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
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe 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
“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 4,301–4,400 of 7,495
Feghali, R. E., Nisse-Durgeat, S., & Asmar, R. G. (2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 9
Angiotensin Type 1 Receptor Blockers in Chronic Kidney Disease
Suzuki, H. (2004) · KARGER eBooks · doi:10.1159/000078719 · Cited by 9
Takihata, M., Nakamura, A., Kondo, Y., Kawasaki, S., Kimura, M., & Terauchi, Y. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125519 · Cited by 9
Fisher, W. G., Lucas, J., Mehdi, U. F., Qunibi, D. W., Garner, H. R., Rosenblatt, K. P., & Toto, R. D. (2011) · PROTEOMICS - CLINICAL APPLICATIONS · doi:10.1002/prca.201000156 · Cited by 8
Do β-blockers combined with RAS inhibitors make sense after all to protect against renal injury?
Ritz, E., & Rump, L. C. (2007) · Current Hypertension Reports · doi:10.1007/s11906-007-0075-6 · Cited by 9
Sasatomi, Y., Kaneoka, H., Abe, Y., et al. (2009) · Clinical and Experimental Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s10157-009-0191-5 · Cited by 9
Morita, S., Fukuhara, S., Akizawa, T., et al. (2005) · Clinical and Experimental Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s10157-005-0358-7 · Cited by 9
Ding, S., Liu, J., Fu, Q., & Zheng, Y. (2013) · Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics · doi:10.1016/j.archger.2013.04.006 · Cited by 9
Kamijima, Y., Ooba, N., Yagame, M., Samizo, K., Shimodozono, Y., Kageyama, S., Horiguchi, S., Nagai, R., Kusunoki, T., & Kubota, K. (2008) · Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · doi:10.1002/pds.1609 · Cited by 9
New short interfering RNA-based therapies for glomerulonephritis
Shimizu, H., & Fujita, T. (2011) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/nrneph.2011.61 · Cited by 9
Vasoactive Hormones and the Diabetic Kidney
Maric, C. (2008) · TheScientificWorldJournal · doi:10.1100/tsw.2008.57 · Cited by 10
Optimising management of chronic heart failure
Krum, H. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61992-9 · Cited by 8
The organ-protective effect of N-type Ca(2+) channel blockade.
Kuwahara, K., & Kimura, T. (2015) · Pharmacology and Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2015.02.001 · Cited by 8
Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers: The Importance of Dose in Cardiovascular and Renal Risk Reduction
Weir, M. R. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2006.03473.x · Cited by 9
Prevalence of Appropriate Management of Diabetes Mellitus in an Academic General Medicine Clinic
Singh, P., Aronow, W. S., Mellana, W. M., et al. (2010) · American Journal of Therapeutics · doi:10.1097/mjt.0b013e3181822e78 · Cited by 9
Sato, E., Amaha, M., Nomura, M., et al. (2014) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2014.08.012 · Cited by 9
Vestra, M. D., Simioni, N., & Masiero, A. (2008) · International Urology and Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s11255-008-9490-0 · Cited by 9
Losartan in Cardiovascular Disease
de Vogel, S., Hoorn, E. J., & Papademetriou, V. (2005) · Future Cardiology · doi:10.2217/14796678.1.4.433 · Cited by 8
Value of Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Therapy in Diabetes
Izzo, J. L., & Zion, A. S. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1751-7176.2011.00447.x · Cited by 9
Trinkley, K. E., Nikels, S. M., Page, R. L., II, & Joy, M. S. (2014) · International Journal of General Medicine · doi:10.2147/ijgm.s61795 · Cited by 9
Stafylas, P. C., Sarafidis, P. A., Grekas, D. M., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2007.07182.x · Cited by 9
Sim, J. J., Shi, J. M., Al‐Moomen, R., et al. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.12419 · Cited by 9
Weiss, J. W., Thorp, M. L., & O’Hare, A. M. (2010) · Current Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · doi:10.1097/mnh.0b013e32833b8d6b · Cited by 9
