The influence of non-beta-blocking drugs on the lipid profile: are diuretics outclassed as initial therapy for hypertension?

Genome-wide meta-analysis of variant-by-diuretic interactions as modulators of lipid traits in persons of European and African ancestry

Hypertension (HTN) is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Metabolic abnormalities, including adverse cholesterol and triglycerides (TG) profiles, are frequent comorbid findings with HTN and contribute to cardiovascular disease. Diuretics, which are used to treat HTN and heart failure, have been associated with worsening of fasting lipid concentrations. Genome-wide meta-analyses with 39,710 European-ancestry (EA) individuals and 9925 African-ancestry (AA) individuals were performed to identify genetic variants that modify the effect of loop or thiazide diuretic use on blood lipid concentrations. Both longitudinal and cross sectional data were used to compute cohort-specific interaction results, which were then combined through meta-analysis in each ancestry. These ancestry-specific results were further combined through trans-ancestry meta-analysis. Analysis of EA data identified two genome-wide significant (p < 5 × 10-8) loci with single nucleotide variant (SNV)-loop diuretic interaction on TG concentrations (including COL11A1). Analysis of AA data identified one genome-wide significant locus adjacent to BMP2 with SNV-loop diuretic interaction on TG concentrations. Trans-ancestry analysis strengthened evidence of association for SNV-loop diuretic interaction at two loci (KIAA1217 and BAALC). There were few significant SNV-thiazide diuretic interaction associations on TG concentrations and for either diuretic on cholesterol concentrations. Several promising loci were identified that may implicate biologic pathways that contribute to adverse metabolic side effects from diuretic therapy.

Effect of Indapamide on Urinary Calcium Excretion in Patients with and without Urinary Stone Disease

BACKGROUND:

Indapamide is an antihypertensive agent similar to thiazides, but with some different effects. Thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics are useful in preventing recurrent urinary stone formation due to their hypocalciuric effects.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the hypocalciuric and other effects on certain laboratory parameters of indapamide 1.5 mg in different patient groups.

METHODS:

Four groups of patients recruited from urology and nephrology outpatient departments were experiencing non-hypercalciuric urinary stone disease (group 1), idiopathic hypercalciuria (group 2), urinary stone disease with hypercalciuria (group 3), and essential hypertension (group 4). In all patients, fasting serum uric acid, calcium, sodium, potassium, cholesterol, triglyceride, parathyroid hormone (PTH) values, and morning second-spot urine calcium and creatinine levels were assessed before and 8 weeks after treatment with indapamide.

RESULTS:

Urinary calcium excretion was reduced significantly in all groups: group 1 from 0.10 ± 0.02 to 0.07 ± 0.03 (mean ± SD; 30% reduction; p < 0.001), group 2 from 0.30 ± 0.15 to 0.15 ± 0.10 (50% reduction; p < 0.001), group 3 from 0.35 ± 0.15 to 0.20 ± 0.10 (43% reduction; p < 0.001), and group 4 from 0.10 ± 0.03 to 0.08 ± 0.02 (20% reduction; p < 0.0010). These results should be interpreted with caution since no control group was included in this study. Mean serum uric acid and triglyceride levels were significantly increased, and mean PTH and potassium levels and diastolic and systolic blood pressure were significantly decreased in all groups. Few temporary adverse effects, such as dizziness and fatigue, were noticed and none of them caused discontinuation of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS:

Indapamide 1.5 mg/day is effective in decreasing calciuria in patients with non-hypercalciuric urinary stone disease, idiopathic hypercalciuria, urinary stone disease with hypercalciuria, and essential hypertension. This could be achieved with few adverse effects similar to those of thiazides and indapamide 2.5 mg. Indapamide decreased the PTH levels in all groups. Long-term clinical benefits of these effects should be evaluated prospectively with further randomized studies.

