Dose-related antihypertensive effects of irbesartan in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension

Influence of AGTR1 and ABCB1 Gene Polymorphism on the Curative Effect of Irbesartan

The interindividual heterogeneity in response to the antihypertensive effect of irbesartan has received considerable attention because of gene polymorphism. In this study, we investigated the new combinational influences of AGTR1 and ABCB1 gene polymorphism on the therapeutic effect of irbesartan among Chinese hypertensive patients. A total of 353 samples including 168 normal people and 185 hypertensive patients were adopted, and genotypes comprise ABCB1 (CC, CT, and TT) and AGTR1 (AA and AC) in this study. The results of multiple linear regression models showed that no statistically significant differences were observed in blood pressure change following irbesartan administration in each genotype from either ABCB1 (CC, CT, and TT) or AGTR1 (AA and AC). However, spline smoothing analysis demonstrated that the blood pressure therapeutic responses of irbesartan presented a noticeable difference among different ABCB1 genotypes when irbesartan doses reached over 300 ng/mL. Eventually, we assumed that the different drug responses of irbesartan among various AGTR1 genotypes were due to the diversity of the irbesartan-conjugated protein, which is responsible for crossing-coupled intracellular G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs).

Comparison of Monotherapy with Irbesartan 150 mg or Amlodipine 5 mg for Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension

Objective. The primary objective of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of the angiotensin II receptor blocker irbesartan 150 mg and the calcium channel blocker amlodipine 5 mg in the treatment of patients with seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95—110 mmHg.

Design. Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, comparative pilot study.

Methods. Subjects were 18—65 years of age, with DBP 95—110 mmHg, and of non-African American origin. Following a three-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period, 181 subjects were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-daily irbesartan 150 mg (n=89) or amlodipine 5 mg (n=92) for four weeks. Trough (24±3 hours post-dosing) BP measurements were obtained at baseline and at Weeks 2 and 4 under standardised, controlled conditions. Response was defined as DBP <90 mmHg or a reductionfrom baseline of ≥10 mmHg.

Results. After four weeks of treatment, the mean (±SE) decrease from baseline in DBP was 9.4±0.6 mmHg in the irbesartan group vs. 9.6±0.6 mmHg in the amlodipine group (p=0.806). The mean decrease from baseline in seated systolic BP was 12.2±1.0 mmHg in the irbesartan group vs. 12.0±1.0 mmHg in the amlodipine group (p=0.885). Overall, 62% of subjects in the irbesartan group and 63% in the amlodipine group had a response (p=0.609), and 54% and 56% of patients (p=0.596), respectively, had their DBP normalised (<90 mmHg). Adverse events were reported by 21.3% of patients receiving irbesartan and 20.7% receiving amlodipine.

Conclusions. Irbesartan 150 mg demonstrated comparable efficacy to amlodipine 5 mg, thereby confirming its value as an antihypertensive treatment option in non-African American patients with DBP 95—110 mmHg.

Involvement of Angiotensin II Type 1 and 2 Receptors in Gelatinase Regulation in Human Carotid Atheroma in vitro

AIM

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), angiotensin II (AII) and its receptors are implicated in atherosclerotic plaque instability, however the roles of the two receptor subtypes, ATR1 and ATR2, in MMP regulation remain uncertain. In this study, we investigated the effect of ATR1 and ATR2 blockade on the expression and activity of MMP-2, MMP-3 and MMP-9, in human carotid atheroma.

METHODS

Atheroma samples (n=36) were obtained from patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy. The effects of ATR1 (irbesartan), ATR2 (PD123319) and combined ATR1 and ATR2 blockade on the expression and activity of the MMPs and the expression of tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs) were investigated in explant culture experiments. Paired atheroma samples were incubated with the intervention or media control for 4 days. Protein levels (MMP-2, MMP-3, MMP-9, TIMP-1, TIMP-2, TIMP-4, ATR1 and ATR2) were determined by ELISA. Overall gelatinase activity and specific activation were measured by chromogenic activity assays and zymography, respectively.

RESULTS

ATR1 blockade, but not ATR2 blockade significantly reduced TIMP-1, TIMP-2 and TIMP-4 expression in atheroma supernatant. Combined ATR1 and ATR2 blockade significantly reduced MMP-2, MMP-3 and MMP-9 expression. MMP-2 and MMP-9 relative activation, and overall MMP-9 catalytic capacity were significantly increased by ATR1 blockade.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that ATR1 blockade reduces TIMP expression and increases gelatinase activity in human carotid atheroma.

