Marquez DF, Ruiz-Hurtado G and Ruilope L. The impact of antihypertensives on kidney disease [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):611 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.9916.1)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
1Unidad de Hipertensión Arterial, Servicio de Medicina Clínica, Hospital San Bernardo, Salta, Argentina 2Instituto de Investigación Imas12 and Unidad de Hipertensión, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain 3Escuela de Estudios Postdoctorales and Investigación, Universidad de Europa de Madrid, Madrid, Spain 4Departamento de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad Autónoma, Madrid, Spain
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS
Abstract
Arterial hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are intimately related. The control of blood pressure (BP) levels is strongly recommended in patients with CKD in order to protect the kidney against the accompanying elevation in global cardiovascular (CV) risk. Actually, the goal BP in patients with CKD involves attaining values <140/90 mmHg except if albuminuria is present. In this case, it is often recommended to attain values <130/80 mmHg, although some guidelines still recommend <140/90 mmHg. Strict BP control to values of systolic BP around 120 mmHg was recently shown to be safe in CKD according to data from the SPRINT trial, albeit more data confirming this benefit are required. Usually, combination therapy initiated with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and commonly followed by the addition of a calcium channel blocker and a diuretic is needed. Further studies are required as well as new drugs in particular after the positive data obtained from new oral anti-diabetic drugs.
Corresponding author:
Luis Ruilope
Competing interests:
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Grant information:
This article was written with the help of Instituto de Salud Carlos III, projects PI14/01841 and CP15/0129, Fundación Senefro, and Fondos FEDER.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Clinical and epidemiological evidence has demonstrated the importance of blood pressure (BP) control in order to prevent the development and to reduce the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD)1. On the other hand, CKD is accompanied by a very significant increase in cardiovascular (CV) risk2. As a consequence, the treatment of arterial hypertension is simultaneously directed to promote renal and CV protection. It is widely accepted that suppression of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) through the use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) constitutes the first step of therapy in patients with CKD1.
Studies examining the effect that antihypertensives have on kidney function have typically involved early or pre-existing primary renal disease and/or diabetic nephropathy patients. These trials were devoted primarily to investigating the evolution of renal function during a short period of time and in relatively small samples that impeded our knowledge of the simultaneous effects on CV outcome3. Initially, the capacity of ACEi and ARB for the diminution and primary prevention of albuminuria in CKD, and particularly in type 2 diabetics, was investigated3–5. The changes in albuminuria together with the control of arterial hypertension were determinants for the improvement in renal outcomes3. However, recent data have also shown that in hypertensive CKD patients with low levels of albuminuria, the exclusive attainment of low BP goals is associated with an improvement in eGFR6. Thus, in CKD patients, the presence of albuminuria is considered in KDIGO and several other guidelines as the key point to recommend a stricter BP goal (≤130 mmHg systolic and ≤80 mmHg diastolic if albumin excretion rate is ≥30 mg/24 hours)7,8. A similar BP goal may be considered in patients with low or no level of albuminuria. In fact, the renal data of the SPRINT trial indicate that a SBP goal lower than 120 mmHg was safe and effective in a subgroup of patients with CKD9.
Hypertension as a mediator of the correlation between chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular disease
Albuminuria, increased serum creatinine values, and a lower eGFR are considered by current arterial hypertension guidelines as significant CV risk factors that add to the already-high risk of pre-existing CV risk factors such as diabetes, cholesterol, and smoking10,11. In fact, patients developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and entering dialysis are a minority among the CKD population; one could also consider them to be survivors, as a large number of patients with CKD die from CV disease before ESRD develops. As can be seen in the article published by Levey et al.12 with data from the USA, 4.9% of the total CKD population has an eGFR below 60 mL/minute/1.73 m2. This represents a very relevant number of patients with CKD in stages 3a, 3b, 4, and 5, but only 0.2% attain the stage12. These data are obtained from different surveys (NHANES) performed in the US, and since these are cross-sectional data it does not capture the fact that many patients die before reaching the terminal stages of CKD. Recently, we published a review13 showing that data from some clinical trials in the field of arterial hypertension have demonstrated that CV and renal protection can be attained simultaneously using the same therapy, mainly consisting of a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blocker, a calcium antagonist, and a diuretic, to which a statin is frequently added. These data indicate that early and aggressive control of hypertension and albuminuria is very important to simultaneously protect the CV and renal systems.
Unfortunately, many patients attain the advanced stages of CKD, where RAAS blockade is often incomplete in a relevant percentage of patients, particularly in stages 3b and 4 of CKD, not tolerating high doses owing to the frequent development of hyperkalemia. The recent development of new potassium binders will contribute to facilitating the long-term maintenance of RAAS blockers, in particular mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, while maintaining adequate serum potassium levels14,15.
