OBJECTIVE—To study whether administration of 1.25 and 5.0 mg ramipril daily, compared with placebo treatment, reduces the urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) in normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Ramipril was administered double blind at two different doses (1.25 [n = 19] and 5.0 mg [n = 18]), and compared with placebo (n = 18) after a single-blind placebo period of 1–4 weeks. The patients (total, n = 55; women, n = 14) were followed for 2 years. To document an effect on the renin-angiotensin system, ACE activity and plasma-renin activity (PRA) were measured. In addition, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was recorded at baseline and repeated after 1 and 2 years using a Spacelab 90207 ambulatory BP recording device (Spacelab, Redmont, CA).

RESULTS—Both doses of ramipril were sufficient to reduce ACE activity and to increase PRA significantly as compared with placebo (P < 0.05 for both). On the other hand, neither ambulatory nor clinic BP was affected by either dose of ramipril compared with the placebo group. There was no progression of UAER in the placebo group during the 2 years of the study. Analysis of covariance showed no differences in UAER between the three treatment groups at year 1 (P = 0.94) or year 2 (P = 0.97), after adjusting for baseline. Furthermore, there were no statistically significant changes from baseline UAER within any of the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS—Treatment with ramipril did not affect microalbuminuria or clinic or ambulatory BP in this study. On the basis of the present study, we question the clinical use of ACE inhibitors in stably normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria in whom a concomitant reduction in BP is not demonstrated.

ACE inhibitors are often prescribed to normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria (1). Numerous reports have proved that treatment with ACE inhibitors reduces the urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) in this particular category of patients (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16). However, many of these trials were of rather short duration or contained only a small number of patients (2,3,4,5,6,7,8). When the effect of ACE inhibitors on UAER has been compared with that of other antihypertensive drugs, a more profound reduction has often been achieved with ACE inhibition (2,7,8,10). Demonstration of a reduction in UAER, even after correction for changes in blood pressure (BP) (17), and two large studies of the short-acting ACE inhibitor captopril (9,11) also implicate that pharmacological inhibition of ACE confers renoprotective effects that are independent of changes in BP in normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes.

We aimed to study whether the reduction of UAER in normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes is dependent on changes of BP or if interference with the renin-angiotensin system is, in itself, sufficient to explain the effects of ACE inhibition on UAER. We thus performed a 2-year study of the long-acting ACE inhibitor ramipril compared with placebo in normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes. Ramipril was administered at two different doses: 1.25 and 5.0 mg; the lower dose was assumed not to reduce BP (18,19). To document an effect on the renin-angiotensin system, ACE activity and plasma-renin activity (PRA) were monitored during the study. Because 24-h ambulatory BP (ABP) correlates better with target organ damage (20) and provides higher reproducibility than clinic BP (21), we recorded ABP as well as regular clinic BP to assess the magnitude of the antihypertensive effect of ramipril.

Subjects

The study was performed at six centers in Sweden. We consecutively recruited 55 normotensive patients with microalbuminuria (clinic diastolic BP <90 mmHg) defined as 20–200 μg/min UAER in two of three urine collections. Two additional urine collections were used to estimate baseline UAER after a single-blind placebo period of 1–4 weeks. Patients treated with any form of antihypertensive medication were not considered for participation. Subjects were then randomized, double-blind, to receive either placebo or ramipril (1.25 or 5.0 mg) once daily in the morning.

Methods

Determinations of ACE activity and PRA were performed at 0, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months of treatment. The methods for analysis of ACE and PRA have been published earlier (22). Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was determined by iohexol clearance at 0, 6, 12, and 24 months of treatment (23). Collection of urine for analysis of urinary albumin was performed in duplicate every 3 months. Determination of urinary albumin levels was performed by radioimmunoassay. Levels of HbA1c was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography.

Spacelab 90207 ABP recording devices (Spacelab, Redmont, CA) were used to record 24-h ABP at baseline and after 1 and 2 years, as described previously (24). BP was recorded every 20 min during the day (0600–2200) and during the night (2200–0600). Every 3 months, clinic BP was measured twice by a nurse, after 5 and 6 min of rest, in the supine position. The mean value of the two recordings was calculated. The standard cuff size used was 12 cm wide × 32 cm long for arm circumferences <36 cm. If the arm circumference exceeded 36 cm, a 14-cm-wide cuff was used. Phase I and V Korotkoff sounds were defined as systolic and diastolic BP, respectively.

