Antihypertensive efficacy of zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide fixed combination for treatment in metabolic syndrome

Roles of Hydrogen Sulfide Donors in Common Kidney Diseases

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) plays a key role in the regulation of physiological processes in mammals. The decline in H2S level has been reported in numerous renal disorders. In animal models of renal disorders, treatment with H2S donors could restore H2S levels and improve renal functions. H2S donors suppress renal dysfunction by regulating autophagy, apoptosis, oxidative stress, and inflammation through multiple signaling pathways, such as TRL4/NLRP3, AMP-activated protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin, transforming growth factor-β1/Smad3, extracellular signal-regulated protein kinases 1/2, mitogen-activated protein kinase, and nuclear factor kappa B. In this review, we summarize recent developments in the effects of H2S donors on the treatment of common renal diseases, including acute/chronic kidney disease, renal fibrosis, unilateral ureteral obstruction, glomerulosclerosis, diabetic nephropathy, hyperhomocysteinemia, drug-induced nephrotoxicity, metal-induced nephrotoxicity, and urolithiasis. Novel H2S donors can be designed and applied in the treatment of common renal diseases.

Efficacy of zofenopril in combination with thiazide diuretics in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a pooled individual data analysis of four randomized, double-blind, controlled, prospective studies

Background

In the Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-Term Evaluation (SMILE) studies, early administration of zofenopril after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was prognostically beneficial as compared to placebo and other angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), such as lisinopril and ramipril. Here, we investigated whether zofenopril efficacy could be affected by a concomitant use of thiazide diuretics (TDs).

Methods

This was a post hoc analysis of pooled individual patient data from the SMILE studies. Patients treated with other diuretics than TDs were excluded. The primary study endpoint was the 1-year combined occurrence of death or hospitalization for CV causes, with or without TD.

Results

Among 2,995 patients, 263 (8.8%) were treated with a combination including a TD (TD+), whereas 2,732 (91.2%) were not treated with any diuretic (TD−). Proportions of subjects who were treated with TD were equally distributed (p=0.774) within the placebo, zofenopril, and other ACEIs groups. The 1-year risk of major cardiovascular events was similar in TD+ (18.3%) and TD− (16.8%) patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04; 95% CI 0.74–1.45; p=0.838). After stratifying per concomitant treatment and TD, the 1-year risk of CV events was significantly lower with zofenopril than with placebo (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55–0.88; p=0.002) and other ACEIs (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.46–0.74; p=0.0001). Treatment with ACEIs and TD as concomitant therapy was associated with a larger blood pressure (BP) reduction (p=0.0001 for systolic BP and p=0.045 for diastolic BP).

Conclusion

In post AMI patients, zofenopril maintained its positive impact on prognosis compared to placebo or other ACEIs, regardless concomitant TD administration. In this setting, TD shows advantages in managing the most difficult hypertensive patients.

Antihypertensive effect of zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide versus zofenopril monotherapy in patients with essential hypertension according to their cardiovascular risk level: A post hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, possibly in combination with other antihypertensive drugs, to treat hypertension with associated risk factors.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the antihypertensive effect of the combination of zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide versus zofenopril monotherapy in patients with essential hypertension, according to their cardiovascular risk level.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a previously published efficacy and tolerability study. After a 4-week placebo washout, patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 95-115 mm Hg), aged 18 to 75 years, were randomized at a ratio of 2:1:1 to treatment with zofenopril 30 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg or monotherapy with zofenopril 30 mg or hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg for 12 weeks in an international, multicenter, double-blind study. This period was followed by 24 weeks of open-label treatment. Systolic BP [SBP] and DBP were measured by mercury sphygmomanometry, and changes associated with treatment were calculated. Patients' cardiovascular risk was computed using the Heart Score algorithm. Patients were classified in quartiles according to distribution of cardiovascular risk level, and comparisons were limited to the zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide and zofenopril monotherapy treatment groups. The primary end point was change in office DBP.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-six patients (139 men, 107 women; mean [SD] age, 54 [11] years) were included in the analysis. Mean baseline cardiovascular risk was similar in the zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide group and the zofenopril monotherapy group (7% vs 9%). DBP and SBP reductions with treatment were significantly greater (both, P < 0.01) with combination treatment than with monotherapy for each quartile of cardiovascular risk. Cardiovascular risk reduction at the end of the 12 weeks of double-blind treatment was greater in the zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide group than in the zofenopril monotherapy group (1.9% vs 0.2%; P < 0.01), particularly in the group of patients with the highest cardiovascular risk at baseline (5.2% vs 2.0%). At the end of the 24-week open-label treatment period, the mean reduction in cardiovascular risk was also significantly greater in the combination treatment group than in the monotherapy group (1.4% vs 0.5%; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In these hypertensive patients, combination treatment with zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide was associated with a significantly greater decrease in BP compared with zofenopril monotherapy, regardless of the patient's cardiovascular risk. The difference between combination treatment and monotherapy was particularly evident for the group of patients at highest risk.

Safety and efficacy of the sulfydryl ACE-inhibitor zofenopril in the management of cardiovascular disease

In the 1970s, pharmacological therapy interrupting the renin-angiotensin system was considered beneficial for patients with high-renin hypertension. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors proved to be effective not only in patients with high renin and elevated blood pressure, but also in many hypertensive patients with normal levels of plasma renin activity. ACE inhibitors are used in a wide range of chronic illnesses such as atherosclerosis, hypertension, myocardial infarction, heart failure, diabetic complications, and stroke. To date, more than ninety controlled clinical trials evaluating the beneficial effects of 14 different ACE inhibitors were conducted. Moreover, data from experimental studies showed that ACE inhibitors can attenuate the development of atherosclerosis, oxidative stress, and vascular inflammation in a wide range of species indicating that ACE inhibition also favourably affects the vasculature. More than fifteen years ago, the bi-sulfydryl ACE-inhibitor zofenopril has shown an excellent clinical safety and efficacy in patients with hypertension and in those with myocardial infarction. More recently, this compound exhibited a potent antioxidant and antiatherosclerotic effect indicating a clinical useful vasoprotective action.