The cost-effectiveness of irbesartan for hypertension

High blood pressure is a very common problem in the adult and elderly population, both in developed and developing countries. A relatively large number of drug classes are available to treat this condition and prevent its complications, which are not only more frequent in the aforementioned patients but also those affected by metabolic syndrome and/or Type 2 diabetes. Irbesartan is an angiotensin-receptor blocker class drug with good antihypertensive efficacy and specific pharmacological characteristics, whose efficacy has been more deeply evaluated in metabolically complex hypertensive patients. In this review, the authors will analyze its effectiveness in preventing or delaying organ damage in hypertensive patients, with a closer look at the economic implications of treating hypertension with irbesartan in the context of available antihypertensive drugs.

Comparison of aldosterone synthesis in adrenal cells, effect of various AT1 receptor blockers with or without atrial natriuretic peptide

Bifunctional angiotensin II (Ang II) type 1 (AT1) receptor blockers (ARBs) that can block the activation of not only AT1 receptor, but also neprilysin, which metabolizes vasoactive peptides including atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), are currently being developed. However, the usefulness of the inactivation of ANP in addition to the AT1 receptor with regard to aldosterone (Ald) synthesis is not yet clear. We evaluated the inhibitory effects of various ARBs combined with or without ANP on Ang II-induced adrenal Ald synthesis using a human adrenocortical cell line (NCI-H295R). Ang II increased Ald synthesis in a dose- and time-dependent manner. Ald synthesis induced by Ang II was completely blocked by azilsartan, but not PD123319 (AT2 receptor antagonist). CGP42112 AT2 receptor agonist did not affect Ald synthesis. While most ARBs block Ang II-induced Ald synthesis to different extents, azilsartan and olmesartan have similar blocking effects on Ald synthesis. The different effects of ARBs were particularly observed at 10(-7) and 10(-8 )M. ANP attenuated Ang II-induced Ald synthesis, and ANP-mediated attenuation of Ang II-induced Ald synthesis were blocked by inhibitors of G-protein signaling subtype 4 and protein kinase G. ANP (10(-8) and 10(-7 )M) without ARBs inhibited Ald synthesis, and the combination of ANP (10(-7 )M) and ARB (10(-8 )M) had an additive effect with respect to the inhibition of Ald synthesis. In conclusions, ARBs had differential effects on Ang II-induced Ald synthesis, and ANP may help to block Ald synthesis when the dose of ARB is not sufficient to block its secretion.

Comprehensive overview: efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of irbesartan

Background

Hypertension represents a major health problem, affecting more than one billion adults worldwide. Irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, is considered to be a highly effective treatment in the management of hypertension. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability profile , and cost-effectiveness of treatment with irbesartan in hypertension.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted using the electronic PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and the Health Economic Evaluations Database of search terms relating to irbesartan efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness, and the results were utilized.

Results

Findings from the present analysis show that irbesartan either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents can achieve significant reductions in blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic, compared with alternative treatment options. Irbesartan was also found to have a renoprotective effect independent of its blood pressure-lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Furthermore, irbesartan demonstrated an excellent safety and tolerability profile , with either lower or equal adverse events compared with placebo and other alternative treatments. In terms of economic analyses, compared with other antihypertensive therapy alternatives, irbesartan was found to be a preferred option, that is less costly and more effective.

Conclusion

The evidence indicates that treating patients with hypertension alone or with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy using irbesartan can control hypertension, prolong life, and reduce costs in relation to existing alternatives.

Role of the angiotensin converting enzyme 1/angiotensin II/angiotensin receptor 1 axis in interstitial collagenase expression in human carotid atheroma

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Angiotensin II (AII) receptor 1 (ATR1) and angiotensin converting enzyme 1 (ACE1) blockers have been shown to reduce acute cardiovascular events in patients, improve plaque stability and modify matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) expression. However, the role of the ACE1/AII/ATR1 axis in interstitial collagenase regulation has not been fully explored. In this study, we investigated the effect of ATR1 and ACE1 blockade on the expression and activity of MMP-1, -8 and -13 in human carotid atheroma.