Telmisartan in High-Risk Cardiovascular Patients
Weber, M. A. (2009) · The American Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.10.008 · Cited by 11
Rationale for Combining Blockers of the Renin-Angiotensin System
Azizi, M., & Wuerzner, G. (2007) · Seminars in Nephrology · doi:10.1016/j.semnephrol.2007.07.002 · Cited by 10
Dimitrov, B. D., Ruggenenti, P. L., Stefanov, R. S., Perna, A., & Remuzzi, G. (2003) · Nephron Clinical Practice · doi:10.1159/000073668 · Cited by 9
Self-citationKarabsheh, S. M., Verma, D. R., Jain, M., et al. (2011) · The American Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.07.059 · Cited by 9
Hypertension and the Older Diabetic
Aronow, W. S. (2008) · Clinics in Geriatric Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.cger.2008.03.001 · Cited by 9
Candesartan for the prevention and treatment of stroke ? results of the SCOPE and ACCESS trials
Doggrell, S. A. (2004) · Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1517/14656566.5.3.687 · Cited by 9
Renal Interstitial Fibrosis and Angiotensin Inhibition
Koo, J. W. (2006) · Electrolytes & Blood Pressure · doi:10.5049/ebp.2006.4.1.35 · Cited by 9
Hogan, D., Lurbe, E., Salabat, M. R., et al. (2002) · Current Diabetes Reports · doi:10.1007/s11892-002-0125-z · Cited by 9
Therapeutic potential of angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertension
Cheung, B. M. Y. (2006) · Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs · doi:10.1517/13543784.15.6.625 · Cited by 10
Benazepril slows progression of renal dysfunction in patients with non‐diabetic renal disease
Ishimitsu, T., Akashiba, A., Kameda, T., Takahashi, T., Ohta, S., Yoshii, M., Minami, J., Ono, H., Numabe, A., & Matsuoka, H. (2007) · Nephrology · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1797.2007.00786.x · Cited by 9
Nodular glomerulosclerosis and renin angiotensin system in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes
Wang, M., Zhang, X., Song, X.-N., Zou, X., Wu, W., Wang, Y., Lin, B., Li, R., Hu, F., & Zhao, H. (2016) · Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.mce.2016.03.008 · Cited by 9
Fliser, D., Dellanna, F., Koch, M., and, Wiggenhauser, A., & on behalf of the PRIMAVERA study group (2016) · Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfw418 · Cited by 9
Recent Advances in Management of Diabetic Nephropathy
Din, U. A. S. E., Salem, M. M., & Abdulazim, D. O. (2017) · World Journal of Nephrology · doi:10.21767/2472-5056.100035 · Cited by 9
Patney, V., Chaudhary, K. R., & Whaley‐Connell, A. T. (2018) · Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease · doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2017.11.002 · Cited by 9
Zhang, Z., Li, X., Liu, L., Sun, J., Wang, X., Zhao, Z., & Yang, Y. (2018) · Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · doi:10.1155/2018/1913691 · Cited by 9
Self-citationIDEAL-2 Study Team, Taheri, S., Asim, M. A., et al. (2018) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-018-2616-5 · Cited by 9
Shah, S. R., & Winchester, D. E. (2018) · Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1080/17512433.2018.1479252 · Cited by 9
Ruiz‐García, A., Arranz-Martínez, E., Merchante, I. M., Fuster, V. P., Tamarit, J. J., Trias, F., Pintó, X., & Ascaso, J. F. (2018) · Clínica e Investigación en Arteriosclerosis · doi:10.1016/j.arteri.2018.06.006 · Cited by 12
Evaluation of Surrogate End Points for Progression to ESKD: Necessary and Challenging
Inker, L. A., & Heerspink, H. J. L. (2018) · American Journal of Kidney Diseases · doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2018.08.017 · Cited by 9
Hypertension Management in Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Thomas, G. (2019) · Cardiology Clinics · doi:10.1016/j.ccl.2019.04.006 · Cited by 10
Pladys, A., Couchoud, C., LeGuillou, A., et al. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125089 · Cited by 9
A narrative review of new treatment options for chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes
Persson, F., Borg, R., & Rossing, P. R. (2021) · Annals of Translational Medicine · doi:10.21037/atm-20-4841 · Cited by 10
Borrelli, S., Nicola, L. D., Conte, G., & Minutolo, R. (2018) · Updates in hypertension and cardiovascular protection · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59918-2_21 · Cited by 9
Hypertension in Chronic Kidney Disease
Toto, R. D. (2004) · Humana Press eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-59259-757-4_3 · Cited by 9
Oxidative Stress and Hypoxia in the Pathogenesis of Diabetic Nephropathy
Palm, F., Nordquist, L., Wilcox, C. S., & Hansell, P. (2010) · Humana Press eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-857-7_29 · Cited by 9
Losartan: lessons learned from the RENAAL study
Shahinfar, S., Lyle, P. A., Zhang, Z., Keane, W. F., & Brenner, B. M. (2006) · Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1517/14656566.7.5.623 · Cited by 9
Self-citationDrazen, J. M., Ingelfinger, J. R., & Curfman, G. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejme030095 · Cited by 9
Maillard, M. P., & Burnier, M. (2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 9
Managing the patient at risk for a second stroke
Weber, M. A. (2005) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/01.hjh.0000165627.64686.cc · Cited by 9
Inclusion of albumin as a target in therapy guidelines: Guidelines for chronic kidney disease
Warnock, D. G. (2004) · Kidney International · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.09230.x · Cited by 9
Locatelli, F., Vecchio, L. D., Pozzoni, P., et al. (2004) · Kidney International · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.09304.x · Cited by 9
Accessory Renal Arteries—Mostly, But Not Always, Innocuous
Kem, D. C., Lyons, D. F., Wenzl, J. E., Halverstadt, D. B., & Xiao, Y. (2005) · Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · doi:10.1681/asn.2005101131 · Cited by 8
Ragucci, E., Zonszein, J., & Frishman, W. H. (2003) · Heart Disease · doi:10.1097/01.hdx.0000050411.62103.f5 · Cited by 9
Palmer, A. J., Valentine, W. J., Ray, J. A., Roze, S., & Muszbek, N. (2007) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-006-0033-2 · Cited by 9
Manrique, C. M., Lastra, G., Palmer, J. C., Stump, C. S., & Sowers, J. R. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2006.05379.x · Cited by 9
Microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients: Evaluation of one-year treatment with irbesartan
de Álvaro, F., Velasco, O., Honorato, J., Calvo, C., & PARRONDO, I. (2004) · Kidney International · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.09307.x · Cited by 9
Tamura, Y., Kosuga, M., Yamashita, M., Tomioka, S., Sasaki, M., Hikita, T., Nakajima, H., Kojima, K., & Uchida, S. (2008) · Clinical and Experimental Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s10157-008-0040-y · Cited by 9
Seki, N., Hashimoto, N., Suzuki, Y., Yagui, K., & Saito, Y. (2005) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2005.09.015 · Cited by 9
Treatment of hypertension in patients with nondiabetic chronic kidney disease
Ruzicka, M., Burns, K. D., Culleton, B. F., et al. (2007) · Canadian Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/s0828-282x(07)70808-5 · Cited by 9
Combination renin-angiotensin system blockade with the renin inhibitor aliskiren in hypertension
Doulton, T. W. R., & MacGregor, G. A. (2009) · Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System · doi:10.1177/1470320309342733 · Cited by 9
An update on proteinuric chronic kidney disease: The dual-goal approach
HIRSCH, S. (2008) · Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine · doi:10.3949/ccjm.75.10.705 · Cited by 9
Drug Treatment of Systolic and of Diastolic Heart Failure in Elderly Persons
Aronow, W. S. (2005) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A · doi:10.1093/gerona/60.12.1597 · Cited by 9
Review: Angiotensin II receptor blockers and cardiovascular outcomes: what does the future hold?
