The renin-angiotensin system is involved in the progression of chronic kidney disease. Evidence exists that the system participates mechanistically beyond blood pressure control. Clinical trials involving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with type 1 diabetes and similar trials with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in patients with type 2 diabetes support that point of view (1). Plasma renin activity and renin concentration increase when angiotensin (Ang) II formation is inhibited or when Ang II activity is blocked (2). A primary action of Ang II is stimulating aldosterone release. Aldosterone is the critical salt-regulating hormone and itself has important effects in terms of target-organ effects on the cardiovascular system. Because the aspartyl proteinase renin is the rate-limiting step in Ang II production, inhibiting renin directly is the logical step in inhibiting renin-angiotensin system activation and the primary stimulus of aldosterone production. This aim was the dream of pharmacologists for decades; 40 years of hard research was rewarded with the development of aliskiren, the first practicable direct renin inhibitor. Aliskiren lowers circulating Ang II concentrations, aldosterone levels, and reduces plasma renin activity to negligible levels, although the circulating renin protein levels increase. However, because the enzymatic pocket of renin is occupied by aliskiren, this increase is of no consequence. The recently published Aliskiren in the Evaluation of Proteinuria in Diabetes trial in patients with type 2 diabetes supports the conclusion that aliskiren provides a powerful advantage in patients already receiving ARB treatment (3). A similarly salubrious effect would be expected in patients with chronic renal allograft injury. Rusai et al. (4) studied a rat model of chronic kidney allograft nephropathy and found that aliskiren did not achieve the expected result. They found that aliskiren treatment in this model was not superior to the ARB, candesartan. The investigators recorded this result despite similar effects on blood pressure achieved by the two treatments. How can we reconcile this result with the expectations engendered by inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system at its very source? A glance at the expanded renin-angiotensin system may help us further (Fig. 1). We are now aware that Ang II can occupy two receptors, the AT1 receptor and the AT2 receptor. The AT2 receptor has been rather elusive. However, two mouse knockout models and a host of in vitro and in vivo studies have provided incontrovertible evidence of the AT2 receptor's importance (1). Above and beyond this important system, we are now also aware that a second angiotensin-converting enzyme exists which effectively produces hitherto fore unappreciated Ang II metabolites, including Ang 1–7. This congener binds to a receptor coded by the Mas protooncogene (1). Both AT2 receptor signaling and Ang 1–7 signaling are said to have actions that oppose or ameliorate Ang II-mediated effects. A direct renin inhibitor would be expected to reduce not only Ang II signaling through the AT1 receptor but also any actions through the AT2 receptor or any Ang 1–7-related effects.FIGURE 1.: Systemic and local renin-angiotensin-aldosterone systems. Angiotensinogen is cleaved by renin to form Ang I. ACE converts Ang I to Ang II that can be further cleaved to Ang 1–7 by ACE2. Systemic and local activations may differ. Blockade of enzymatic activity of renin by aliskiren reduces the concentrations of the downstream effectors Ang II and Ang (1–7). Low Ang II activity releases feedback inhibition on JGA cells leading to increased release of the renin protein. RAAS, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system; Ang I, angiotensin I; ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; Ang II, angiotensin II; ACE2, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2; Ang 1–7, angiotensin 1–7; VSMC, vascular smooth muscle cell; AT1R, angiotensin II type 1 receptor; JGA, Juxtaglomerular apparatus; MCP-1, macrophage chemoattractant protein-1; AT2R, angiotensin II type 2 receptor.Another confounding possibility is related to species variability. Aliskiren is a human renin inhibitor. The IC50 of aliskiren for humans is 100-fold more active for human than for rat renin. For that reason, rodents were outfitted with human genes to test the compound in earlier studies (5). The authors would have to document that sufficient aliskiren was present in their rat model to adequately block rat renin at all sites in their model. Finally, the (pro)renin receptor (PRR) must be considered (5). This receptor binds renin or prorenin. Prorenin is activated to active renin when bound to the receptor. Aliskiren does not interfere with binding. The PRR is not inhibited by aliskiren and is capable of activating extracellular-related kinase-1/2, when occupied by renin or prorenin. The activity of the PRR in the authors' model is conjecture but should be considered. Finally, the authors could be correct. Perhaps, renin-angiotensin blockade with a direct renin inhibitor posttransplantation provides no specific advantage. Indeed, retrospective human studies involving ARB in transplant patients provided an only modest advantage. Human studies will have to be performed to provide a final answer. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors thank F.C. Luft for helpful comments on the manuscript.