METHODS

Atheroma samples (n = 24) were obtained from patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy. The effects of ATR1 (irbesartan), ACE1 (quinapril), ACE2 (DX600) and MMP (GM6001) blockade on the expression of AII, the interstitial collagenases and soluble elastin fragments were investigated in explant culture supernatants. Paired atheroma samples were incubated with intervention or media control for 4 days. Protein levels (AII, MMP-1, -8, -13 and soluble elastin) were determined by ELISA.

RESULTS

ATR1, but not ACE1, blockade significantly reduced MMP-1 and -8 concentrations in atheroma supernatants. ACE2 blockade significantly increased MMP-1 and -8 concentrations in atheroma supernatants. AII concentration in atheroma supernatants significantly increased after ATR1, ACE1 and ACE2 blockade. Release of soluble elastin fragments increased after ATR1 and ACE1 blockade, but was not changed by an MMP inhibitor.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that ATR1 blockade alters AII, MMP-1, MMP-8 expression and a marker of elastin degradation in human atheroma, but that the elastin degradation response is not MMP driven. This data contributes to the recognised ability of ATR1 blockade to modify plaque stability.

The role of irbesartan in the treatment of patients with hypertension: a comprehensive and practical review

Irbesartan is an orally active angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist (angiotensin receptor blocker [ARB]) whose pharmacological profile differs significantly from those of many other compounds of the same class. In particular, according to its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, irbesartan has a high bioavailability, a long duration of action and a small potential for pharmacological interactions due to the nature of the enzymatic pathway involved in its metabolic process. Morbidity data with irbesartan have been mainly accumulated in patients with renal impairment where the drug has demonstrated the most remarkable evidence of efficacy among the ARBs class, regardless of the stage of the renal disease (from early to late) and the length of the observational period. The efficacy of irbesartan has also been demonstrated in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and congestive heart failure. The drug is indicated for the treatment of hypertension and renal impairment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) and hypertension, and its tolerability and safety profile have been extensively investigated and reported to be similar to placebo. From the pharmacoeconomic point of view, treating patients with T2D, hypertension and overt nephropathy using irbesartan was both a cost- and life-saving procedure compared with the use of amlodipine and standard antihypertensive treatment in an Italian setting. The role of irbesartan in the management of hypertension with or without T2D and renal impairment is clearly recognized by national and international guidelines and largely acknowledged by the medical community according to the efficacy of the drug in the prevention of cardiovascular risk in addition to and beyond kidney prevention.

Encounter frequency and serum glucose level, blood pressure, and cholesterol level control in patients with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

More frequent patient-provider encounters may lead to faster control of hemoglobin A1c level, blood pressure (BP), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (LDL-C) level (hereafter referred to as hemoglobin A1c, BP, and LDL-C) and improve outcomes, but no guidelines exist for how frequently patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) should be seen.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed 26,496 patients with diabetes and elevated hemoglobin A1c, BP, and/or LDL-C treated by primary care physicians at 2 teaching hospitals between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2009. The relationship between provider encounter (defined as a note in the medical record) frequency and time to hemoglobin A1c, BP, and LDL-C control was assessed.

RESULTS

Comparing patients who had encounters with their physicians between 1 to 2 weeks vs 3 to 6 months, median time to hemoglobin A1c less than 7.0% was 4.4 vs 24.9 months (not receiving insulin) and 10.1 vs 52.8 months (receiving insulin); median time to BP lower than 130/85 mm Hg was 1.3 vs 13.9 months; and median time to LDL-C less than 100 mg/dL was 5.1 vs 32.8 months, respectively (P<.001 for all). In multivariable analysis, doubling the time between physician encounters led to an increase in median time to hemoglobin A1c (not receiving [35%] and receiving [17%] insulin), BP (87%), and LDL-C (27%) targets (P<.001 for all). Time to control decreased progressively as encounter frequency increased up to once every 2 weeks for most targets, consistent with the pharmacodynamics of the respective medication classes.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care provider encounters every 2 weeks are associated with fastest achievement of hemoglobin A1c, BP, and LDL-C targets for patients with diabetes mellitus.

