The influence of beta-adrenoceptor antagonists with and without partial agonist activity on exercise tolerance and muscle lactate production

Do β-blockers prolong survival in heart failure only by inhibiting the β1-receptor? A perspective on the results of the COMET trial

Experimental and clinical studies indicate that carvedilol exerts multiple antiadrenergic effects in addition to beta(1)-receptor blockade, but the prognostic importance of these actions has long been debated. This controversy has now been substantially advanced by the results of the recently completed Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET), which showed that carvedilol (25 mg twice daily) reduced mortality by 17% when compared with metoprolol (50 mg twice daily), P=.0017--a result that was consistent with the differences seen across earlier controlled trials with beta-blockers in survivors of an acute myocardial infarction and in patients with chronic heart failure. Questions have been raised about the interpretation of these findings in view of the fact that the trial did not use the dose or formulation of metoprolol that was shown to prolong life in a placebo-controlled trial (ie, Metoprolol CR/XL [Controlled Release] Randomized Intervention Trial in Heart Failure). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses, however, indicate that the dosing regimen of metoprolol selected for use in the COMET trial produces a magnitude and time course of beta(1)-blockade during a 24-hour period that is similar to the dose of carvedilol targeted for use in the trial. These analyses suggest that the observed difference in the mortality effects of metoprolol and carvedilol is not related to a difference in the magnitude or time course of their beta(1)-blocking effects but instead reflect antiadrenergic effects of carvedilol in addition to beta(1)-blockade.

A comparison of the reproducibility and the sensitivity to change of visual analogue scales, Borg scales, and Likert scales in normal subjects during submaximal exercise

OBJECTIVE

To assess which subjective scale, the visual analogue scale (VAS), the Borg CR10 (Borg) scale, or the Likert scale (LS), if any, is decidedly more reproducible and sensitive to change in the assessment of symptoms.

DESIGN

Prospective clinical study.

SETTING

Exercise laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-three physically active male subjects (mean +/- SD age of 30 +/- 4 years old) were recruited.

INTERVENTION

Each subject attended the exercise laboratory on four occasions at intervals of 1 week. Three subjective scales were used: (1) the VAS (continuous scale); (2) the Borg scale (12 fixed points); and (3) the Likert scale (LS; 5 fixed points). Four identical submaximal tests were given (2 min at 60% maximum oxygen uptake [VO(2)max] and 6 min at 70% VO(2)max). Two tests were undertaken to assess the reproducibility of scores that were obtained with each subjective scale. Two other tests were undertaken to assess the sensitivity of each scale to a change in symptom perception: a double-blind treatment with propranolol, 80 mg, (ie, active therapy; to increase the sensation of breathlessness and general fatigue during exercise) or matching placebo. The subjective scale scores were measured at 1 min 30 s, 5 min 30 s, and 7 min 15 s of exercise. Reproducibility was defined as the proportion of total variance (ie, between-subject plus within-subject variance) explained by the between-subject variance given as a percentage. Sensitivity was defined as the effect of the active drug therapy over the variation within subjects.

RESULTS

Overall, the VAS performed best in terms of reproducibility for breathlessness and general fatigue, with reproducibility coefficients as high as 78%. For sensitivity, the VAS was best for breathlessness (ratio, 2.7) and the Borg scale was most sensitive for general fatigue (ratio, 3.0). The relationships between the respective psychological and physiologic variables were reasonably stable throughout the testing procedure, with overall typical correlations of 0.73 to 0.82

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that subjective scales can reproducibly measure symptoms during steady-state exercise and can detect the effect of a drug intervention. The VAS and Borg scales appear to be the best subjective scales for this purpose.