Ethics

The study was approved by the ethics committee at Linköping University Hospital (Linköping, Sweden), and all subjects gave informed consent.

Statistics

The use of parametric or nonparametric statistical methods is given elsewhere in the text. Statistical significance was considered at the 5% level (P = 0.05). It was calculated that a total of 55 subjects was needed to achieve >90% power to detect a 50% reduction in UAER for active treatment compared with no change with placebo treatment.

There were no differences between the groups regarding proportions of men and women, age of the subjects, duration of diabetes, or HbA1c levels (Table 1). HbA1c was unaffected by treatment, and the levels remained stable in all three treatment groups throughout the study.

Effect of treatment on ACE activity, levels of PRA, and BP

Both doses of ramipril were sufficient to decrease ACE activity and to increase PRA significantly as compared with placebo (Figs. 1A and B). After 2 years of treatment, ACE activity was approximately halved in both groups treated with ramipril, and PRA was almost doubled as compared with placebo. On the other hand, neither ambulatory nor clinic BP was affected by either dose of ramipril compared with placebo (Table 2).

Effects of treatment on UAER

There was no progression of UAER in the placebo group during the 2 years of the study (Table 3). No regression to normoalbuminuria or development of macroproteinuria occurred in any patients during the study. There was no development of hypertension in any of the groups. Analysis of covariance showed no differences in UAER between the three treatment groups at year 1 (P = 0.94) or year 2 (P = 0.97) after adjusting for baseline (Table 3). These nonsignificant results were confirmed by rank analysis of covariance (year 1, P = 0.98; year 2, P = 0.82). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant changes from baseline UAER within any of the three treatment groups. There was, however, a significant correlation between the change in systolic (but not diastolic) clinic BP and change from baseline in UAER at year 2 (Spearman, r = 0.32, P = 0.02). No such significant correlation was found for clinic BP at year 1.

Effects of treatment on GFR

No statistically significant differences were found in baseline GFR between the groups (P = 0.77). GFR remained similar after 1 year (P = 0.17) and 2 years (P = 0.49) of treatment, adjusted for baseline in all three categories. Median values of GFR at each time point in the three groups are shown in Table 3.

Adverse events

In general, there were no differences between treatment groups regarding the proportion of subjects reporting adverse events (P = 0.8). All patients in the placebo group completed the study. Of the patients receiving 1.25 mg ramipril, two withdrew from the study. One withdrew because of arthralgia, which subsided after discontinuation of the drug. The withdrawal of the second patient from the study after 1 year was unrelated to any particular event or side effects. In the group receiving 5.0 mg ramipril, there were also two withdrawals. One was due to cough and one was due to feeling of faintness. The symptoms abated after discontinuation of the drug. The patients who withdrew from the study were used in the outcome calculations.

We found that both doses of ramipril, 1.25 mg or 5.0 mg given once daily, on average halved the ACE activity levels throughout the study, indicating a relevant pharmacological interference with the renin-angiotensin system. Furthermore, PRA was roughly doubled by ramipril, indirectly demonstrating decreased plasma concentrations of angiotensin II. Despite these proofs of pharmacological effects of ramipril, we somewhat surprisingly found no change in either clinic or ambulatory BP with either dose of ramipril. A small BP-reducing effect of ramipril when given to subjects not necessarily hypertensive (average BP, 139/79 mmHg) was found in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study, in which 10 mg ramipril (compared with placebo) decreased BP, on average, by 3/2 mmHg (25,26).

Despite an effect of both doses of ramipril on ACE activity and PRA levels, we found no reduction of the UAER. This is in contrast to most earlier studies of normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes, in which at least a trend toward an antiproteinuric effect of ACE inhibition compared with placebo was demonstrated (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17). However, in one small study by Chase et al. (27), therapy with captopril (n = 7) for 2 years did not affect UAER or BP as compared with placebo (n = 9), although the rate of progression of retinopathy was reduced. In contrast to the study presented here, the effects of ACE inhibition on levels of PRA or ACE activity levels was not assessed by Chase et al. (27) nor was ABP performed.

HbA1c was similar in the three treatment groups and remained stable during the study. The high-performance liquid chromatography method for HbA1c in our study gives values that, in general, are ∼1% lower than, for example, those of the U.K. (28). Thus, for comparison, the patients in our study were not under as good glycemic control as the group allocated to intensive treatment in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (29). A reduction of UAER by ACE inhibition was demonstrated earlier in patients with higher (12,14,30) as well as lower HbA1c levels (16) than patients in our study. This makes it unlikely that a trial difference with regard to glycemic control was the reason for the lack of effect of ramipril on UAER in our study.