Long-term use and tolerability of irbesartan for control of hypertension

In this review, we discuss the pharmacological and clinical properties of irbesartan, a noncompetitive angiotensin II receptor type 1 antagonist, successfully used for more than a decade in the treatment of essential hypertension. Irbesartan exerts its antihypertensive effect through an inhibitory effect on the pressure response to angiotensin II. Irbesartan 150-300 mg once daily confers a lasting effect over 24 hours, and its antihypertensive efficacy is further enhanced by the coadministration of hydrochlorothiazide. Additionally and partially beyond its blood pressure-lowering effect, irbesartan reduces left ventricular hypertrophy, favors right atrial remodeling in atrial fibrillation, and increases the likelihood of maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion in atrial fibrillation. In addition, the renoprotective effects of irbesartan are well documented in the early and later stages of renal disease in type 2 diabetics. Furthermore, both the therapeutic effectiveness and the placebo-like side effect profile contribute to a high adherence rate to the drug. Currently, irbesartan in monotherapy or combination therapy with hydrochlorothiazide represent a rationale pharmacologic approach for arterial hypertension and early-stage and late-stage diabetic nephropathy in hypertensive type II diabetics.

A small difference in the molecular structure of angiotensin II receptor blockers induces AT₁ receptor-dependent and -independent beneficial effects

Angiotensin II (Ang II) type 1 (AT₁) receptor blockers (ARBs) induce multiple pharmacological beneficial effects, but not all ARBs have the same effects and the molecular mechanisms underlying their actions are not certain. In this study, irbesartan and losartan were examined because of their different molecular structures (irbesartan has a cyclopentyl group whereas losartan has a chloride group). We analyzed the binding affinity and production of inositol phosphate (IP), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and adiponectin. Compared with losartan, irbesartan showed a significantly higher binding affinity and slower dissociation rate from the AT₁ receptor and a significantly higher degree of inverse agonism and insurmountability toward IP production. These effects of irbesartan were not seen with the AT₁-Y113A mutant receptor. On the basis of the molecular modeling of the ARBs-AT₁ receptor complex and a mutagenesis study, the phenyl group at Tyr(113) in the AT₁ receptor and the cyclopentyl group of irbesartan may form a hydrophobic interaction that is stronger than the losartan-AT₁ receptor interaction. Interestingly, irbesartan inhibited MCP-1 production more strongly than losartan. This effect was mediated by the inhibition of nuclear factor-kappa B activation that was independent of the AT₁ receptor in the human coronary endothelial cells. In addition, irbesartan, but not losartan, induced significant adiponectin production that was mediated by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ activation in 3T3-L1 adipocytes, and this effect was not mediated by the AT₁ receptor. In conclusion, irbesartan induced greater beneficial effects than losartan due to small differences between their molecular structures, and these differential effects were both dependent on and independent of the AT₁ receptor.

Effects of protein coding polymorphisms in the kallikrein 1 gene on baseline blood pressure and antihypertensive response to irbesartan in Chinese hypertensive patients

The aim of this study was to determine the association between coding variants in the human tissue kallikrein 1 (KLK1) gene and baseline blood pressure (BP) and antihypertensive response to irbesartan treatment in Chinese hypertensive patients. A total of 1061 hypertensives were recruited and received daily oral dosage of 150 mg irbesartan for 4 weeks. Predose BPs, BPs and blood irbesartan concentrations at postdose on the 28th day were all measured. Common functional single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the KLK1 gene were genotyped. On the basis of the HapMap data of Han Chinese in the Beijing population, two non-synonymous polymorphisms with minor allele frequency>0.1, SNP rs5517 (Glu162Lys) and rs5516 (Gln121Glu), were selected. Those with GG genotype in the rs5516 locus had higher average baseline systolic BP (SBP) than CC subjects (β±s.e.: 5.0±2.3, P=0.033); and no associations of rs5517 with baseline BP (diastolic BP (DBP) and SBP) and BP responses, or rs5516 with baseline DBP and BP response were observed. In a haplotype-based association test for the KLK1 gene, the Haplo-special score analyses identified that haplotype AG was marginally associated with SBP response (specific score: 1.75 for P=0.08), but not with DBP response. We did not find any associations between haplotypes (GC and AC) and BP responses. The Haplo-GLM analyses showed that, compared with haplotype GC subjects, the subjects with haplotype AG had a marginally greater SBP response (adjusted β±s.e.: 1.81±0.97, P=0.06), but DBP response did not differ. This study suggests that rs5516 in the KLK1 gene may be involved in the development of essential hypertension and in the regulation of SBP-lowering response to irbesartan in Chinese hypertensives.

