., Ito, N., et al. (2007) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1291/hypres.30.1187 · Cited by 11
Hypertension: A Review and Rationale of Treatment
Copley, J. B., & Rosario, R. (2005) · Disease-a-Month · doi:10.1016/j.disamonth.2005.10.004 · Cited by 11
Angiotensinogen M235T genotype predicts progression in chronic renal allograft dysfunction1
Prasad, G. V. R., Pinnaduwage, D., Parkes, R. K., Midgley, J., Balfe, J. W., Hegele, R. A., Bull, S. B., Cole, E., & Logan, A. G. (2003) · Transplantation · doi:10.1097/01.tp.0000040866.14123.05 · Cited by 11
Staessen, J. A., Thijs, L., Li, Y., Kuznetsova, T., Richart, T., Wang, J., & ger, W. B. (2007) · Current Opinion in Cardiology · doi:10.1097/hco.0b013e3281eb8e8d · Cited by 11
Prevention of Nephropathy in Patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Tzamaloukas, A. H., & Murata, G. H. (2005) · International Urology and Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s11255-005-2394-3 · Cited by 11
Angiotensin Antagonism in Patients with Heart Failure
Cruden, N. L. M., & Newby, D. E. (2004) · American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs · doi:10.2165/00129784-200404060-00002 · Cited by 11
Smith, D. G., Nguyen, A. B., Peak, C. N., & Frech, F. H. (2004) · Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy · doi:10.18553/jmcp.2004.10.1.26 · Cited by 11
Lansang, M. C., Coletti, C. M., Ahmed, S. B., et al. (2006) · Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System · doi:10.3317/jraas.2006.028 · Cited by 11
Palmer, A. J., Valentine, W. J., & Ray, J. A. (2007) · International Journal of Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01343.x · Cited by 11
The importance of a correct evaluation of progression in studies on chronic kidney disease
Kamper, A. (2006) · Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfl561 · Cited by 11
World Kidney Day 2011: protect your kidneys, save your heart.
Couser, W. G., & RIELLA, M. C. (2011) · PubMed · Cited by 11
Role of NPT2b in health and chronic kidney disease
Sabbagh, Y., & Schiavi, S. C. (2014) · Current Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · doi:10.1097/01.mnh.0000447015.44099.5f · Cited by 11
Heerspink, H. J. L., & de Zeeuw, D. (2011) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.111.018382 · Cited by 11
Current Status of Research on Losartan in Tumour Therapy
Wang, H., Yuan, S., & Wang, H. (2026) · Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine · doi:10.1111/jcmm.70985 · Cited by 11
Petrella, R. J., Tremblay, G., Backer, G. D., et al. (2014) · Vascular Health and Risk Management · doi:10.2147/vhrm.s55298 · Cited by 10
Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: An Opportunity for Pharmacists to Improve Outcomes
Neumiller, J. J., Peter, W. L. S., & Shubrook, J. H. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm13051367 · Cited by 10
Zhou, J. S., Wang, X., Tang, R., Kou, M., Ma, H., Li, X., Heianza, Y., Fonseca, V. A., & Qi, L. (2024) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03288-0 · Cited by 10
García‐Prieto, A., Verdalles, Ú., de José, A. P., Arroyo, D., Aragoncillo, I., Barbieri, D., Camacho, R., & Goicoechea, M. (2024) · Hipertensión y Riesgo Vascular · doi:10.1016/j.hipert.2023.11.005 · Cited by 10
New perspectives in the management of diabetic nephropathy
Psyllaki, A., & Τζιόμαλος, Κ. (2024) · World Journal of Diabetes · doi:10.4239/wjd.v15.i6.1086 · Cited by 10
Ichikawa, D., Kawarazaki, W., Saka, S., Kanaoka, T., Ohnishi, H., Arima, H., & Shibata, S. (2025) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-025-02146-7 · Cited by 10
Innovative therapeutics for renoprotection: Where we are
Cortinovis, M., Perico, N., & Remuzzi, G. (2025) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.pharmr.2025.100060 · Cited by 10
Self-citationYu, H., Fu, L., Zhang, C., Wang, S., Song, J., Zhu, Y., & Wang, F. (2025) · Phytotherapy Research · doi:10.1002/ptr.70028 · Cited by 10
Chen, X., Niu, B., Zhang, Z., Zhang, B., Xue, T., Liu, Y., Wang, Z., & Li, X. (2025) · Fitoterapia · doi:10.1016/j.fitote.2025.106779 · Cited by 13
Self-citationRenin Angiotensin System Inhibition in the Older Person: A Review
