Clinical potential of aldose reductase inhibitors in diabetic neuropathy.

Yoji Hamada, Jiro Nakamura
{"title":"Clinical potential of aldose reductase inhibitors in diabetic neuropathy.","authors":"Yoji Hamada,&nbsp;Jiro Nakamura","doi":"10.2165/00024677-200403040-00006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A number of aldose reductase inhibitors (ARIs) have been developed over the past few decades with the expectation of therapeutic effects for diabetic complications. Neuropathy is the complication that has been most intensively studied as a potential target for ARIs. Most ARIs have shown satisfactory effects in animal models. However, the clinical potential of ARIs in diabetic patients has been controversial due to the lack of conclusive evidence. The safety of this category of drugs is also uncertain. This article summarizes the results of clinical trials of ARIs for patients with diabetic neuropathy that have been performed to date. The efficacy and toxicity of each ARI will be briefly assessed by the clinical data. The theoretical background along with major issues in the evaluation of drug efficacy will also be discussed. Overall the observed efficacy varied among the compounds. A few ARIs showed favorable effects in multiple endpoints in the majority of trials, while the results from many ARIs seemed ambivalent. One drug barely exhibited positive effects on any endpoint. This discrepancy may be attributable at least in part to the different degree of inhibition of the polyol pathway in nerve tissues, which is determined not only by the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug but also by its penetration into nerve tissues. In addition to the uncertain potential of each ARI, the issues of design and analytical methods used for clinical trials may underlie the ambivalent outcomes. The power of analysis and the duration of trials were apparently inadequate in a large number of the studies. Various indices selected as endpoints are not necessarily sensitive or reproducible. Studies of longer duration, large-scale trials, better methods to assess neuropathy, and the selection of patients with a homogenous background would provide more conclusive evidence. The risk of serious adverse reactions, for example, hypersensitivity reactions and hepatic damage, has led to some ARIs being withdrawn from the market or from further development. These adverse effects, however, do not appear to result from the inhibition of aldose reductase activity per se but from specific reactions to each compound. In conclusion, sufficient inhibition of the nerve aldose reductase activity seems likely to prevent or ameliorate diabetic neuropathy, and further development of more potent and safe ARIs is necessary before extensive clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":23310,"journal":{"name":"Treatments in Endocrinology","volume":"3 4","pages":"245-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2165/00024677-200403040-00006","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Treatments in Endocrinology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2165/00024677-200403040-00006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

A number of aldose reductase inhibitors (ARIs) have been developed over the past few decades with the expectation of therapeutic effects for diabetic complications. Neuropathy is the complication that has been most intensively studied as a potential target for ARIs. Most ARIs have shown satisfactory effects in animal models. However, the clinical potential of ARIs in diabetic patients has been controversial due to the lack of conclusive evidence. The safety of this category of drugs is also uncertain. This article summarizes the results of clinical trials of ARIs for patients with diabetic neuropathy that have been performed to date. The efficacy and toxicity of each ARI will be briefly assessed by the clinical data. The theoretical background along with major issues in the evaluation of drug efficacy will also be discussed. Overall the observed efficacy varied among the compounds. A few ARIs showed favorable effects in multiple endpoints in the majority of trials, while the results from many ARIs seemed ambivalent. One drug barely exhibited positive effects on any endpoint. This discrepancy may be attributable at least in part to the different degree of inhibition of the polyol pathway in nerve tissues, which is determined not only by the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug but also by its penetration into nerve tissues. In addition to the uncertain potential of each ARI, the issues of design and analytical methods used for clinical trials may underlie the ambivalent outcomes. The power of analysis and the duration of trials were apparently inadequate in a large number of the studies. Various indices selected as endpoints are not necessarily sensitive or reproducible. Studies of longer duration, large-scale trials, better methods to assess neuropathy, and the selection of patients with a homogenous background would provide more conclusive evidence. The risk of serious adverse reactions, for example, hypersensitivity reactions and hepatic damage, has led to some ARIs being withdrawn from the market or from further development. These adverse effects, however, do not appear to result from the inhibition of aldose reductase activity per se but from specific reactions to each compound. In conclusion, sufficient inhibition of the nerve aldose reductase activity seems likely to prevent or ameliorate diabetic neuropathy, and further development of more potent and safe ARIs is necessary before extensive clinical application.

醛糖还原酶抑制剂治疗糖尿病神经病变的临床潜力。
在过去的几十年里,许多醛糖还原酶抑制剂(ARIs)被开发出来,期望对糖尿病并发症有治疗作用。神经病变是作为ARIs的潜在靶点而被广泛研究的并发症。大多数体外循环在动物模型上显示出令人满意的效果。然而,由于缺乏确凿的证据,ARIs在糖尿病患者中的临床潜力一直存在争议。这类药物的安全性也不确定。本文总结了迄今为止ARIs治疗糖尿病性神经病变的临床试验结果。每种ARI的疗效和毒性将根据临床数据进行简要评估。本文还将讨论药物疗效评价的理论背景和主要问题。总的来说,观察到的疗效在不同的化合物之间有所不同。在大多数试验中,一些ARIs在多个终点显示出良好的效果,而许多ARIs的结果似乎是矛盾的。一种药物几乎没有在任何终点显示出积极作用。这种差异可能至少部分归因于多元醇途径在神经组织中的抑制程度不同,这不仅取决于药物的药代动力学特性,还取决于其对神经组织的渗透。除了每种ARI的不确定潜力之外,用于临床试验的设计和分析方法的问题可能是矛盾结果的基础。在大量的研究中,分析的力量和试验的持续时间显然不足。作为终点的各种指标不一定是敏感的或可重复的。更长时间的研究,大规模的试验,更好的方法来评估神经病变,并选择具有同质背景的患者将提供更确凿的证据。严重不良反应的风险,例如过敏反应和肝损害,已导致一些ARIs退出市场或停止进一步开发。然而,这些不良反应似乎不是由于醛糖还原酶活性本身的抑制,而是由于对每种化合物的特定反应。总之,充分抑制神经醛糖还原酶活性似乎有可能预防或改善糖尿病神经病变,在广泛临床应用之前,有必要进一步开发更有效、更安全的ARIs。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信