Review: angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers: class effects versus molecular effects

Highly selective angiotensin II (Ang II) type 1 (AT(1)) receptor blockers (ARBs) are now available. The AT(1) receptor is a member of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily and block the diverse effects of Ang II. Several ARBs are available for clinical use. Most ARBs have common molecular structures (biphenyl-tetrazol and imidazole groups) and it is clear that ARBs have 'class effects'. On the other hand, recent clinical studies have demonstrated that not all ARBs have the same effects, and some benefits conferred by ARBs may not be class effects, and instead may be 'molecular effects'. In addition, each ARB has been clearly shown to have specific molecular effects in basic experimental studies, and these effects may be due to small differences in the molecular structure of each ARB. However, it is controversial whether ARBs have molecular effects in a clinical setting. Although the presence of molecular effects for each ARB based on experimental studies may not directly influence the clinical outcome, this possibility has not been adequately evaluated. This review focuses on the class effects versus molecular effects of ARBs from bench to bedside.

Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analytical approach

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of valsartan in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) reduction with other angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in essential hypertension.

METHODS

Systematic literature search of databases between October 1997 and May 2008. Meta-analysis of short-term, double-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for treatment of adult hypertension (DBP: 90-115 mmHg). Random-effects meta-regression adjusting for baseline blood pressure (BP) was used to analyse the data. Mean change in SBP and DBP was estimated for each individual drug and dose combination.

RESULTS

In all, 31 RCTs (n = 13,110 patients) were included in the analysis. Six studies include trial arms with candesartan, six irbesartan, 13 losartan, two olmesartan, five telmisartan and 12 valsartan. The weighted average reduction in mean SBP and DBP for valsartan 160 mg was -15.32 mmHg (95% CI: -17.09, -13.63) and -11.3 mmHg (95% CI: -12.15, -10.52) and for 320 mg was -15.85 mmHg (95% CI: -17.60, -14.12) and -11.97 mmHg (95% CI: -12.81, -11.16); these are statistically significantly greater reductions compared with losartan 100 mg, which was -12.01 mmHg (95% CI: -13.78, -10.25) and -9.37 mmHg (95% CI: -10.18, -8.54) for SBP and DBP respectively. There is evidence that valsartan 160 mg reduces SBP and DBP more than irbesartan 150 mg and reduced DBP more than candesartan 16 mg. No other statistically significant difference in efficacy is demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

Valsartan administered at 160 or 320 mg is more effective at lowering BP than losartan 100 mg and shows comparable efficacy to other ARBs in patients with essential hypertension.

Blood pressure lowering efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for hypertension so it is essential to determine and compare their effects on blood pressure (BP), heart rate and withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAE).

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the dose-related systolic and/or diastolic BP lowering efficacy of ARBs versus placebo in the treatment of primary hypertension.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2007), EMBASE (1988 to February 2007) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials evaluating the BP lowering efficacy of fixed-dose monotherapy with an ARB compared with placebo for a duration of 3 to 12 weeks in patients with primary hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. WDAE information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty six RCTs evaluated the dose-related trough BP lowering efficacy of 9 ARBs in 13 451 participants with a baseline BP of 156/101 mm Hg. The data do not suggest that any one ARB is better or worse at lowering BP. A dose of 1/8 or 1/4 of the manufacturers' maximum recommended daily dose (Max) achieved a BP lowering effect that was 60 to 70% of the BP lowering effect of Max. A dose of 1/2 Max achieved a BP lowering effect that was 80% of Max. ARB doses above Max did not significantly lower BP more than Max. Due to evidence of publication bias, the largest trials provide the best estimate of the trough BP lowering efficacy for ARBs as a class of drugs: -8 mm Hg for SBP and -5 mm Hg for DBP. ARBs reduced BP measured 1 to 12 hours after the dose by about 12/7 mm Hg.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from this review suggests that there are no clinically meaningful BP lowering differences between available ARBs. The BP lowering effect of ARBs is modest and similar to ACE inhibitors as a class; the magnitude of average trough BP lowering for ARBs at maximum recommended doses and above is -8/-5 mmHg. Furthermore, 60 to 70% of this trough BP lowering effect occurs with recommended starting doses. The review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with ARBs because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in many of the trials.