Mohamed, M., & Weir, M. R. (2009) · Clinics in Geriatric Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.cger.2009.01.007 · Cited by 10
Siragy, H. M. (2011) · Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy · doi:10.1007/s10557-010-6278-0 · Cited by 10
Aqeel, S. B., Ye, M., Wysocki, J. A., Sánchez-Nadales, A., Khattab, A., Lores, E., RADEMAKER, A. W., Gao, X., Bebu, I., Nelson, R. G., et al. (2019) · Physiological Reports · doi:10.14814/phy2.14242 · Cited by 11
Zhao, Z., Huo, L., Wang, L., Wang, L., Fu, Z., Li, Y., & Wu, X. (2019) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-019-7859-x · Cited by 11
Cai, J., Liu, B., Guo, T., et al. (2020) · European Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2020.173254 · Cited by 10
Kernéis, M., Ferrante, A., Guedeney, P., Vicaut, É., & Montalescot, G. (2020) · Archives of cardiovascular diseases · doi:10.1016/j.acvd.2020.09.002 · Cited by 10
Zobel, E. H., von Scholten, B. J., Hansen, T. W., Persson, F., Rasmussen, S., Wolthers, B. O., & Rossing, P. R. (2021) · Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism · doi:10.1111/dom.14578 · Cited by 9
New Approaches to Diabetic Nephropathy from Bed to Bench
Tsai, J.-L., Chen, C., Wu, M., & Tsai, S. (2022) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines10040876 · Cited by 10
Stuart, D., Peterson, C. S., Hu, C., Revelo, M. P., Huang, Y., Kohan, D. E., & Ramkumar, N. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2022-0082 · Cited by 10
Bell, D. S. H. (2022) · Journal of Diabetes Research · doi:10.1155/2022/7787732 · Cited by 9
Nashar, K., & Khalil, P. (2022) · International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease · doi:10.2147/ijnrd.s234282 · Cited by 10
Ortíz, A., Arroyo, R. A., Escribano, P. P. C., Fernández‐Fernández, B., Debén, F. M., Mediavilla, J. D., Doña, A. M., Soler, M. J., & Górriz, J. L. (2023) · Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1080/17512433.2023.2213888 · Cited by 10
Calvert, N. D., Kirby, A., Suchý, M., Pallister, P. J., Torrens, A. A., Burger, D. E., Melkus, G., Schieda, N., & Shuhendler, A. J. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39720-x · Cited by 10
Incretin Therapies for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease
Alicic, R. Z., & Neumiller, J. J. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm13010201 · Cited by 14
Combined effects of blood pressure and glucose status on the risk of chronic kidney disease
Toyama, M., Satoh, M., Nakayama, S., Hashimoto, H., Muroya, T., Murakami, T., Hirose, T., Obara, T., Nakaya, N., Mori, T., et al. (2024) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-024-01683-x · Cited by 14
Ming, J., Hong, G., Xu, Y., Mernagh, P., Pochopień, M., & Li, H. (2024) · Advances in Therapy · doi:10.1007/s12325-024-02906-w · Cited by 10
Bhatti, S., Hakeem, A., Dillie, K. S., Cook, J. R., & Chang, S. M. (2010) · Congestive Heart Failure · doi:10.1111/j.1751-7133.2010.00181.x · Cited by 10
Abe, M., Maruyama, N., Oikawa, O., et al. (2015) · Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation · doi:10.3109/00365513.2015.1054871 · Cited by 10
Cardiovascular Prevention in Subjects with Impaired Fasting Glucose or Impaired Glucose Tolerance
Volpe, M., Borghi, C., Perin, P. C., Chiariello, M., Manzato, E., Miccoli, R., Modena, M. G., Riccardi, G., Sesti, G., Tiengo, A., et al. (2010) · High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention · doi:10.2165/11311830-000000000-00000 · Cited by 10
Matavelli, L. C., Huang, J., & Siragy, H. M. (2011) · Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology · doi:10.1097/fjc.0b013e31823fc3f5 · Cited by 10
The Role of AMPKαin High-Glucose-Induced Dysfunction of Cultured Rat Mesangial Cells
Lv, Z., Liu, Y., Zhang, P., et al. (2012) · Renal Failure · doi:10.3109/0886022x.2012.668491 · Cited by 10
Levene, L. S., McNally, P., Fraser, R., & Lowy, A. (2004) · Practical Diabetes · doi:10.1002/pdi.691 · Cited by 10
Tan, J. S., Jaung, R., Gamble, G. D., & Cundy, T. (2013) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2013.11.023 · Cited by 10
Renin‐angiotensin system inhibition: how much is too much of a good thing?
