The efficacy of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in slo
wing the advancement of chronic renal disease attests to the importanc
e of angiotensin II (Ang II) in the pathophysiological mechanisms unde
rlying disease progression. It is apparent from studies of the effects
of orally-active AT(1) receptor antagonists (AT(1)Ra) in experimental
models of chronic progressive renal disease, that AT(1)RA have broadl
y similar effects to those of ACEI, implying that the favorable effect
s of ACEI on systemic and renal hemodynamics and indices of glomerular
injury are mediated, in large part, by reducing the action of Ang II
at AT(1) receptors. The possibility remains, however, that differences
in the modes of action of ACEI and AT(1)RA are significant in terms o
f renal protection and that the two classes of drugs are not therapeut
ically equivalent. Thus far, however, virtually all experimental studi
es comparing the renal protective effects of ACEI versus AT(1)RA have
failed to show any convincing differences between the two classes of d
rug that cannot be attributed to discrepancies in the levels of blood
pressure control achieved. As many rodent studies have adopted protoco
ls originally designed to distinguish between the effects of treatment
versus no treatment, however, it may be premature to conclude that AC
EI and AT(1)R4 are, essentially therapeutically equivalent. Since both
classes of drug have such potent renoprotective effects, the extent o
f injury that develops in treated rats may be so slight as to compromi
se the sensitivity of the experimental comparison. Fresh experimental
approaches may be required to overcome this issue and resolve any outs
tanding questions concerning the therapeutic equivalence of AT(1)RA an
d ACEI in slowing the progression of renal disease.