Antihypertensive and Metabolic Effects of Concomitant Administration of Terazosin and Methyclothiazide for the Treatment of Essential Hypertension

The efficacy and safety of once-daily 2.5- or 5.0-mg methyclothiazide (MCTZ) added to once-daily 5.0-mg terazosin (TRZ) versus 5.0-mg TRZ alone was evaluated in this double-blind, multicenter study. All patients received TRZ during a 6-week titration period. Hypertensive patients (222) (mean blood pressure of 159/104 mm Hg) were randomized to one of three treatment groups: TRZ alone (N = 76); TRZ+MCTZ-2.5 mg (N = 74); and TRZ+MCTZ-5.0 mg (N = 72) for the 8-week double-blind period. Changes in the supine and standing SBP/DBP from preTRZ period were: TRZ alone (-4.8/-8.1 and -2.6/-6.1 mm Hg); TRZ+MCTZ-2.5 mg (-17.3/-12.4 and -16.0/-11.2 mm Hg); and TRZ+MCTZ-5.0 mg (-20.6/-14.4 and -23.3/-14.6 mm Hg). Blood pressure changes in the combination groups were significantly greater than those in the TRZ alone group. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the TRZ+MCTZ-2.5-mg and TRZ+MCTZ-5.0-mg groups. The combination of TRZ and MCTZ tends to mitigate the adverse effects on serum glucose, uric, potassium and lipids usually associated with thiazide diuretics. Thus, combination treatment that begins with TRZ and adds MCTZ is effective in lowering blood pressure without any significant adverse metabolic effects.

Comparative metabolic effects of hydrochlorothiazide and indapamide in hypertensive diabetic patients receiving ACE inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

ACE inhibitors, when used as monotherapy, are frequently unable to adequately control blood pressure in diabetic patients. A diuretic may be added; however, thiazide diuretics, but not indapamide, have been associated with adverse metabolic effects. Whether these effects also apply to thiazides when administered in the currently used lower doses, and whether they differ from indapamide in their metabolic effects, particularly when used in combination with an ACE inhibitor in diabetic patients, has not been previously studied.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint crossover study comparing the metabolic responses to the addition of either hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or indapamide, in 18 diabetic hypertensive patients receiving ACE inhibitor monotherapy for hypertension. Patients stabilized on fosinopril 20 mg/day were randomized to receive either HCTZ 12.5 mg od or indapamide 2.5 mg od for 8 weeks, then crossed over to the alternate therapy for a further 8-week period. Blood pressure, heart rate and metabolic assessments were performed at the end of each 8-week treatment period.

RESULTS

Seated and standing systolic and diastolic blood pressures were not different between HCTZ or indapamide when added to fosinopril, nor was the fasting lipid profile or urinary albumin : creatinine ratio. Plasma potassium was lower with indapamide compared with HCTZ treatment (indapamide 4.3+/-0.1 mmol/l; HCTZ 4.5+/-0.1 mmol/l, P<0.01) and HbA1c was higher with indapamide than with HCTZ therapy (indapamide 7.8+/-0.4%; HCTZ 7.2+/-0.3%, P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day, when added to background ACE inhibitor therapy with fosinopril in hypertensive diabetic patients, resulted in a metabolic profile that was similar, if not superior on certain parameters, in comparison with indapamide 2.5 mg/day.

Interaction between Potassium-Depleting Diuretics and Lovastatin in Hypercholesterolemic Ambulatory Care Patients

Objective:

To evaluate the potential impact of potassium-depleting diuretics on the efficacy of lovastatin.

Design:

A retrospective study of ambulatory patients taking lovastatin and thiazide or loop diuretics was conducted.

Setting:

Ambulatory care patients with coexisting hypercholesterolemia and hypertension from a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Participants:

A total of 32 patients were studied, 13 of whom had been taking lovastatin before diuretics were added. Another 19 patients had been receiving diuretics before lovastatin was initiated. The changes in their total cholesterol from baseline were recorded and analyzed.

Main Outcome Measures:

In all the patients taking lovastatin and diuretics concurrently, total cholesterol concentrations dropped initially, followed by a rise despite continuation of therapy with lovastatin. The reason for this initial drop in total cholesterol following 1 month of concurrent therapy is the subject of further investigation in a prospective study.

Results:

Regardless of the order of administration of the lipid-lowering and antihypertensive drugs, serum cholesterol rose 20% from its nadir.

Conclusions:

Patients taking potassium-depleting diuretics and a hepatic hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase enzyme inhibitor (lovastatin) concurrently do not seem to benefit substantially from the lipid-lowering effect of lovastatin, probably because of a functional antagonism of the lipid-lowering effect of lovastatin by potassium-depleting diuretics.