Weber, M. A. (2003) · Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System · doi:10.3317/jraas.2003.015 · Cited by 9
Ribeiro, A. B., & Gavras, H. P. (2006) · Arquivos Brasileiros de Endocrinologia & Metabologia · doi:10.1590/s0004-27302006000200019 · Cited by 9
The role of the kidney in cardiovascular medicine
Ritz, E. (2005) · European Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2005.01.009 · Cited by 9
Pharmacoeconomical Evaluation of Combination Therapy for Lifetime Hypertension Treatment in Japan
Saito, I., Kobayashi, M., Matsushita, Y., et al. (2005) · Cited by 9
Regression of Microalbuminuria in???Type 2 Diabetics after Switch to???Irbesartan Treatment
Lehnert, H., Bramlage, P., Pittrow, D., & Kirch, W. (2004) · Clinical Drug Investigation · doi:10.2165/00044011-200424040-00003 · Cited by 9
Waeber, B., de la Sierra, A., & Ruilope, L. M. (2009) · American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs · doi:10.2165/10061600-000000000-00000 · Cited by 9
Kocks, M. J. A., de Zeeuw, D., & Navis, G. J. (2002) · Current Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · doi:10.1097/00041552-200203000-00002 · Cited by 9
Executive summary of the African-American Initiative.
Yancy, C. W. (2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 9
Angiotensin Type 2 Receptor (AT2R): A Challenging Twin
Berk, B. C. (2003) · Science Signaling · doi:10.1126/scisignal.1812003pe16 · Cited by 9
Diabetic Renal Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Mogensen, C. E. (2002) · Treatments in Endocrinology · doi:10.2165/00024677-200201010-00001 · Cited by 9
CARDS on the table: should everybody with type 2 diabetes take a statin?
Lee, J. D., Morrissey, J., Mikhailidis, D. P., & Patel, V. (2005) · Current Medical Research and Opinion · doi:10.1185/030079905x36413 · Cited by 11
Editorial World Kidney Day 2011: Protect your kidneys, save your heart
Couser, W. G., & RIELLA, M. C. (2011) · Archives of Medical Science · doi:10.5114/aoms.2011.20596 · Cited by 9
Renal Function and Heart Failure Treatment
Konstam, M. A. (2011) · Circulation Heart Failure · doi:10.1161/circheartfailure.111.964874 · Cited by 9
Emerging epigenetic modifications in renal fibrosis: From mechanisms to treatments
Suo, X., Ge, Q., Peng, L., Zhu, Q., Zhang, M., Cheng, X., Wang, F., Jin, J., Wang, J., & Meng, X. (2025) · Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B · doi:10.1016/j.apsb.2025.09.012 · Cited by 8
“ACEIs and ARBs play crucial roles in preventing the progression of microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria, and reducing glomerular pressure, decreasing proteinuria 8-10 .”