Antihypertensive therapy, blood pressure goals, and renal function
Different mechanisms play a key role in the development and maintenance of hypertension in CKD. The most important of them are volume overload, due to the difficulty in sodium and water handling, and activation of the RAAS and of the sympathetic nervous system2. These effects influence intraglomerular pressure negatively through the facilitation of the pulsatile transmission of uncontrolled systemic BP16. The renoprotection provided by antihypertensive agents depends on their capacity to lower systemic BP, impeding the damage in the renal vasculature from the arteries to the renal microcirculation and to the glomeruli through their specific effects on renal hemodynamics16. Usually, the combination of more than two drugs is needed to attain an adequate control that depends on counteracting the three main factors intervening in the development and progression of hypertension.
The goal BP for CKD is commonly recommended to be below 140/90 mmHg, except when albuminuria is presented. The abandoning of the prior commonly recommended BP goal of <130/80 mmHg in patients with CKD was due to the failure of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) devoted to investigating strict BP control in CKD to show benefit, particularly the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study17, the BP Control for Renoprotection in Patients with Nondiabetic Chronic Renal Disease (REIN-2) trial18, and the African American Study of Kidney Disease (AASK)19. A secondary analysis of the AASK trial reported that strict BP control in patients with albuminuria >0.22 g/g creatinine had fewer composite endpoints (HR 0.73, p=0.01)20, confirming the adequacy of lower goal BP with albuminuria. Interestingly, a long-term combined analysis of the MDRD and AASK studies showed that strict BP control did not delay the onset of ESRD but did reduce the relative risk of death in patients with CKD (0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–0.99) during long-term follow up21.
On the other hand, data published as a meta-analysis of 11 randomized controlled trials in non-diabetic renal disease patients demonstrated that an SBP of 110–129 mmHg was associated with a lower risk for progressive renal disease22. Interestingly, increased renal risk was observed with SBP values of <110 mmHg; this is in line with the potential negative effects on the kidney caused by a significant drop in renal perfusion pressure after the consequences of a maintained elevation of BP and the development of nephrosclerosis have taken their toll on the renal vasculature23. Other data related to mortality in patients with CKD indicate that the optimal BP differs and oscillates between 130 and 159/70 and 89 mmHg24. The progression of diabetic and non-diabetic renal disease was more effectively slowed down, and survival was also improved, when patients were administered an antihypertensive regime that included an ACEi or an ARB compared to a regime without; this observation was independent of attained BP25. On the other hand, dual blockade of the RAAS using ACEi plus ARB simultaneously did not show benefits in large-scale trials26–28. In the same way, the addition of the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren to standard therapy with a RAAS blocker in high CV risk patients with diabetes is not supported and may even be harmful28. As a consequence, combined use of the two RAAS blockers in patients with CKD has been discarded by guidelines8,29.
Data from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study30 indicate that strict BP control (SBP <120 mmHg) did not improve renal outcomes of type 2 diabetic patients, and according to several reports the SBP goal of <130 mmHg remains adequate in this condition for renal and CV protection13,31.
Blockade of aldosterone: an unfulfilled promise?
Aldosterone is a relevant mediator of progressive renal and CV damage32. It is well known that aldosterone antagonists reduce albuminuria in patients with CKD, on top of a RAAS blocker, by an amount of 30–40%33–35. As previously mentioned, a limiting factor for the wide use of aldosterone antagonists is linked with the risk of inducing hyperkalemia, which becomes a prominent concern as renal function deteriorates. Finerenone is a novel nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) that has greater receptor selectivity than spironolactone and eplerenone, can significantly decrease albuminuria in diabetic nephropathy, and has a much lower prevalence of hyperkalemia36. Actually, two seminal studies are ongoing to test the capacity of the new MRA finerenone to slow down the progression of diabetic nephropathy (NCT02540993)37 and to protect the CV system in type 2 diabetic patients (NCT02545049)38. The use of the new potassium binder patiromer and the selective cation exchanger sodium zirconium cyclosilicate15 will contribute to the facilitation of MRA use in patients with CKD.
Evidence with other therapies and renal outcomes
Recently, new data on the role of sodium intake in the progression of CV disease39 and renal disease40–42 have been published, enhancing the need for an adequate intake of sodium in patients with CKD. A low-sodium diet contributes to the reduction of albuminuria by itself and through the enhancement of RAAS blockade40,41. On the other hand, there are drugs other than hypertensives that can positively influence renal function together with BP control, such as statins43, fibrates44, thiazolidinediones45, and antiplatelet therapy46. Treatments such as allopurinol47 and vitamin D supplementation48 require further investigation.