We found no differences in UAER between the three groups, or changes from baseline, at any time point during the study. Again, this was true despite a powerful interference with the renin-angiotensin system. We were thus unable to test our hypothesis that 5.0 mg ramipril, which we had assumed would reduce BP in this study, compared with 1.25 mg ramipril, which was confirmed to lack effect on BP, would reduce UAER or cause a decline in GFR. On the other hand, the results of our study do suggest that both 1.25 and 5.0 mg ramipril once daily significantly affect PRA and ACE activity and that this magnitude (doubling of PRA and decreasing ACE activity to approximately half of baseline levels) of interference with the renin-angiotensin system does not decrease UAER in normotensive subjects in whom BP was not reduced. Considered together, our findings imply that a decrease in BP is the main cause of the UAER-reducing effect of ACE inhibition in normotensive subjects with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria. This interpretation was strengthened by the statistically significant correlation between the change in systolic BP and the change in UAER. This association suggests that some individuals did experience a decrease in BP and that this was correlated, on an individual level, with a reduction in UAER. On the other hand, it is even possible that some subjects experienced an increase in UAER and BP in parallel, which also serves to cause a positive correlation between changes in clinic BP and UAER. There was no progression of UAER in the placebo group in this study. It was found earlier that patients with diabetes of long duration have a slow progression of UAER and nephropathy (31). The patients in our study had an average duration of diabetes of >20 years. Thus, it is possible that this, together with reasonably good glycemic control, accounts for stable UAER in the control group.

The lack of an effect of ACE inhibition on UAER in this study was not due to the specific choice of ramipril. In the HOPE study (in the substudy micro-HOPE), it was clearly settled that ramipril reduces UAER as well as microangiopathy in subjects with diabetes (25,26). Furthermore, in the ATLANTIS study, comprising 120 normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria, 5.0 mg ramipril decreased BP and UAER. However, this study has hitherto only been published as an abstract (32).

The subjects in the study by Chase et al. (27) (in which no effect on UAER or BP was seen with treatment with captopril) had a mean BP of only 118/78 mmHg at baseline, which was even lower than that of the patients in our study. However, in other trials, patients have been recruited with clinic BP in the same strictly normotensive range as in our study, and still a reduction of UAER and BP was found by inhibition of ACE (9,15).

The main limitation of this study is the size. It is possible, although very unlikely, that it was underpowered to detect relevant changes in UAER. However, we believe that this was compensated for by frequent determination of UAER. Furthermore, we measured clinic as well as ABP, and a significant pharmacological effect of ACE inhibition was demonstrated on ACE activity and PRA levels. Because we did not find even a trend toward a reduction of UAER in this setting of normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbumuria, in whom BP was not reduced, we believe a statistical type II error is very unlikely. However, this cannot be entirely excluded.

Treatment with ramipril did not affect microalbuminuria, clinic BP, or ABP in our study. The quite general recommendation to treat normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria with ACE inhibitors (1) might need to be reconsidered. On the basis of the present study, we question the clinical use of ACE inhibitors in stably normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and microalbuminuria who do not demonstrate a concomitant reduction in BP.

Figure 1 —

A: Mean values of ACE activity at the different time points during therapy with ramipril 1.25 mg, ramipril 5.0 mg daily, or placebo. P < 0.001 for differences between either 1.25 or 5.0 mg ramipril daily at 24 months of treatment compared with placebo. B: Median values of PRA at the different time points during therapy with ramipril 1.25 mg, ramipril 5.0 mg daily, or placebo. P < 0.05 for differences between either 1.25 or 5.0 mg ramipril daily at 24 months of treatment compared with placebo.

Figure 1 —

A: Mean values of ACE activity at the different time points during therapy with ramipril 1.25 mg, ramipril 5.0 mg daily, or placebo. P < 0.001 for differences between either 1.25 or 5.0 mg ramipril daily at 24 months of treatment compared with placebo. B: Median values of PRA at the different time points during therapy with ramipril 1.25 mg, ramipril 5.0 mg daily, or placebo. P < 0.05 for differences between either 1.25 or 5.0 mg ramipril daily at 24 months of treatment compared with placebo.