Efficacy and safety of fixed combinations of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide in older vs younger patients with hypertension uncontrolled with monotherapy

Subgroup analysis of the Irbesartan/Hydrochlorothiazide Blood Pressure Reductions in Diverse Patient Populations (INCLUSIVE) trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) fixed combinations in patients aged 65 years or older with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure (SBP) after >or= 4 weeks of antihypertensive monotherapy. The INCLUSIVE trial was a prospective, open-label, single-arm trial carried out in 119 sites. Of 844 patients completing placebo treatment, 212 were aged 65 years or older. Participants received treatment with placebo (4-5 weeks), HCTZ 12.5 mg (2 weeks), irbesartan/HCTZ 150/12.5 mg (8 weeks), and then irbesartan/HCTZ 300/25 mg (8 weeks). From baseline to week 18 (n=184, intent-to-treat population), mean change in SBP was -23.0+/-13.3 mm Hg (P<.001) and diastolic BP (DBP) was -10.9+/-7.7 mm Hg (P<.001). Mean SBP/DBP at study end was 134.0+/-14.7/75.1+/-8.4 mm Hg, and SBP, DBP, and SBP/DBP goal was achieved in 73%, 96%, and 72% of patients, respectively. Irbesartan/HCTZ combination therapy allowed SBP goal attainment in 73% of patients aged 65 years or older whose hypertension was previously uncontrolled with antihypertensive monotherapy.

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of irbesartan/HCTZ combination therapy with irbesartan and HCTZ monotherapy in the treatment of moderate hypertension

This prospective, double-blind, parallel-group study randomized patients with moderate hypertension (seated systolic blood pressure (SeSBP) 160-179 mm Hg when seated diastolic blood pressure (SeDBP) <110 mm Hg; or SeDBP 100-109 mm Hg when SeSBP <180 mm Hg) 3:1:1 to treatment with irbesartan 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg combination therapy (n=328), irbesartan 300 mg monotherapy (n=106) or HCTZ monotherapy 25 mg (n=104). Treatment was initiated at half dose, with forced titration to full dose after two weeks followed by ten further weeks' treatment. The primary efficacy variable was the mean reduction in SeSBP from baseline to week 8. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, with mean baseline blood pressure approximately 162/98 mm Hg; the mean age was 55 years. At week 8 there was a reduction in SeSBP of 27.1 mm Hg with irbesartan/HCTZ, compared with 22.1 mm Hg with irbesartan monotherapy (P=0.0016) and 15.7 mm Hg with HCTZ (P<0.0001). Both the rate of decline and the total degree of decline achieved were greatest with irbesartan/HCTZ and least with HCTZ. A significantly greater percentage of patients reached a treatment goal of SeSBP <140 mm Hg and SeDBP <90 mm Hg by week 8 with irbesartan/HCTZ (53.4%), compared with irbesartan (40.6%; P=0.0254) and HCTZ (20.2%; P<0.0001) alone. Treatment was well tolerated in all three-treatment groups with a slight increase in adverse events in the combination therapy group. In conclusion, irbesartan/HCTZ (300/25 mg) is well tolerated and achieves rapid and sustained reductions in both systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure in patients with moderate hypertension.

Efficacy and safety of irbesartan/HCTZ combination therapy as initial treatment for rapid control of severe hypertension

Severe hypertension is difficult to control. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial compared efficacy and safety of once-daily irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) combination therapy with irbesartan monotherapy in severe hypertension. Patients who were untreated or uncontrolled on monotherapy (seated diastolic blood pressure [BP] > or =110 mm Hg) received fixed-dose irbesartan 150 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg combination therapy for 7 weeks, force-titrated to irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 mg at week 1 (n=468); or irbesartan 150 mg monotherapy, force-titrated to 300 mg at week 1 (n=269). Significantly more patients on combination therapy achieved seated diastolic BP <90 mm Hg at week 5 (primary end point) compared with monotherapy recipients (47.2% vs 33.2%; P=.0005). Likewise, significantly more patients attained goals per the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) (<140/90 mm Hg) at week 5 (34.6% vs 19.2%, respectively; P<.0001), while the mean difference between combination and monotherapy in seated diastolic BP and seated systolic BP was 4.7 mm Hg and 9.7 mm Hg (P<.0001). Greater and more rapid BP reduction with irbesartan/HCTZ was achieved without additional side effects.

Managing hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE

Current guideline recommendations for effective strategies to optimize the treatment of patients with concomitant hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus are reviewed.