Review: the effects of antihypertensive agents on serum lipids

Because various antihypertensive drugs adversely affect lipid metabolism, these drugs may increase associated risks for coronary artery disease and thus offset some of the beneficial effects of blood pressure reduction. In this paper the current literature regarding the effects of antihypertensive agents on serum lipids is reviewed. Differing effects of various classes of antihypertensives are assessed to further our understanding of this very important subject.

Hydrochlorothiazide treatment of children with hypercalciuria: effects and side effects

Urinary excretion of calcium and the changes in serum cholesterol fractions were investigated in 15 children with renal hypercalciuria, following 3-month hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) treatment (daily dose 1 mg/kg). Urinary calcium excretion (expressed as the ratio of calcium to creatinine) reached its lowest value after 2 weeks. It was still below the initial value at the end of the 3rd month of treatment (0.84 +/- 0.06, 0.29 +/- 0.03 and 0.6 +/- 0.09 mmol/mmol, respectively). A significant rise in the total serum cholesterol level (4.64 +/- 0.23 vs. 4.25 +/- 0.18 mmol/l before treatment, P < 0.01) and the low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol fraction (2.6 +/- 0.24 vs. 2.31 +/- 0.31 before treatment, P < 0.01) was observed at the end of the 3rd month, while high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol was slightly decreased. A significant elevation of the LDL/HDL ratio was also observed (from 1.76 +/- 0.17 to 2.2 +/- 0.17, P < 0.001), indicating an increase in the atherogenic cholesterol fractions. The risks and benefits of the thiazide therapy should be considered before starting long-term treatment of children with hypercalciuria and haematuria or renal stone disease.

The place of alpha blockers in the antihypertensive armamentarium

Although beta-blockers and diuretics are presently the only medications shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in hypertensives in large clinical trials, these drugs have not exerted optimal expected benefits in reducing cardiac events. Alpha-1 selective blockers exhibit a favorable impact on lipids, particularly on HDL-cholesterol. Unlike beta-blockers, they do not increase triglycerides and they do not produce the increase in LDL-cholesterol observed with traditional doses of diuretics. Alpha-blockers should be considered in the treatment of hypertensives with lipid disorders or diabetes and in those who have contraindications, failure to respond or toxicity associated with diuretics and/or beta-blockade.

Torasemide in comparison with thiazides in the treatment of hypertension

There are a number of clinically relevant differences between torasemide and the thiazide diuretics in the treatment of hypertension. Only 2.5-5 mg torasemide once daily is sufficient for antihypertensive treatment; these low doses of torasemide exert comparable antihypertensive effects to those of the overtly natriuretic doses of thiazides (e.g., hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg) that are currently used once daily for the treatment of hypertension. Whereas natriuretic thiazide doses reduce blood pressure rapidly, the blood pressure-lowering effect of low-dose torasemide appears to occur more gradually during the first weeks of treatment. The diurnal blood pressure rhythm is not altered by either drug. In contrast to the thiazides, torasemide does not cause significant renal potassium loss in doses recommended to treat hypertension. Long-term antihypertensive treatment with torasemide has not resulted in undesired metabolic side effects, such as hypomagnesemia, alterations in glucose and lipid metabolism, or hyperuricemia. As compared with the thiazides, torasemide appears to be a safer and equally effective alternative for antihypertensive treatment when subdiuretic doses of this loop diuretic are used.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled comparison of the metabolic effects of low-dose hydrochlorothiazide and indapamide