Close modal
Table 1 —

Baseline characteristics of patients

Groupn (M/F)Age (years)Duration of diabetes (years)HbA1c (%)
Placebo 14/4 38 ± 9 21 ± 9 7.4 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 13/6 42 ± 10 28 ± 11 7.6 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 14/4 39 ± 10 22 ± 12 7.2 
Groupn (M/F)Age (years)Duration of diabetes (years)HbA1c (%)
Placebo 14/4 38 ± 9 21 ± 9 7.4 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 13/6 42 ± 10 28 ± 11 7.6 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 14/4 39 ± 10 22 ± 12 7.2 

Data are means ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

Table 2 —

Clinic and ambulatory BP at baseline and after 1 and 2 years of treatment

TreatmentBaseline BP (mmHg)BP after 1 year (mmHg)BP after 2 years (mmHg)
Placebo 
 Clinic BP 124 ± 13/78 ± 7.2 122 ± 8.9/77 ± 7.1 128 ± 13.9/80 ± 6.2 
 Daytime BP 138 ± 9.7/82 ± 6.0 134 ± 8.3/82 ± 5.3 134 ± 8.1/81 ± 6.4 
 Nighttime BP 124 ± 8.9/72 ± 7.8 121 ± 8.0/70 ± 6.9 120 ± 7.7/70 ± 5.8 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 
 Clinic BP 127 ± 12/76 ± 7.2 133 ± 14/74 ± 8.4 132 ± 14/77 ± 8.7 
 Daytime BP 136 ± 14/80 ± 8.6 132 ± 13/80 ± 6.2 134 ± 9.4/79 ± 7.5 
 Nighttime BP 123 ± 13/70 ± 8.0 119 ± 8.2/68 ± 5.8 121 ± 10/67 ± 6.2 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 
 Clinic BP 128 ± 12/75 ± 7.9 127 ± 12/74 ± 11 129 ± 13/77 ± 8.9 
 Daytime BP 134 ± 11/80 ± 6.3 130 ± 14/77 ± 6.3 132 ± 12/78 ± 7.2 
 Nighttime 123 ± 16/70 ± 10 118 ± 13/66 ± 5.7 118 ± 13/67 ± 8.2 
TreatmentBaseline BP (mmHg)BP after 1 year (mmHg)BP after 2 years (mmHg)
Placebo 
 Clinic BP 124 ± 13/78 ± 7.2 122 ± 8.9/77 ± 7.1 128 ± 13.9/80 ± 6.2 
 Daytime BP 138 ± 9.7/82 ± 6.0 134 ± 8.3/82 ± 5.3 134 ± 8.1/81 ± 6.4 
 Nighttime BP 124 ± 8.9/72 ± 7.8 121 ± 8.0/70 ± 6.9 120 ± 7.7/70 ± 5.8 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 
 Clinic BP 127 ± 12/76 ± 7.2 133 ± 14/74 ± 8.4 132 ± 14/77 ± 8.7 
 Daytime BP 136 ± 14/80 ± 8.6 132 ± 13/80 ± 6.2 134 ± 9.4/79 ± 7.5 
 Nighttime BP 123 ± 13/70 ± 8.0 119 ± 8.2/68 ± 5.8 121 ± 10/67 ± 6.2 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 
 Clinic BP 128 ± 12/75 ± 7.9 127 ± 12/74 ± 11 129 ± 13/77 ± 8.9 
 Daytime BP 134 ± 11/80 ± 6.3 130 ± 14/77 ± 6.3 132 ± 12/78 ± 7.2 
 Nighttime 123 ± 16/70 ± 10 118 ± 13/66 ± 5.7 118 ± 13/67 ± 8.2 

Data are means ± SD. There were no statistically significant differences in BP between the groups at any time point.

