Amlodipine combined with beta blockade for chronic angina: Results of a multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind study

[Benefits and risks of exercise training in coronary artery disease patients]

Cardiac rehabilitation programs improve vital and functional prognosis in patients suffering from stable angina or after myocardial infarction. The studies focusing on the balance risks/benefits of cardiac rehabilitation are relatively old; therefore, the patients included in these studies are different from today's patients mainly because of different management of the acute phases and of modifications of the medical treatment in stable angina (ABCDE protocols). The authors present the preliminary results of a French multicentric register focusing on complications during cardiac rehabilitation conducted on behalf of the French Society of Cardiology. Complications are rare: one resuscitated cardiac arrest/1.3 millions exercise training hours and no death was reported. It must be highlighted that, in some patients, the antianginal medical treatment must be reinforced in order to allow exercise training without myocardial ischaemia.

Evidence-based guideline for the primary care management of stable angina

This is an updated version of the first North of England Stable Angina Guideline (1,2) and summarizes the full guideline. (3) This paper presents all the recommendations within the guideline; and where these are new or substantially altered from the original version, it also presents a summary of the supporting evidence. The aims and methods of development (summarized in Box 1) of this guideline are unchanged from the original version, to which readers are directed for more detail. The research questions raised during the development of this guideline are shown in Box 2.

Combination of calcium channel blockers and beta-blockers for patients with exercise-induced angina pectoris: beneficial effect of calcium channel blockers largely determined by their effect on heart rate

The combination of calcium channel blockers and beta-blockers is more effective for the treatment of exercise-induced angina pectoris than beta-blocker monotherapy. As ischemia in exercise-induced angina is essentially preceded by an increase in heart rate, calcium channel blockers with a negative chronotropic property may perform better for this purpose than nonchronotropic compounds. A 335-patient, 10-week, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of amlodipine 5 mg and 10 mg, diltiazem 200 mg and 300 mg, and mibefradil 50 mg and 100 mg treatment added to baseline beta-blocker treatment was performed. Exercise testing (ETT) was performed by bicycle ergometry. All of the calcium channels blockers significantly delayed the onset of 1 mm ST-segment depression on ETT (p < 0.001 for any treatment vs. baseline). In addition, mibefradil, in both low- and high-dose treatments, produced the largest delays (low dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 24.1 and 29.8 seconds, respectively, p < 0.003 and < 0.001; high dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 33.7 and 37.0 seconds, respectively, p < 0.001 and < 0.001). A stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that this beneficial effect of calcium channel blockers was largely dependent on their effect on heart rate. Serious symptoms of dizziness likewise occurred significantly more frequently on mibefradil (p < 0.05 vs. diltiazem) and urged no fewer than 19 patients on mibefradil to withdraw from the trial. The authors conclude that calcium channel blockers with a negative chronotropic property provide a better delay of ischemia in patients with exercise-induced angina, but the concomitant risk of intolerable dizziness may reduce this benefit.

Combination of calcium channel blockers and beta blockers for patients with exercise-induced angina pectoris: a double-blind parallel-group comparison of different classes of calcium channel blockers. The Netherlands Working Group on Cardiovascular Research (WCN)

The combination of calcium channel blockers and beta blockers is more effective for the treatment of exercise-induced angina pectoris than beta blocker monotherapy. Since ischemia in exercise-induced angina is essentially preceded by an increase in heart rate, calcium channel blockers with negative chronotropic property may perform better for this purpose than nonchronotropic compounds. A 335-patient, 10-week, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of amlodipine 5 and 10 mg, diltiazem XR 200 and 300 mg, and mibefradil 50 and 100 mg treatment added to baseline beta blocker treatment was performed. Exercise testing (ETT) was performed by bicycle ergometry. Although none of the calcium channel blockers improved duration of exercise or amount of workload, all of them significantly delayed onset of 1 mm ST segment depression on ETT (p<0.001 for any treatment versus baseline). In addition, mibefradil, both low- and high-dose treatment, produced the largest delays (low dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 24.1 and 29.8 s, p<0.003 and <0.001, respectively; high dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 33.7 and 37.0 s, p<0.001 and <0.001, respectively). These effects were linearly correlated to the amount of rate pressure product (RPP) reduction. Serious symptoms of dizziness likewise occurred significantly more frequently with mibefradil (p<0.05) and led 19 patients taking mibefradil to withdraw from the trial. The authors conclude that calcium channel blockers with negative chronotropic property provide better delay of ischemia in patients with exercise-induced angina but that the concomitant risk of intolerable dizziness largely reduces this benefit.

Antianginal efficacy of the combination of felodipine-metoprolol 10/100 mg compared with each drug alone in patients with stable effort-induced angina pectoris: a multicenter parallel group study. The TRAFFIC Study Group

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this randomized, double-blind, parallel group trial was to compare the antianginal and antiischemic efficacy of a combination tablet of felodipine-metoprolol 10/100 mg once daily with both drugs given separately once daily in patients with stable effort-induced angina pectoris. The secondary objective was to compare the tolerability of the 3 treatments.

