Angiotensin receptor blockers vs. angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and acute coronary syndrome outcomes in elderly patients: a population-based cohort study (UMPIRE study results)

Comparative Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on Response to a Physical Activity Intervention in Older Adults: Results From the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Study

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may protect against aging-related decline. This study directly compared ACEis and ARBs on associations with risk of mobility disability in older adults when combined with a physical activity intervention.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) trial. Participants aged 70-89 years were randomized to a physical activity or health education intervention. Outcomes included incident and persistent major mobility disability, injurious falls, short physical performance battery, and gait speed. For this analysis, only participants who reported ACEi or ARB use at baseline were included. Baseline differences between ACEi and ARB groups were adjusted for using inverse probability of treatment weights. Weighted Cox proportional hazard models and analysis of covariance models were used to evaluate the independent effects of medications and interaction effects with the intervention on each outcome.

RESULTS

Of 1,635 participants in the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders study, 796 used either an ACEi (496, 62.3%) or ARB (300, 37.7%). Compared with ACEi users, ARB users had 28% lower risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72 [0.60-0.85]) of incident major mobility disability and 35% (HR = 0.65 [0.52-0.82]) lower risk of persistent major mobility disability whereas no interaction between medication use and intervention was observed. Risk of injurious falls and changes in short physical performance battery or gait speed were not different between ARB and ACEi users.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that ARBs may protect from major mobility disability by other mechanisms than improving physical performance.

A Review of Current Diagnosis, Investigation, and Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Elderly Patients

The elderly constitute a sizeable proportion of the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) population, and this population is continually increasing in number. Guideline-directed therapy is frequently underutilized in the elderly due to concerns about patient safety. However, studies suggest that this subgroup could benefit from many of the conventional and newer therapies available. This paper reviews current literature in the context of contemporary American and European guidance.

Azilsartan: a newly approved angiotensin II receptor blocker

Hypertension is a common chronic disease that leads to significant cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Blood pressure control is essential to prevent end-organ complications, such as stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, or kidney disease. Azilsartan is the eighth angiotensin II receptor blocker approved for the management of hypertension, alone or in combination with other agents. At the approved dosage, it reduces systolic blood pressure by 12 to 15 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure by 7 to 8 mm Hg. A higher dose of azilsartan (80 mg) was superior to valsartan 320 mg or olmesartan 40 mg in lowering systolic blood pressure in short-term studies. Additional blood pressure reduction is expected when azilsartan is used adjunctively with a diuretic. However, the effects of azilsartan on cardiovascular morbidity or mortality are still lacking. Azilsartan is well tolerated; the most common side effects are headache and diarrhea. No cases of hyperkalemia have been reported in 6-week clinical trials. Worsening of renal function and hypotension should be monitored, particularly in those with baseline risk factors. It is unknown whether azilsartan would join angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and other angiotensin receptor blockers as the preferred hypertensive agents for end-organ protection. At this time, azilsartan should be considered as an alternative agent for mild-to-moderate hypertension, or as an adjunctive therapy when preferred agents fail to maintain optimal blood pressure control. It is also an option for those patients who have contraindications or cannot tolerate other antihypertensive agents, including dry cough induced by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

Do we need more than just powerful blood pressure reductions? New paradigms in end-organ protection

Antihypertensive therapy can lower the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Yet, partly because of inadequate dosing, wrong pharmacological choices, and poor patient adherence, hypertension control remains suboptimal in the majority of hypertensive patients. Achieving greater blood pressure control requires a multifaceted approach that raises awareness of hypertension, uses effective therapies, and improves adherence. Particular classes of antihypertensive therapy have beneficial actions beyond blood pressure and studies have evaluated differences in cardiovascular protection among classes. The LIFE and HOPE studies showed between-class differences that may be due to effects other than blood pressure-lowering. In the ONTARGET study, telmisartan and ramipril provided similar cardiovascular protection but adherence was higher with telmisartan, which was better tolerated. This difference in compliance is likely to be important for long-term therapy. The selection of an agent for cardiovascular protection should depend on an appreciation of its composite properties, including any beneficial effects on tolerability and increased patient adherence, as these are likely to be advantageous for the long-term management of hypertension. This review examines the evidence that the effects beyond blood pressure provided by some antihypertensive agents can also lower the risk of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and renal events in patients with hypertension.

Are there effects of renin-angiotensin system antagonists beyond blood pressure control?

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are recognized to reduce cardiovascular and renal morbidity and mortality, which is primarily attributed to their antihypertensive effects. Activation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may also play an important role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular and renal disease through blood pressure-independent mechanisms mediated by angiotensin II. Thus, inhibiting the RAS with either an ARB or an ACE inhibitor may confer additional benefit in people with advanced nephropathy that cannot be explained totally by reductions in blood pressure. Preclinical evidence suggests that blood pressure lowering is not solely responsible for the organ and tissue protective effects of ACE inhibitors or ARBs. Furthermore, clinical studies evaluating effects on end organs and surrogate markers have shown that these agents have blood pressure-independent effects. There is also intriguing evidence that agents in the same class may differ in their effects on renal function despite similar blood pressure control. Support for blood pressure-independent effects comes from outcome studies. Agents evaluated in such studies and that appear to have effects independent of blood pressure lowering include irbesartan, losartan, ramipril, and telmisartan. Taken together, this body of evidence indicates that the clinical benefits of ARBs and ACE inhibitors in patients with advanced nephropathy extend beyond blood pressure reduction. Therefore, although antihypertensive efficacy is of primary importance in choosing a treatment to provide cardiovascular and renal protection, consideration should be given to the effects of an agent that extend beyond blood pressure.