Chronic Kidney Disease in Brazil: Current Status and Recommended Improvements
Bauer, A. C., Elias, R. M., Abensur, H., Batista, M. C., Jansen, A. M., & RIELLA, M. C. (2024) · Kidney Diseases · doi:10.1159/000538068 · Cited by 13
Tungsanga, S., Fung, W. W., Okpechi, I. G., Ye, F., Ghimire, A., Li, P. K., Shlipak, M. G., Tummalapalli, S. L., Arruebo, S., Caskey, F. J., et al. (2024) · American Journal of Kidney Diseases · doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2024.03.024 · Cited by 8
Obrador, G. T., Álvarez-Estévez, G., Bellorín-Font, E., Bonanno-Hidalgo, C., Clavero, R., Correa‐Rotter, R., Diná-Batlle, E., Morales, L., Orozco, R., Ortiz, F., et al. (2024) · Nefrología Latinoamericana · doi:10.24875/nefro.m24000037 · Cited by 12
Lamb, E. J., Barratt, J., Brettell, E. A., Cockwell, P., Dalton, R. N., Deeks, J. J., Eaglestone, G., Pellatt‐Higgins, T., Kalra, P. A., Khunti, K., et al. (2023) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hyhn1078 · Cited by 11
Ma, D., Zhang, J., Du, L., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2024.1418588 · Cited by 8
Luo, R., Yang, K., Wang, F., Zheng, H., & Yang, T. (2024) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.123.21740 · Cited by 9
Hishida, E., & Nagata, D. (2024) · Kidney & Blood Pressure Research · doi:10.1159/000541939 · Cited by 10
Montero, N., Oliveras, L., Martínez‐Castelao, A., Górriz, J. L., Soler, M. J., Fernández‐Fernández, B., Quero, M., García-Carro, C., García-Sancho, P., Goicoechea, M., et al. (2025) · Nefrología (English Edition) · doi:10.1016/j.nefroe.2025.04.005 · Cited by 10
Balancing Efficiency and Equity in Population-Wide CKD Screening
Cusick, M. M., Tisdale, R. L., Adams, A. S., Chertow, G. M., Owens, D. K., Salomon, J. A., & Goldhaber‐Fiebert, J. D. (2025) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.4740 · Cited by 10
Hashimoto, N., Sakaguchi, Y., Hattori, K., Kawano, Y., Kawaoka, T., Doi, Y., Oka, T., Kusunoki, Y., Yamamoto, S., Yamato, M., et al. (2025) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-025-02218-8 · Cited by 9
Moore, H. J., Wu, W., Heidenreich, P. A., Rossignol, P., Patel, S. S., Lu, F., Lam, P. H., Ahmed, A. A., Faselis, C. J., Butler, J., et al. (2025) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2025.05.024 · Cited by 8
Anumas, S., & Inagi, R. (2025) · Nephrology · doi:10.1111/nep.70098 · Cited by 11
Azegami, T., Kaneko, H., Okada, A., Suzuki, Y., Aoyama, K., Nakayama, T., Fujiu, K., Takeda, N., Morita, H., Yokoo, T., et al. (2025) · Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism · doi:10.1111/dom.70020 · Cited by 9
Residual Renal Risk in Diabetic Nephropathy Despite Contemporary Therapies
Speeckaert, R., Delrue, C., & Speeckaert, M. M. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm15030921 · Cited by 15
Onuigbo, M. A. C. (2013) · Nephron Extra · doi:10.1159/000351044 · Cited by 7
Vu, B. N., Castro, A. M. D., Shottland, D., Frishman, W. H., & Cheng-Lai, A. (2016) · Cardiology in Review · doi:10.1097/crd.0000000000000123 · Cited by 8
Schernthaner, G., Jarvis, S., Lotan, C., Prázný, M., Wanner, C., & Wascher, T. C. (2017) · Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management · doi:10.2147/tcrm.s121804 · Cited by 9
Agarwal, S., Saikia, U., Sarma, D., & Devi, R. (2018) · Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism · doi:10.4103/ijem.ijem_303_17 · Cited by 11
Vitamin D and the Renin-Angiotensin System
Li, Y. C. (2017) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-809965-0.00045-8 · Cited by 9
Not all proteinuria is created equal
Beenken, A., Barasch, J. M., & Gharavi, A. G. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci133250 · Cited by 8
Management of proteinuria: blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system
Athavale, A., & Roberts, D. M. (2020) · Australian Prescriber · doi:10.18773/austprescr.2020.021 · Cited by 9
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