METHODS

The main criteria for inclusion were stable effort-induced angina pectoris for at least 2 months before the enrollment and a positive bicycle exercise test result. Patients were allocated to once-daily treatment with either felodipine-metoprolol 10/100 mg, felodipine 10 mg, or metoprolol 100 mg. The duration of active double-blind treatment was 4 weeks. There were 3 primary efficacy variables in the study; time until end of exercise, time until onset of chest discomfort, and time until 1-mm ST depression during a standardized exercise test.

RESULTS

The number of patients randomized was 397. There was a statistically significant improvement in time until end of exercise with felodipine-metoprolol 10/100 mg compared with metoprolol 100 mg (P =.04) and felodipine 10 mg compared with metoprolol 100 mg ( P =.03). However, for time until onset of pain or time until 1-mm ST-depression there were no significant differences among the treatment groups. At highest comparable workload, ST depression was less pronounced with felodipine-metoprolol than with metoprolol alone (P =.04), and the rate-pressure product was significantly lower in the groups receiving felodipine-metoprolol and metoprolol than in the group receiving felodipine alone. The combination and metoprolol were better tolerated than felodipine alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In stable angina pectoris, the combination felodipine-metoprolol 10/100 mg and felodipine 10 mg alone increased exercise time compared with metoprolol 100 mg. The combination tablet and metoprolol 100 mg alone showed a more favorable tolerability profile than felodipine 10 mg alone.

Combination of calcium channel blockers and beta-adrenoceptor blockers for patients with exercise-induced angina pectoris: a double-blind parallel-group comparison of different classes of calcium channel blockers. Netherlands Working Group on Cardiovascular Research (WCN)

AIMS

The combination of calcium channel blockers and beta-adrenoceptor blockers is more effective for the treatment of exercise-induced angina pectoris than beta-adrenoceptor blocker monotherapy. As ischaemia in exercise-induced angina is preceded by increase in heart rate, calcium channel blockers with negative chronotropic properties may perform better for this purpose than nonchronotropic compounds.

METHODS

A 335 patient double-blind parallel-group study comparing 14 day treatment with amlodipine 5 and 10 mg, with diltiazem 200 and 300 mg, and mibefradil 50 and 100 mg added to baseline beta-adrenoceptor blocker treatment was performed. Exercise testing (ETT) was performed by bicycle ergometry.

RESULTS

Although none of the calcium channel blockers improved duration of exercise or amount of workload, all significantly delayed onset of 1 mm ST-segment depression on ETT (P<0.001 for any treatment vs baseline). In addition, mibefradil, both low and high dose treatment, produced the longest delays (low dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 24.1 and 29.8 s, respectively, P<0. 003 and <0.001; high dose: different from diltiazem and amlodipine by 33.7 and 37.0 s, respectively, P<0.001 and <0.001). These effects were linearly correlated with the reduction in rate pressure product (RPP). Serious symptoms of dizziness occurred significantly more frequently on mibefradil (P<0.05), and 19 patients on mibefradil withdrew from trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Calcium channel blockers with negative chronotropic properties provide greater delay of ischaemia in patients with exercise-induced angina, but the concomitant risk of intolerable dizziness attenuates this benefit.

Comparison of controlled-onset, extended-release verapamil with amlodipine and amlodipine plus atenolol on exercise performance and ambulatory ischemia in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo lead-in, placebo-controlled study compared the antianginal and anti-ischemic effects of once-daily bedtime dosing of controlled-onset extended-release (COER-24) verapamil to a once-daily morning dosing of amlodipine +/- atenolol in patients with chronic stable angina. A total of 551 patients with exercise-induced myocardial ischemia and evidence of coronary artery disease were randomized to a 4-week, forced-dose titration treatment period with (1) COER-24 verapamil 240 mg titrated to 480 mg at bedtime (n = 173), (2) amlodipine 5 mg titrated to 10 mg/day (n = 149), (3) amlodipine 5 mg (titrated to 10 mg) plus atenolol 50 mg/day in the A.M. (n = 154), or (4) placebo (n = 75). Treadmill exercise tolerance testing (standard Bruce protocol), and 48-hour ambulatory electrocardiographic (Holter) monitoring were performed at the end of placebo lead-in and double-blind treatment. Each active treatment significantly improved symptom-limited exercise duration and time to moderate angina (p < or = 0.01 vs placebo). For patients with baseline ischemia, amlodipine resulted in a statistically significant increase in total duration of ischemic episodes compared with placebo, whereas COER-24 verapamil and amlodipine plus atenolol resulted in statistically significant decreases compared with placebo and amlodipine. Heart rate at onset of ischemic episodes and ST product were also significantly increased with amlodipine (p < 0.05) compared with either COER-24 or amlodipine plus atenolol. COER-24 and amlodipine alone or in combination with atenolol improved exercise capacity in patients with angina pectoris. COER-24 verapamil monotherapy or amlodipine plus atenolol combination therapy were more effective than amlodipine monotherapy in decreasing ambulatory myocardial ischemia, especially during the hours of 6 A.M. to 12 noon.