To compare the metabolic effects of indapamide (I) and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) at equivalent hypotensive doses, 11 hypertensive patients (5 male, 8 black, aged 56 +/- 8 yr--mean +/- SEM) having serum uric acid concentrations greater than 8.0 mg/dL while receiving previous therapy with thiazides, received 28-day courses of placebo, indapamide (2.5 mg/d), and HCTZ (25 mg/d) in randomized, double-blind, double-crossover design. Supine and standing blood pressures, weight, pulse rates and sera were obtained after each 28 day period. Blood pressures and weights were lowered (P less than .001 and 0.01, respectively) equally by the diuretics: supine blood pressures fell from 168 +/- 4/104 +/- 2 (placebo) to 153 +/- 4/93 +/- 2 (HCTZ) and 155 +/- 4/94 +/- 2 mm Hg (I); standing blood pressures (after 2 minutes upright) also decreased: 171 +/- 5/104 +/- 2 (placebo) to 156 +/- 5/93 +/- 2 (HCTZ) and 157 +/- 4/94 +/- 2 mm Hg (I). There was a statistically significant difference (P less than .05) across treatments by analysis of variance in both uric acid and potassium concentrations: serum urate (in mg/dL) was lowest with placebo (7.1 +/- 0.3), and rose to 8.3 +/- 0.2 with HCTZ (P less than .001 compared with placebo by paired t test), and 8.1 +/- 0.2 with I (P less than .005 vs. placebo). The urate concentration with I was significantly lower than that with HCTZ (P less than .02), but the magnitude of the difference was small (0.2 mg/dL).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Doxazosin therapy in the treatment of diabetic hypertension

The incidence of cardiovascular disease in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) has not been reduced by the control of hyperglycemia alone. Hypertension and dyslipidemia may be the major determinants of macrovascular disease in these patients. With the high prevalence of hypertension in NIDDM, antihypertensive drugs are likely to be important determinants of an atherogenic lipid profile. To date, there is no completed major randomized controlled trial of antihypertensive treatment outcome in a diabetic population, and as such, drug choice for the treatment of diabetic hypertension is often based on evidence extrapolated from studies in nondiabetic groups. However, two short-term studies have assessed the effects of doxazosin antihypertensive therapy in subjects with NIDDM. Both studies showed that the significant reduction in blood pressure with doxazosin treatment was associated with favorable effects on the serum lipid profile. In one study, contrasting adverse effects of atenolol treatment on glycemic control, lipids, and lipoproteins were observed. Doxazosin therapy was associated with a trend toward correcting the disturbances of lipoprotein metabolism characteristic of NIDDM. These metabolic effects, combined with effective lowering of blood pressure by doxazosin, may be important determinants of cardiovascular disease in the long term.

Effects of captopril on diabetic nephropathy in hypertensive women

The effects of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor captopril on blood pressure, proteinuria, creatinine clearance and metabolic control in diabetic nephropathy have been evaluated. Captopril 144 mg per day was given to 8 longstanding, insulin-dependent, diabetic females with nephropathy. The blood pressure was significantly reduced (systolic 45.4, diastolic pressure 30.6 and mean arterial pressure 33.8 mm Hg after 24 weeks of treatment). Plasma renin activity rose significantly from a basal value of 1.60 to 6.71 ng.ml-1.h-1, and so did serum potassium (from 4.57 to 4.83 mEq.1-1). Serum aldosterone fell from 161 to 70.9 pgm.ml-1 and from 27.3 to 15.3 micrograms.24 h-1 in plasma and urine, respectively, after 6 months on captopril therapy. Urinary protein excretion was decreased by about 48% and creatinine clearance remained unchanged throughout the study. Plasma triglycerides and cholesterol also remained unchanged, and glycosylated haemoglobin was significantly reduced from 13.8 to 10.2% after captopril. The results suggest that captopril is a useful drug to treat hypertension in patients suffering from diabetic nephropathy, as the decline in kidney function can be reduced without impairing glucose tolerance or the lipid profile.

Beneficial effects of indapamide on lipoproteins and apoproteins in ambulatory hypertensive patients

Among the numerous risk factors for atherosclerosis, 2 are particularly important: hypertension and primary or secondary abnormalities of plasma lipids and lipoproteins. Antihypertensive treatments significantly decrease the risk of cerebrovascular accidents, renal failure or hypertensive cardiomyopathy, but they have little influence on coronary artery disease. It has been suggested that some antihypertensive agents may have deleterious effects by altering serum lipoproteins and this may override the benefit of blood pressure reduction. Diuretics increase the blood concentration of total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins and triglycerides. Indapamide, a methylindoline agent with vasodilator activity, has no adverse lipid effects. Twenty-six studies have clearly demonstrated that indapamide appears to be unique among diuretics because of an absence of adverse lipid effects. In some studies indapamide significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apoproteins A1, A2 and apoprotein E. When a thiazide diuretic had been given previously, indapamide treatment normalized the lipid and lipoprotein profiles. The reason for the lack of adverse lipid effects of indapamide is discussed. Thus indapamide, 2.5 mg once daily, is effective and safe for the control of mild to moderate hypertension, both in young and older patients. It may be an optimal diuretic for use in normolipidemic or hyperlipidemic patients, as it increases high-density lipoprotein but not low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