Campbell, D. J. (2002) · Internal Medicine Journal · doi:10.1046/j.1445-5994.2002.00286.x · Cited by 10
Primary and secondary prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment
Wang, J., & Li, Y. (2004) · Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics · doi:10.1586/14737175.4.6.1023 · Cited by 10
Ishizawa, K., Izawa‐Ishizawa, Y., Yamano, N., Urushihara, M., Sakurada, T., Imanishi, M., Fujii, S., Nuno, A., Miyamoto, L., Kihira, Y., et al. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086335 · Cited by 10
Saito, A., Higgins, M., Zheng, S., Li, W., Ojima, I., Dinkova‐Kostova, A. T., & Honda, T. (2013) · Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1016/j.bmcl.2013.08.058 · Cited by 10
Lin, J., Chang, C., Caffrey, J. L., Wu, L., & Lai, M. (2014) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.113.02550 · Cited by 10
Vaccari, C. S., Rahman, S. T., Khan, Q. A., Cheema, F. A., & Khan, B. V. (2008) · Journal of the CardioMetabolic Syndrome · doi:10.1111/j.1559-4572.2008.07117.x · Cited by 10
Olmesartan ameliorates peripheral nerve dysfunction in Zucker diabetic fatty rats
Sugimoto, K., Kojima, K., Baba, M., & Yasujima, M. (2011) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e328347da0f · Cited by 10
Secondary Arterial Hypertension: Improvements in Diagnosis and Management in the Last 10 Years
Baglivo, H. P., & Sanchez, R. A. (2011) · American Journal of Therapeutics · doi:10.1097/mjt.0b013e3181c0805a · Cited by 10
Xu, H., Wang, W., Zhang, Y., Cheng, Y., & Xu, Z. (2016) · Journal of Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s40620-016-0296-3 · Cited by 10
Considerations and controversies in managing chronic kidney disease: An update
Prasad‐Reddy, L., Isaacs, D. M., & Kantorovich, A. (2017) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.2146/ajhp160559 · Cited by 10
Dual renin–angiotensin system blockade for nephroprotection
Ruggenenti, P. L. (2017) · Néphrologie & Thérapeutique · doi:10.1016/j.nephro.2017.02.006 · Cited by 9
Cardiovascular outcome trials of diabetes drugs: lessons learned
Taylor, S. I., & Leslie, B. R. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci99820 · Cited by 11
Zhou, B., Wen, M., Mi, L., Hu, C.-J., Zhang, Y., Wang, J.-T., & Tang, L. (2018) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2018.05.015 · Cited by 10
Renin–angiotensin system inhibition in advanced chronic kidney disease
Shah, R., & Sparks, M. A. (2018) · Current Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · doi:10.1097/mnh.0000000000000484 · Cited by 10
Stolfo, D., & Savarese, G. (2019) · Cardiac failure review · doi:10.15420/cfr.2019.6.2 · Cited by 10
Ahmed, S. B., & Dumanski, S. M. (2019) · Canadian Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2019.06.033 · Cited by 10
Zafari, N., Lotfaliany, M., O'Keefe, G. J., Kishore, K., Torkamani, N., MacIsaac, R. J., Churilov, L. P., & Ekinci, E. I. (2020) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgaa722 · Cited by 11
Sharma, A. K., Alvarez, P. J., Woods, S. D., & Dai, D. (2020) · ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research · doi:10.2147/ceor.s267063 · Cited by 12
The Pathological Role of Pro(Renin) Receptor in Renal Inflammation
Quadri, S. S. A., Cooper, C., Ghaffar, D., et al. (2021) · Journal of Experimental Pharmacology · doi:10.2147/jep.s297682 · Cited by 10
Krummel, T., Ingwiller, M., Keller, N., Prinz, É., Charlin, E., Bazin, D., & Hannedouche, T. P. (2021) · International Urology and Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s11255-021-02950-3 · Cited by 10
SPRINT—A Kidney-Centric Narrative Review: Recent Advances in Hypertension
Hu, A. H., & Chang, T. I. (2021) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.16505 · Cited by 10
Davies, M. D., Sandoo, A., & Macdonald, J. H. (2022) · Kidney and Dialysis · doi:10.3390/kidneydial2020026 · Cited by 12
Yoo, T., Hong, S. J., Kim, S., Shin, S., Kim, D. K., Lee, J. P., Han, S. Y., Lee, S., Won, J. C., Kang, Y. S., et al. (2022) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-022-01028-6 · Cited by 10
the ESPORT Study Group, Malacco, E., Omboni, S., Mallion, J.-M., & Volpe, M. (2012) · High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention · doi:10.1007/bf03297633 · Cited by 10
Prescribing Trends and Drug Budget Impact of the ARBs in the UK
Blak, B. T., Mullins, C. D., Shaya, F. T., Simoni, J. M., Cooke, C. E., & Weir, M. R. (2008) · Value in Health · doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00423.x · Cited by 10
Pfister, R., Erdmann, E., & Schneider, C. A. (2011) · Journal of Atherosclerosis and Thrombosis · doi:10.5551/jat.6247 · Cited by 10
Bekki, H., Yamamoto, K., Sone, M., Homma, T., Nakata, M., Nohara, M., Fukami, K., Okuda, S., & Yamagish, S.-I. (2010) · Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity · doi:10.4161/oxim.3.5.13199 · Cited by 12
The potential role of prorenin in diabetic nephropathy
Schmieder, R. E. (2007) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e328048d01c · Cited by 10
Mathur, G., Noronha, B., Rodrigues, E., & Davis, G. K. (2006) · Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism · doi:10.1111/j.1463-1326.2006.00644.x · Cited by 10
Chronic kidney disease and long-term outcomes of myocardial infarction
Nagashima, M., Hagiwara, N., Koyanagi, R., et al. (2012) · International Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.04.049 · Cited by 10
Calcium channel blockers in the spectrum of antihypertensive agents
Liebson, P. R. (2006) · Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1517/14656566.7.17.2385 · Cited by 10
Hu, X., Zheng, Y., Sun, J., et al. (2009) · Chromatographia · doi:10.1365/s10337-009-1017-z · Cited by 10
Plasma Renin and Cardiovascular Risk: What Is the Evidence for an Association?
