Article

Effect of chelation therapy on progressive diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes and high-normal body lead burdens.

Division of Clinical Toxicology, Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Lin-Kou Medical Center, Chang Gung University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.
American Journal of Kidney Diseases (Impact Factor: 5.29). 06/2012; 60(4):530-8. DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2012.04.028
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A previous study in type 2 diabetic patients with high-normal body lead burdens showed that EDTA chelation therapy for 3 months slows progressive diabetic nephropathy during a 12-month follow-up. The effect of a longer course of therapy on kidney function decrease over a longer follow-up is not known.
A 12-month run-in phase, then a randomized single-blind study with a 27-month intervention.
University medical center; 50 patients (serum creatinine, 1.5-3.9 mg/dL) with high-normal body lead burden (≥80-<600 μg) were randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups.
The treatment group received weekly chelation therapy for 3 months to reduce their body lead burden to <60 μg and then as needed for 24 months to maintain this level. The control group received placebo for 3 months and then weekly for 5 weeks at 6-month intervals for 24 months.
The primary end point was change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over time. A secondary end point was a 2-fold increase in baseline serum creatinine level or the requirement for renal replacement therapy.
Body lead burdens were assessed by EDTA mobilization tests and eGFR was calculated using the equation for Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.
Mean baseline eGFRs in the treatment and control groups were similar. After 3 months of chelation therapy, the change in eGFR in the treatment group (+1.0±4.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) differed significantly from that in the control group (-1.5±4.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2); P = 0.04). In the subsequent 24-month intervention, the yearly rate of decrease in eGFR (5.6±5.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year) in the treatment group was slower than that (9.2±3.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2) per year; P = 0.04) in the control group. 17 (68%) control-group patients and 9 (36%) treatment-group patients achieved the secondary end point.
Small sample size, not double blind.
A 27-month course of EDTA chelation therapy retards the progression of diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetic patients with high-normal body lead burdens.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
92 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whether environmental lead exposure has a long-term effect on progressive diabetic nephropathy in type II diabetic patients remains unclear. A total of 107 type II diabetic patients with stage 3 diabetic nephropathy (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) range, 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) with normal body lead burden (BLB) (<600 μ g/72 hr in EDTA mobilization tests) and no history of exposure to lead were prospectively followed for 2 years. Patients were divided into high-normal BLB (>80 μ g) and low-normal BLB (<80 μ g) groups. The primary outcome was a 2-fold increase in the initial creatinine levels, long-term dialysis, or death. The secondary outcome was a change in eGFR over time. Forty-five patients reached the primary outcome within 2 years. Although there were no differences in baseline data and renal function, progressive nephropathy was slower in the low-normal BLB group than that in the high-normal BLB group. During the study period, we demonstrated that each 100 μ g increment in BLB and each 10 μ g increment in blood lead levels could decrease GFR by 2.2 mL/min/1.72 m(2) and 3.0 mL/min/1.72 m(2) (P = 0.005), respectively, as estimated by generalized equations. Moreover, BLB was associated with increased risk of achieving primary outcome. Environmental exposure to lead may have a long-term effect on progressive diabetic nephropathy in type II diabetic patients.
    BioMed research international. 01/2013; 2013:742545.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: <0.001) for over 5 years. The result remained significant after Bonferroni adjustment for multiple subgroups (99.4% CI, 0.39-0.88; adjusted P=0.002). All-cause mortality was reduced by EDTA chelation (10% versus 16%; hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.88; P=0.011), as was the secondary end point (cardiovascular death, reinfarction, or stroke; 11% versus 17%; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.91; P=0.017). However, after adjusting for multiple subgroups, those results were no longer significant. The number needed to treat to reduce 1 primary end point over 5 years was 6.5 (95% CI, 4.4-12.7). There was no reduction in events in non-diabetes mellitus (n=1075; P=0.877), resulting in a treatment by diabetes mellitus interaction (P=0.004). . Unique identifier: NCT00044213.
    Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 11/2013; · 5.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The heavy metal lead (Pb) is a major environmental and occupational hazard. Epidemiological studies have demonstrated a strong association between lead exposure and the presence of chronic kidney injury. Some studies have suggested that chelation therapy with calcium disodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (calcium disodium EDTA) might help decrease the progression of chronic kidney disease among patients with measurable body lead burdens. However, calcium disodium EDTA chelation in lead exposure is controversial due to the potential for adverse effects such as acute tubular necrosis. Therefore, we investigated the available randomized controlled trials assessing the renoprotective effects of calcium disodium EDTA chelation therapy. Our meta-analysis shows that calcium disodium EDTA chelation therapy can effectively delay the progression of chronic kidney disease in patients with measurable body lead burdens reflected by increasing the levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and creatinine clearance rate (Ccr). There appears to be no conclusive evidence that calcium disodium EDTA can decrease proteinuria.
    Nephrology 01/2014; 19(1):56-9. · 1.69 Impact Factor