SUMMARY

Current estimates indicate that 20 million people in the United States have diabetes, 90-95% of whom have type 2 diabetes mellitus. Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of premature death from cardiovascular disease (CVD), stroke, and end-stage renal disease. Hypertension is an extremely common comorbidity in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The coexistence of hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes is particularly destructive because of the strong linkage of the two conditions with CVD, stroke, progression of renal disease, and diabetic nephropathy. Current guidelines, including those issued by the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, the National Kidney Foundation, and the American Diabetes Association, provide evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, studies indicate that guidelines are not widely followed. Therefore, the beneficial effects of appropriate hypertension treatment observed in clinical trials are often not recognized in clinical practice. Pharmacists are ideally positioned to help improve guideline implementation and patient outcome.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists must become more vigilant about following current guidelines for the treatment of patients with concomitant hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Strategies such as patient education and medication assessment can help to optimize care for these patients and slow the progression to diabetic nephropathy.

Rationale and design of ACTIVE: the atrial fibrillation clopidogrel trial with irbesartan for prevention of vascular events

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently occurring cardiac arrhythmia with often serious clinical consequences. Many patients have contraindications to anticoagulation, and it is often underused in clinical practice. The addition of clopidogrel to aspirin (ASA) has been shown to reduce vascular events in a number of high-risk populations. Irbesartan is an angiotensin receptor-blocking agent that reduces blood pressure and has other vascular protective effects.

METHODS AND RESULTS

ACTIVE W is a noninferiority trial of clopidogrel plus ASA versus oral anticoagulation in patients with AF and at least 1 risk factor for stroke. ACTIVE A is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of clopidogrel in patients with AF and with at least 1 risk factor for stroke who receive ASA because they have a contraindication for oral anticoagulation or because they are unwilling to take an oral anticoagulant. ACTIVE I is a partial factorial, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of irbesartan in patients participating in ACTIVE A or ACTIVE W. The primary outcomes of these studies are composites of vascular events. A total of 14000 patients will be enrolled in these trials.

CONCLUSIONS

ACTIVE is the largest trial yet conducted in AF. Its results will lead to a new understanding of the role of combined antiplatelet therapy and the role of blood pressure lowering with an angiotensin II receptor blocker in patients with AF.

Association between human atrial natriuretic peptide Val7Met polymorphism and baseline blood pressure, plasma trough irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan in rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension

BACKGROUND

Individual variations in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antihypertensive drugs are influenced by genetic and environmental factors. The ANP gene, which encodes the precursor of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), is among the candidate genes for genetic susceptibility to hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the relationship between ANP Val7Met polymorphism (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism database ID: rs5063) and baseline blood pressure (BP), plasma trough irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan in rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

Patients with essential hypertension who had taken no antihypertensive medications within 4 weeks of study initiation received oral irbesartan 150 mg/d for 4 weeks. Genotyping was performed for all patients. BP was measured before dosing on the 1st and 28th days of treatment. Plasma irbesartan concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescent detection. Antihypertensive efficacy was defined as attainment of a diastolic BP (DBP) <90 mm Hg (DBP analysis), a systolic BP (SBP) <140 mm Hg (SBP analysis), and a DBP <90 mm Hg and SBP <140 mm Hg (DBP and SBP analysis).

RESULTS

The study included 756 patients, 621 with the Val/Val genotype and 135 with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotypes. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, sex, education level, occupation, alcohol consumption, or smoking status between the 2 groups. Patients with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotypes had a significantly lower mean baseline DBP compared with those with the Val/Val genotype (adjusted regression coefficient [SE]: -2.5 [1.0] mm Hg; P = 0.012) and significantly lower mean steady-state plasma trough irbesartan concentrations (adjusted regression coefficient: -12.6 [4.1]; P = 0.002). No significant association was found between antihypertensive efficacy and Val7Met polymorphism in the overall population, but in an analysis by baseline DBP status, patients with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotype a baseline DBP > or =100 mm Hg had significantly smaller reductions in DBP (adjusted regression coefficient: -5.7 [1.4] mm Hg; P < 0.001) and SBP compared with those with the Val/Val genotype and a baseline DBP > or =100 mm Hg (adjusted regression coefficient: -9.8 [2.9] mm Hg; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that in these rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension, ANP Val7Met polymorphism may be a genetic marker for baseline DBP, plasma irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of short-term irbesartan therapy.