Recently, the results of the EMPA-REG trial showed a lower rate of CV death, total death, and heart failure in type 2 diabetic patients with the addition of empagliflozin to standard care49. Moreover, the analysis of secondary end points of the EMPA-REG trial showed that empagliflozin was associated with a slower progression of CKD50. These good results were partially due to the antihypertensive and natriuretic capacities of the drugs51.
Results obtained with GLP-1 agonists liraglutide52 and semaglutide53 have also shown a significant improvement in CV outcomes of type 2 diabetics that was accompanied by a more significant decrease in body weight and a less important drop in BP in the absence of natriuretic effects. This last point could explain the absence of effects on heart failure. Liraglutide also exhibited a renal protective capacity through a significant decrease in albuminuria52. Further studies will be presented in the near future with these two classes of drugs and will contribute to the reconsideration of type 2 diabetes treatment with regard to CV and renal protection.
In summary, strict BP control, adequate suppression of the RAAS, and an integrated approach to protection of the increased global CV risk are required to prevent the appearance and progression of CKD and simultaneously of CV disease. New drugs are coming that could facilitate the control of BP and improve both renal and CV outcomes.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Grant information
This article was written with the help of Instituto de Salud Carlos III, projects PI14/01841 and CP15/0129, Fundación Senefro, and Fondos FEDER.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
F1000 recommended
References
1.
Qaseem A, Hopkins RH Jr, Sweet DE, et al.:
Screening, monitoring, and treatment of stage 1 to 3 chronic kidney disease: A clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians.
Ann Intern Med.
2013; 159(12): 835–47. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
2.
Gansevoort RT, Correa-Rotter R, Hemmelgarn BR, et al.:
Chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular risk: epidemiology, mechanisms, and prevention.
Lancet.
2013; 382(9889): 339–52. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
3.
Ruilope LM, Segura J, Fujita T, et al.:
Renal and cardiovascular events: do they deserve the same consideration in clinical trials?
J Hypertens.
2009; 27(9): 1743–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
4.
Ruggenenti P, Fassi A, Ilieva AP, et al.:
Preventing microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes.
N Engl J Med.
2004; 351(19): 1941–51. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
7.
Wheeler DC, Becker GJ:
Summary of KDIGO guideline. What do we really know about management of blood pressure in patients with chronic kidney disease?
Kidney Int.
2013; 83(3): 377–83. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
8.
Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, et al.:
2013 ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Eur Heart J.
2013; 34(28): 2159–219. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
10.
van der Velde M, Matsushita K, Coresh J, et al.:
Lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher albuminuria are associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. A collaborative meta-analysis of high-risk population cohorts.
Kidney Int.
2011; 79(12): 1341–52. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
11.
Gansevoort RT, Matsushita K, van der Velde M, et al.:
Lower estimated GFR and higher albuminuria are associated with adverse kidney outcomes. A collaborative meta-analysis of general and high-risk population cohorts.
Kidney Int.
2011; 80(1): 93–104. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
12.
Levey AS, de Jong PE, Coresh J, et al.:
The definition, classification, and prognosis of chronic kidney disease: a KDIGO Controversies Conference report.
Kidney Int.
2011; 80(1): 17–28. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
13.
Ruiz-Hurtado G, Sarafidis P, Fernández-Alfonso MS, et al.:
Global cardiovascular protection in chronic kidney disease.
Nat Rev Cardiol.
2016; 13(10): 603–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
15.
Zannad F, Rossignol P, Stough WG, et al.:
New approaches to hyperkalemia in patients with indications for renin angiotensin aldosterone inhibitors: Considerations for trial design and regulatory approval.
Int J Cardiol.
2016; 216: 46–51. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
17.
Klahr S, Levey AS, Beck GJ, et al.:
The effects of dietary protein restriction and blood-pressure control on the progression of chronic renal disease. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group.
N Engl J Med.
1994; 330(13): 877–84. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
18.
Ruggenenti P, Perna A, Loriga G, et al.:
Blood-pressure control for renoprotection in patients with non-diabetic chronic renal disease (REIN-2): multicentre, randomised controlled trial.
Lancet.
2005; 365(9463): 939–46. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
19.
Wright JT Jr, Bakris G, Greene T, et al.:
Effect of blood pressure lowering and antihypertensive drug class on progression of hypertensive kidney disease: results from the AASK trial.
JAMA.
2002; 288(19): 2421–31. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
22.
Jafar TH, Stark PC, Schmid CH, et al.:
Progression of chronic kidney disease: the role of blood pressure control, proteinuria, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: a patient-level meta-analysis.
Ann Intern Med.
2003; 139(4): 244–52. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
23.
Toto RD:
Renal insufficiency due to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.
Miner Electrolyte Metab.
1994; 20(4): 193–200. PubMed Abstract
25.