Table 3 —

UAER and GFR as estimated by iohexol clearance

TreatmentBaseline GFR (ml/min per 1.73 m2)GFR after 1 year (ml/min per 1.73 m2)GFR after 2 years (ml/min per 1.73 m2)Baseline UAER (μg/min)UAER after 1 year (μg/min)UAER after 2 years (μg/min)
Placebo 108 (49–138) 100 (78–145) 102 (60–173) 103 (49–202) 103 (22–338) 96 (48–308) 
 n = 16 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 100 (63–144) 102 (67–127) 95 (61–132) 109 (25–550) 110 (35–768) 94 (23–1,112) 
 n = 19 n = 17 n = 17 n = 19 n = 18 n = 17 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 100 (69–134) 115 (75–139) 104 (57–135) 69 (16–466) 78 (22–482) 81 (10–1,450) 
 n = 16 n = 15 n = 16 n = 18 n = 17 n = 16 
TreatmentBaseline GFR (ml/min per 1.73 m2)GFR after 1 year (ml/min per 1.73 m2)GFR after 2 years (ml/min per 1.73 m2)Baseline UAER (μg/min)UAER after 1 year (μg/min)UAER after 2 years (μg/min)
Placebo 108 (49–138) 100 (78–145) 102 (60–173) 103 (49–202) 103 (22–338) 96 (48–308) 
 n = 16 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 n = 18 
Ramipril 1.25 mg 100 (63–144) 102 (67–127) 95 (61–132) 109 (25–550) 110 (35–768) 94 (23–1,112) 
 n = 19 n = 17 n = 17 n = 19 n = 18 n = 17 
Ramipril 5.0 mg 100 (69–134) 115 (75–139) 104 (57–135) 69 (16–466) 78 (22–482) 81 (10–1,450) 
 n = 16 n = 15 n = 16 n = 18 n = 17 n = 16 

Data are median (range) from the treatment groups at 0, 1, and 2 years of treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at any time point.

This study was supported by a grant from Hoechst AG, later Aventis Pharma.

We thank A.M. Ottosson, P.O. Andersson, P. Kanulf, A. Sjostrand, K. Bunner, J. Saaw, and P. Nicol.

This study has been presented previously as an abstract in Diabetologia 40 (Suppl. 1):A544, 1997.

