Antihypertensive effects of six calcium antagonists: evidence from Fourier analysis of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure recordings

Near-infrared magnetic core-shell nanoparticles based on lanthanide metal-organic frameworks as a ratiometric felodipine sensing platform

Felodipine is an effective drug to treat hypertension, but its abuse can cause bardycardia. It is significant to develop highly sensitive detection platform for felodipine to enable the efficient treatment of hypertension diseases. In this work, to highly efficiently detect felodipine, multi-emission near-infrared (NIR) hierarchical magnetic core-shell lanthanide-MOF nanoparticles, namely Nd-MOF@Yb-MOF@SiO₂@Fe₃O₄ (NIR-1), has been synthesized by layer-by-layer (LBL) method. LBL method can adjust the optical properties of NIR-1 and expose more active sites to improve sensitivity in detection process. NIR-1 has near-infrared luminescence emission, which can efficiently avoid the interference of autofluorescence in biological tissues. Photo-luminescent (PL) experiments also reveal that NIR-1 could be used as a near-infrared ratiometric luminescent sensor for felodipine detection with high selectivity and sensitivity, the low of detection limit (LOD) is 6.39 nM in felodipine detection, which is also performed using real biological samples. In addition, NIR-1 can be used as a ratiometric thermometer could also be applied in the temperature sensing from 293 K to 343 K. Finally, detection mechanisms for felodipine and temperature sensing performance based on near-infrared (NIR) emission were also investigated and discussed in detail.

Lercanidipine vs lacidipine in isolated systolic hypertension

This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, multicentre study compared the efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine with lacidipine. Elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension (supine blood pressure >/=160/<95 mmHg) were enrolled and underwent a placebo run-in period of 14-27 days before random allocation to lercanidipine tablets 10 mg once daily (n=111) or lacidipine tablets 2 mg once daily (n=111) for the assessment period (112-160 days). Titration to lercanidipine 20 mg once daily (two 10 mg tablets) or lacidipine 4 mg once daily (two 2 mg tablets) was allowed after 8 weeks, if required. Both treatments decreased supine and standing systolic and diastolic blood pressure between the end of the run-in period and the end of the assessment period (P<0.0001). At the end of the assessment period, the estimated mean treatment difference (95% confidence intervals) in supine systolic blood pressure was -0.81 (-4.45, 2.84) mmHg. These confidence intervals were within the limits specified for equivalence, that is, (-5, 5) mmHg. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring showed that the antihypertensive effects of both drugs lasted for the full 24-h dosing period and followed a circadian pattern. Both treatments were well tolerated with a low incidence of adverse drug reactions and a low withdrawal rate. Significantly fewer patients withdrew from treatment with lercanidipine (P=0.015). Neither treatment had any clinically significant effect on pulse rate or cardiac conduction. In conclusion, both treatments were equally effective in controlling supine systolic blood pressure in patients with isolated systolic hypertension.

Comparative effect of lercanidipine, felodipine, and nifedipine GITS on blood pressure and heart rate in patients with mild to moderate arterial hypertension: the Lercanidipine in Adults (LEAD) Study

This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the effects of three dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (lercanidipine, felodipine, and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system) on blood pressure and heart rate in 250 patients with mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure > or =95 and 109 mm Hg). Patients were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with once-daily doses of lercanidipine 10 mg, felodipine 10 mg, or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system 30 mg. After 4 weeks of treatment, the dose was doubled in nonresponding patients. At 8 weeks, no significant differences in blood pressure were observed among the three groups. Increases in heart rate in all three groups induced by stressful conditions before and after treatment were not exacerbated during active treatment. The incidence of adverse drug reactions was lower in the lercanidipine and nifedipine groups than in the felodipine group (p<0.05); in particular, the incidence of edema for lercanidipine was 5.5% vs. 13% for felodipine and 6.6% for nifedipine.

Effect of amlodipine on systolic blood pressure

BACKGROUND

Systolic hypertension is the most common form of hypertension, particularly in people aged >60 years. Caused by decreased compliance of large arteries, systolic hypertension is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Recent studies have demonstrated that it is more important to control systolic blood pressure (SBP) than diastolic blood pressure (DBP).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to perform a systematic literature review to examine the effectiveness of amlodipine in lowering SBP in a variety of patient subgroups and clinical settings.

METHODS

The literature review methodology included identifying, selecting, appraising, extracting, and synthesizing primary research studies. Following an a priori protocol, published literature was searched from 1980 to 2001 using 3 electronic databases. A manual review of the reference lists of recent review articles and all accepted studies was performed. Parallel-group, randomized, controlled trials that included at least 10 adults with baseline hypertension (SBP>or=140 mm Hg, DBP>or=90 mm Hg, or both), included at least 1 arm randomized to initial treatment with amlodipine monotherapy, had a minimum treatment duration of 8 weeks, and reported baseline and end-point blood pressure were included.

RESULTS

Of 696 citations identified, 85 primary studies met all inclusion criteria. Comparable treatment arms were pooled, and weightd mean SBP was calculated. In the amlodipine monotherapy arms, which included >5000 patients, SBP decreased by a mean of 17.5 mm Hg from baseline. The effect of amlodipine in reducing SBP was greater in elderly patients (age>or=60 years) and patients with author-defined isolated systolic hypertension. The dose was titrated to achieve the target blood pressure in 73 of 89 amlodipine treatment arms, whereas 16 treatment arms reported fixed doses. The median daily dose was 5 mg (range, 1.25-15 mg) in both the fixed-dose and dose-titration groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this review of the published literature, amlodipine monotherapy was effective in reducing SBP. Antihypertensive agents such as amlodipine warrant consideration for the management of patients with inadequately controlled SBP.