Damman K, Lambers-Heerspink HJ:
Are renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors lifesaving in chronic kidney disease?
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2014; 63(7): 659–60. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
26.
ONTARGET Investigators, Yusuf S, Teo KK, et al.:
Telmisartan, ramipril, or both in patients at high risk for vascular events.
N Engl J Med.
2008; 358(15): 1547–59. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
29.
James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, et al.:
2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8).
JAMA.
2014; 311(5): 507–20. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
31.
Ettehad D, Emdin CA, Kiran A, et al.:
Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Lancet.
2016; 387(10022): 957–67. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
32.
Hostetter TH, Ibrahim HN:
Aldosterone in chronic kidney and cardiac disease.
J Am Soc Nephrol.
2003; 14(9): 2395–401. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
33.
Márquez DF, Ruiz-Hurtado G, Ruilope LM, et al.:
An update of the blockade of the renin angiotensin aldosterone system in clinical practice.
Expert Opin Pharmacother.
2015; 16(15): 2283–92. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
34.
Mehdi UF, Adams-Huet B, Raskin P, et al.:
Addition of angiotensin receptor blockade or mineralocorticoid antagonism to maximal angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition in diabetic nephropathy.
J Am Soc Nephrol.
2009; 20(12): 2641–50. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
35.
Bomback AS, Kshirsagar AV, Amamoo MA, et al.:
Change in proteinuria after adding aldosterone blockers to ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in CKD: a systematic review.
Am J Kidney Dis.
2008; 51(2): 199–211. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
36.
Bakris GL, Agarwal R, Chan JC, et al.:
Effect of Finerenone on Albuminuria in Patients With Diabetic Nephropathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
JAMA.
2015; 314(9): 884–94. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
37.
Bayer:
Efficacy and Safety of Finerenone in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIDELIO-DKD). NCT02540993. Reference Source
38.
Bayer:
Efficacy and Safety of Finerenone in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and the Clinical Diagnosis of Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD). NCT02545049. Reference Source
43.
Douglas K, O'Malley PG, Jackson JL:
Meta-analysis: the effect of statins on albuminuria.
Ann Intern Med.
2006; 145(2): 117–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
44.
Jun M, Zhu B, Tonelli M, et al.:
Effects of fibrates in kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2012; 60(20): 2061–71. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
45.
Sarafidis PA, Bakris GL:
Protection of the kidney by thiazolidinediones: an assessment from bench to bedside.
Kidney Int.
2006; 70(7): 1223–33. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
46.
Jardine MJ, Ninomiya T, Perkovic V, et al.:
Aspirin is beneficial in hypertensive patients with chronic kidney disease: a post-hoc subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2010; 56(12): 956–65. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
47.
Kabul S, Shepler B:
A review investigating the effect of allopurinol on the progression of kidney disease in hyperuricemic patients with chronic kidney disease.
Clin Ther.
2012; 34(12): 2293–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
48.
Anker SD, von Haehling S:
Vitamin D in chronic kidney disease: more questions than answers.
JAMA.
2012; 307(7): 722–3. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
50.
Wanner C, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, et al.:
Empagliflozin and Progression of Kidney Disease in Type 2 Diabetes.
N Engl J Med.
2016; 375(4): 323–34. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
51.
Heise T, Seewaldt-Becker E, Macha S, et al.:
Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics following 4 weeks' treatment with empagliflozin once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Diabetes Obes Metab.
2013; 15(7): 613–21. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
53.
Marso SP, Bain SC, Consoli A, et al.:
Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.
N Engl J Med.
2016; 375(19): 1834–44. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
1
Unidad de Hipertensión Arterial, Servicio de Medicina Clínica, Hospital San Bernardo, Salta, Argentina 2
Instituto de Investigación Imas12 and Unidad de Hipertensión, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain 3
Escuela de Estudios Postdoctorales and Investigación, Universidad de Europa de Madrid, Madrid, Spain 4
Departamento de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad Autónoma, Madrid, Spain
This article was written with the help of Instituto de Salud Carlos III, projects PI14/01841 and CP15/0129, Fundación Senefro, and Fondos FEDER.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Marquez DF, Ruiz-Hurtado G and Ruilope L. The impact of antihypertensives on kidney disease [version 1; peer review: 2 approved] F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):611 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.9916.1)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.
Share
Open Peer Review
Current Reviewer Status:
?
Key to Reviewer Statuses
VIEWHIDE
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations -
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Adjust parameters to alter display
View on desktop for interactive features
Includes Interactive Elements
View on desktop for interactive features
Competing Interests Policy
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests'
Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors.
You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student).
You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission.
You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests'
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors.
You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on.
Stay Updated
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Comments on this article Comments (0)