Volpe, M., & Unger, T. (2013) · Cardiology · doi:10.1159/000348365 · Cited by 11
Results of the ALLHAT Trial: Is the Debate About Initial Antihypertensive Drug Therapy Over?
Moser, M. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2003.02259.x · Cited by 10
Advances in the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: Relevance to Diabetic Nephropathy
Koı̈tka, A., & Tikellis, C. (2008) · The Scientific World JOURNAL · doi:10.1100/tsw.2008.69 · Cited by 10
Self-Medication Practices That Alter the Efficacy of Selected Cardiac Medications
Neafsey, P. J. (2004) · Home Healthcare Now · doi:10.1097/00004045-200402000-00007 · Cited by 10
Slowing the progression of kidney disease in patients with diabetes
Burgess, E. D. (2008) · Journal of the American Society of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/j.jash.2008.03.007 · Cited by 10
Osawa, H., Nakamura, N., Shirato, K.-I., et al. (2006) · The Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine · doi:10.1620/tjem.209.7 · Cited by 10
The effects of candesartan on diabetes glomerulopathy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Perrin, N., Jaremko, G., & Berg, U. (2008) · Pediatric Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s00467-008-0745-x · Cited by 10
Sica, D. A. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1751-7176.2011.00450.x · Cited by 11
Angiotensin AT1 and AT2 receptors the battle for health and disease
Siragy, H. M. (2007) · Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfm614 · Cited by 10
Approaches to Cardiovascular Disease and Its Treatment
Bloomgarden, Z. T. (2003) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.26.12.3342 · Cited by 10
End-Organ Protection in Patients with Hypertension
Tocci, G., & Volpe, M. (2011) · Drugs · doi:10.2165/11591350-000000000-00000 · Cited by 10
Hypertension and Diabetic Nephropathy
Skov, J., Christiansen, J. S., & Poulsen, P. L. (2016) · Endocrine development · doi:10.1159/000439393 · Cited by 10
Hsing, S.-C., Lu, K., Sun, C., Chien, W.-C., Chung, C., & Kao, S. (2015) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000001999 · Cited by 10
Short- and long-term effects of the use of RAAS blockers immediately after renal transplantation
Chatzikyrkou, C., Eichler, J., Karch, A., et al. (2016) · Blood Pressure · doi:10.1080/08037051.2016.1182856 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Brenner, B. M., Cooper, M. E., de Zeeuw, D., Keane, W. F., Mitch, W. E., Parving, H.-H., Remuzzi, G., Snapinn, S. M., Zhang, Z., & Shahinfar, S.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Hennepin County Medical Center (US)
- Emory University (US)
- Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research (IT)
- Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US)
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2001-09-20
- Volume
- 345
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 861-869
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2056976690
- Semantic Scholar
- 842bf4da2a50ee13464536c9dfa502f4eb80c5f1
- Cited by
- 7,493
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 180 · 2025: 233 · 2024: 211 · 2023: 248 · 2022: 235 · 2021: 240 · 2020: 263 · 2019: 204 · 2018: 212 · 2017: 233 · 2016: 243 · 2015: 249 · 2014: 289 · 2013: 288 · 2012: 341
- FWCI
- 280.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Renin-Angiotensin System Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Renal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
- Keywords
- losartan, type 2 diabetes, diabetic nephropathy, angiotensin receptor blockers, renin-angiotensin system blockade, end-stage renal disease, kidney disease progression, proteinuria, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, heart failure hospitalization, serum creatinine doubling, antihypertensive therapy
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Cardiovascular Diseases, Creatine, Creatinine, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Nephropathies, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Male, Middle Aged, Proteinuria, Disease Progression, Losartan, Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-16, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-16 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