1
Cooper ME: Pathogenesis, prevention, and treatment of diabetic nephropathy.
Lancet
352
:
213
–219,
1998
2
Bilo H, Kluitman E, van Ballegooie E, Potter van Loon BJ, Bakker K, Michels B, Gans R, Donker A: Long term use of captopril or nifedipine in normotensive microalbuminuric patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
Diabetes Res
23
:
115
–122,
1993
3
Carella MJ, Gossain VV, Jones J: The effects of a low-dose regimen of fosinopril on elevated urinary albumin excretion in normotensive type 1 diabetic patients.
J Med
30
:
305
–320,
1999
4
Rudberg S, Aperia A, Freyschuss U, Persson B: Enalapril reduces microalbuminuria in young normotensive type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetic patients irrespective of its hypotensive effect.
Diabetologia
33
:
470
–476,
1990
5
Bakris GL, Slataper R, Vicknair N, Sadler R: ACE inhibitor mediated reductions in renal size and microalbuminuria in normotensive, diabetic subjects.
J Diabetes Complications
8
:
2
–6,
1994
6
Ciavarella A, Mustacchio A, Silletti A, Franchi R, Levorato M, Campieri C, Borgnino LC, Capozzi G, Morotti L, Vannini P: Low-dose angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors: effect on renal function in normo- and hypertensive type 1 diabetic patients.
Eur J Med
1
:
268
–272,
1992
7
De Cesaris R, Ranieri G, Andriani A, Lamontanara G, Cavallo A, Bonfantino MV, Bertocchi F: Effects of benazepril and nicardipine on microalbuminuria in normotensive and hypertensive patients with diabetes.
Clin Pharmacol Ther
60
:
472
–478,
1996
8
Mimran A, Insua A, Ribstein J, Bringer J, Monnier L: Comparative effect of captopril and nifedipine in normotensive patients with incipient diabetic nephropathy.
Diabetes Care
11
:
850
–853,
1988
9
Microalbuminuria Captopril Study Group: Captopril reduces the risk of nephropathy in IDDM patients with microalbuminuria.
Diabetologia
39
:
587
–593,
1996
10
Hallab M, Gallois Y, Chatellier G, Rohmer V, Fressinaud P, Marre M: Comparison of reduction in microalbuminuria by enalapril and hydrochlorothiazide in normotensive patients with insulin dependent diabetes.
BMJ
306
:
175
–182,
1993
11
Mathiesen ER, Hommel E, Giese J, Parving HH: Efficacy of captopril in postponing nephropathy in normotensive insulin dependent diabetic patients with microalbuminuria.
BMJ
303
:
81
–87,
1991
12
Parving HH, Hommel E, Damkjaer Nielsen M, Giese J: Effect of captopril on blood pressure and kidney function in normotensive insulin dependent diabetics with nephropathy.
BMJ
299
:
533
–536,
1989
13
Marre M, Chatellier G, Leblanc H, Guyene TT, Menard J, Passa P: Prevention of diabetic nephropathy with enalapril in normotensive diabetics with microalbuminuria.
BMJ
297
:
1092
–1095,
1988
14
Viberti G, Mogensen CE, Groop LC, Pauls JF: Effect of captopril on progression to clinical proteinuria in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria: European Microalbuminuria Captopril Study Group.
JAMA
271
:
275
–279,
1994
15
Laffel LM, McGill JB, Gans DJ: The beneficial effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition with captopril on diabetic nephropathy in normotensive IDDM patients with microalbuminuria: North American Microalbuminuria Study Group.
Am J Med
99
:
497
–504,
1995
16
EUCLID Study Group: Randomised placebo-controlled trial of lisinopril in normotensive patients with insulin-dependent diabetes and normoalbuminuria or microalbuminuria.
Lancet
349
:
1787
–1792,
1997
17
Kasiske BL, Kalil RS, Ma JZ, Liao M, Keane WF: Effect of antihypertensive therapy on the kidney in patients with diabetes: a meta-regression analysis.
Ann Intern Med
118
:
129
–138,
1993
18
Spieker C, Zidek W, Vetter H, Rahn KH: Ambulatory 24-h blood pressure monitoring in essential hypertensives treated with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril.
J Int Med Res
19
:
39
–43,
1991
19
Marre M, Hallab M, Billiard A, Le Jeune JJ, Bled F, Girault A, Fressinaud P: Small doses of ramipril to reduce microalbuminuria in diabetic patients with incipient nephropathy independently of blood pressure changes.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol
18(Suppl. 2)
:
S165
–S168,
1991
20
Staessen JA, Thijs L, Fagard R, O’Brien ET, Clement D, de Leeuw PW, Mancia G, Nachev C, Palatini P, Parati G, Tuomilehto J, Webster J: Predicting cardiovascular risk using conventional vs ambulatory blood pressure in older patients with systolic hypertension: Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial Investigators.
JAMA
282
:
539
–546,
1999
21
Bottini PB, Carr AA, Rhoades RB, Prisant LM: Variability of indirect methods used to determine blood pressure: office vs mean 24-hour automated blood pressures.
Arch Intern Med
152
:
139
–144,
1992
22
Nystrom F, Karlberg BE, Ohman KP: Serum angiotensin-converting enzyme activity correlates positively with plasma angiotensin II: a population-based study of ambulatory blood pressure and the renin-angiotensin system.
J Hum Hypertens
11
:
301
–306,
1997
23
Krutzen E, Back SE, Nilsson-Ehle I, Nilsson-Ehle P: Plasma clearance of a new contrast agent, iohexol: a method for the assessment of glomerular filtration rate.
J Lab Clin Med
104
:
955
–961,
1984
24
Nystrom F, Malmstrom O, Karlberg BE, Ohman KP: Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure in the population.
J Intern Med
240
:
279
–284,
1996
25
Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators: Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy.
Lancet
355
:
253
–259,
2000
26
Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, Bosch J, Davies R, Dagenais G: Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients: the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.
N Engl J Med
342
:
145
–153,
2000
27
Chase HP, Garg SK, Harris S, Hoops S, Jackson WE, Holmes DL: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment for young normotensive diabetic subjects: a two-year trial.
Ann Ophthalmol
25
:
284
–289,
1993
28
Kullberg CE, Bergstrom A, Dinesen B, Larsson L, Little RR, Goldstein DE, Arnqvist HJ: Comparisons of studies on diabetic complications hampered by differences in GHb measurements.
Diabetes Care
19
:
726
–729,
1996
29
The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) Research Group: Effect of intensive therapy on the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial.
Kidney Int
47
:
1703
–1720,
1995
30
Wiegmann TB, Herron KG, Chonko AM, MacDougall ML, Moore WV: Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition on renal function and albuminuria in normotensive type I diabetic patients.
Diabetes
41
:
62
–67,
1992
31
Forsblom CM, Groop PH, Ekstrand A, Groop LC: Predictive value of microalbuminuria in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes of long duration.
BMJ
305
:
1051
–1053,
1992
32
O’Hare JP, Michael A, Viberti G: Ramipril reduces albumin excretion rate in normotensive IDDM patients with microalbuminuria (Abstract).
Diabetologia
41(Suppl. 1)
:
A258
,
1998

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Fredrik Nyström, MD, PhD, Department of Medicine and Care, University Hospital of Linköping, SE-581 85 Linköping, Sweden. E-mail: [email protected].

Received for publication 10 October 2000 and accepted in revised form 8 January 2001.

A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.