Initial drug therapy for hypertensive patients with hyperlipidemia

Hypertension and hyperlipidemia are cardiovascular risk factors that commonly coexist. Studies have indicated that it is important to control both risk factors to achieve significant reductions in morbidity and mortality. Recent debate has focused upon whether traditional step I antihypertensive agents can substantially lower these risks because of their effects on plasma lipids. This debate continues to be unresolved. However, for the patient with elevated lipid levels, diuretics and beta-blockers may make the management of the lipid disorder more difficult. Therefore it may be desirable to select alternative step I antihypertensive agents that will not interfere with the therapy for hyperlipidemia. Alternative step I agents include alpha 1-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers. These agents either have no effect on plasma lipids or they improve the lipid profile. Generally, these drugs are well tolerated and provide good alternatives for patients with hyperlipidemias. The initial drug of choice can be chosen depending upon other patient variables such as age, race, or concomitant diseases.

Cost of antihypertensive treatment: a point of view from India

In India, expenditure on the treatment of all patients with mild hypertension is not cost effective. Nonpharmacologic treatment is encouraged.

Selective alpha 1-adrenergic blockade, lipids, and coronary heart disease risk. Considerations in the treatment of mild hypertension

The importance of hypertension and hyperlipidemia as independent and interactive risk factors for the development of premature cardiovascular disease, and particularly for the development of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease, is becoming increasingly apparent both from epidemiologic data and from therapeutic trials. Nevertheless, therapeutic trials of patients with mild hypertension have not demonstrated benefits from lowering arterial pressure, in terms of reduced mortality rates from coronary events. This may, in part, be due to the fact that many of the antihypertensive agents used in these trials adversely influence lipid and lipoprotein levels. Thus, agents that are lipid-neutral or that favorably influence the lipid profile, such as selective alpha 1-inhibitors, are receiving increasing attention for the treatment of mild hypertension. Recent insights into these issues are considered.

Lipids, lipoproteins, and coronary heart disease: implications for antihypertensive therapy

There is now considerable evidence that treatment of abnormalities of lipids and lipoproteins reduces the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD). Treatment of hypertension, another major cardiovascular risk factor, has not been shown to have the same impact on CHD. Possible explanations for this are that cardiovascular risk factors may occur in combination in an individual or that therapy for hypertension has adversely affected one or several of the other risk factors for CHD, thereby offsetting the benefit gained by lowering blood pressure. This article reviews the relationship between lipids, lipoproteins, and coronary heart disease, and the impact of cholesterol lowering on CHD. The evidence that antihypertensive drugs are associated with lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities is introduced by a critical appraisal of the several studies for such evidence. Implications for the treatment of the hypertensive patient are discussed.

Effects of diuretic drugs on the lipid profile

Thiazide-type diuretic drugs modify the lipoprotein profile when used in the short term treatment of hypertension. Total cholesterol increases by 6 to 7% on average because of raised concentrations of low density or very low density lipoprotein cholesterol or both. High density lipoprotein cholesterol does not change. Spironolactone has a lesser effect on lipids than do thiazides. In contrast, the methylindoline compound, indapamide, a diuretic with vasodilator activity, has produced no adverse effects on lipids or lipoproteins. Long term data on thiazide monotherapy are sparse but suggest a persistence of the lipid effect for as long as 6 years of treatment. The clinical impact of these lipid changes is unclear. Although clinical trials have proved the benefit of lowering cholesterol on the incidence of coronary heart disease, the clinical significance of these diuretic-induced increases is unknown. A clinical trial will be required to resolve the issue by comparing antihypertensive drugs with and without adverse effects on the lipid profile. Because coronary heart disease is the most common complication of mild hypertension, and as diuretic-based regimens have not succeeded in curbing it, resolution of this concern is important.