Value of the addition of amlodipine to atenolol in patients with angina pectoris despite adequate beta blockade

Anginal patients who remain symptomatic despite optimally dosed beta blockade may also be given dihydropyridine calcium antagonists. This treatment regimen was examined in a double-blind parallel, randomized, controlled study in 147 patients with angina and positive bicycle exercise tests despite optimal beta blockade with atenolol (heart rate at rest <60 beats/min). Patients were randomized to atenolol and/or placebo (control), and atenolol and/or amlodipine. The main outcome measurement was exercise tolerance after 8 weeks compared with baseline. After 8 weeks, no significant differences in time to 0.1-mV ST-segment depression, time to chest pain, and time to end of exercise were observed. The number of patients with chest pain during exercise decreased significantly in the amlodipine group (p = 0.04 vs controls). The subgroup of patients with an early (<6 minutes) onset of chest pain at baseline showed a significant increase in time to chest pain after amlodipine (p = 0.0001 vs controls). In the amlodipine group, ST depression and rate-pressure product at submaximum comparable workload decreased to 0.4 mm (0.56) (p = 0.03 vs controls) and 1.223 (2.652) beats/ min x mm Hg (p = 0.01 vs controls). The number of patients in each group with adverse events was not different. The addition of amlodipine to the treatment of patients with myocardial ischemia, despite optimal beta blockade, is well tolerated and may lead to improvement in symptomatic anginal patients, who have a rapid onset of exercise-induced ischemia.

Effect of amlodipine, atenolol and their combination on myocardial ischemia during treadmill exercise and ambulatory monitoring. Canadian Amlodipine/Atenolol in Silent Ischemia Study (CASIS) Investigators

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the effects of amlodipine, atenolol and their combination on ischemia during treadmill testing and 48-h ambulatory monitoring.

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether anti-ischemic drugs exert similar effects on ischemia during ambulatory monitoring and exercise treadmill testing.

METHODS

Patients with stable coronary artery disease and ischemia during treadmill testing and ambulatory monitoring were randomized to receive amlodipine (n = 51) or atenolol (n = 49). Each group underwent a counterbalanced, crossover evaluation of single drug and placebo, followed by evaluation of the combination.

RESULTS

Amlodipine and the combination prolonged exercise time to 0.1-mV ST segment depression by 29% and 34%, respectively (p < 0.001) versus 3% for atenolol (p = NS). During ambulatory monitoring, the frequency of ischemic episodes decreased by 28% with amlodipine (p = 0.083 [NS]), by 57% with atenolol (p < 0.001) and by 72% with the combination (p < 0.05 vs. both single drugs; p < 0.001 vs. placebo). Suppression of ischemia during exercise testing and ambulatory monitoring was similar in patients with and without exercise-induced angina. Exercise time to angina improved by 29% with amlodipine (p < 0.01), by 16% with atenolol (p < 0.05) and by 39% with the combination (p < 0.005 vs. placebo, atenolol and amlodipine). In patients with angina, total exercise time improved by 16% with amlodipine (p < 0.001), by 4% with atenolol (p = NS) and by 19% with the combination (p < 0.05 vs. placebo and either single drug). In those patients without angina, no therapy significantly improved total exercise time.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemia during treadmill testing was more effectively suppressed by amlodipine, whereas ischemia during ambulatory monitoring was more effectively suppressed by atenolol. The combination was more effective than either single drug in both settings.

Electrophysiologic effects of amlodipine vs. diltiazem in patients with coronary artery disease and beta-blocking therapy

This study compares the electrophysiologic effects of amlodipine and diltiazem in patients with coronary artery disease concomitantly treated with background beta-blocking therapy. Thirty patients were included in an open-label parallel study in two phases. During phase 1, patients were screened and placed on maintenance atenolol therapy at 50 or 100 mg/day, while phase 2 consisted of right-sided catheterization and randomization of patients to either amlodipine (10 mg i.v.) or diltiazem (10 mg i.v.). Following treatment with amlodipine, no significant alteration in markers of electrophysiological activity was observed. Treatment with diltiazem resulted in a significant lengthening of sinus cycle length (SCL, p < 0.04), AH interval (p < 0.02), and Wenckebach CL (WCL, p < 0.001), and a trend towards an increase in sinus node recovery time (SNRT, p = 0.057). No effects were observed with regard to HV interval and corrected SNRT. The results of this study indicate that 10 mg intravenous amlodipine has no significant electrophysiological action on sinus or AV node function in patients receiving beta-blocker therapy with atenolol, suggesting that amlodipine can be added to beta-blockers to treat patients with myocardial ischemia and/or hypertension without any significant increase in the risk of bradyarrhythmias.