Ambulatory blood pressure comparison of the anti-hypertensive efficacy of fixed combinations of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide and losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension

This study examined whether the greater anti-hypertensive efficacy of irbesartan monotherapy over losartan monotherapy extends to the respective fixed-dose combinations with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Patients were treated with either irbesartan 150 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg or losartan 50 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg over a 4-week period. Twenty-four hour daytime and night-time mean blood pressure (BP), BP load and duration of action were assessed using ambulatory BP monitoring. Both treatment regimens significantly reduced BP from baseline for all efficacy variables assessed. A significant difference was noted in adjusted mean changes from baseline in 24-h ambulatory diastolic BP with irbesartan/HCTZ versus losartan/HCTZ. Reduction in diastolic load was significantly greater with irbesartan/HCTZ than with losartan/HCTZ as was mean ambulatory systolic BP during the last 4 h of the dosing interval. Both regimens were well tolerated, with no significant differences in terms of adverse event profile observed. Irbesartan 150 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg resulted in greater reductions in ambulatory BP than losartan 50 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg.

The Role of Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Antagonists in Elderly Patients with Hypertension

Hypertension is a major risk factor for stroke and coronary events in elderly people and clinical trials have shown that treatment of hypertension with various drugs can result in a substantial reduction in cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events. The angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonists are the newest class of antihypertensive agents to be used widely in clinical practice. AT1 receptor antagonists can generally be given once-daily. They are also extremely well tolerated with minimal first-dose hypotension and an incidence of adverse effects similar to that seen with placebo. Adverse event rates are significantly lower than with other classes of antihypertensive drugs including ACE inhibitors. These factors result in improved compliance and increased rates of continuance on therapy. AT1 receptor antagonists show similar efficacy in lowering blood pressure to other classes of antihypertensive agents and their antihypertensive effect is potentiated when they are given concomitantly with low-dose thiazide diuretics. AT1 receptor antagonists are eliminated predominantly by the hepatic route but most are not subject to extensive metabolism and interactions with other drugs are uncommon. This is an advantage in the elderly, who are often receiving multiple medications which increases the risk for adverse drug interactions. Dose adjustments are not usually required in the elderly unless there is plasma volume depletion. Although plasma AT1 receptor antagonist concentrations are generally higher in the elderly than in younger subjects, this pharmacokinetic difference may be balanced by decreased activation of the circulating renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the elderly. Recent clinical studies in high-risk hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy or in patients with diabetic nephropathy or heart failure have demonstrated that AT1 receptor antagonists can improve clinical outcomes to a similar or sometimes greater extent than other antihypertensive agents. Many of these studies have included large numbers of older patients and have confirmed the excellent tolerability profile of these drugs. Thus, AT1 receptor antagonists should be considered as a possible first-line treatment or as a component of combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria or nephropathy and as an alternative or additional treatment to ACE inhibitors in patients with heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction. AT1 receptor antagonists also appear to reduce the onset of new diabetes compared with some other antihypertensive drugs. The benefits in terms of organ protection have mainly been seen in studies using higher doses of particular AT1 receptor antagonists and it is not certain at present whether these results can be extrapolated to other members of the class. As the elderly are more likely to have developed organ damage related to hypertension or to have heart failure or diabetes as concomitant conditions, AT1 receptor antagonists represent an appropriate option for many elderly patients. The main disadvantage of these drugs is the cost of the medication but this may be offset by their improved tolerability with fewer adverse reactions and thus increased compliance, resulting in better blood pressure control and fewer clinical events. Overall, AT1 receptor antagonists are well tolerated and efficacious for blood pressure-lowering when given as a single daily dose in elderly patients and have many potential benefits in high-risk hypertensive subjects.

Dose-Related Efficacy of Irbesartan in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Essential Hypertension

OBJECTIVE

A prospective open multicentre study was conducted in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension to compare the efficacy on diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and tolerance of treatment with either irbesartan 150mg od (once daily) or irbesartan 300mg od in patients who were defined as non-normalised responders with irbesartan 150mg od.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 14 820 hypertensive patients were included in the study. After 6 weeks with irbesartan 150mg od, in terms of their response to treatment, 8861 (61.9%) were normalised (DBP <90mm Hg), 1963 (13.7%) non-normalised responders (DBP > or = 90mm Hg with a decrease in DBP > or = 10mm Hg) and 3154 (22%) non-normalised non-responders (DBP > or = 90mm Hg with a decrease in DBP <10mm Hg); 842 patients did not respect the protocol and could not be evaluated. The 1963 non-normalised responders were randomly assigned at week 6 to either irbesartan 150mg od (n = 963) or irbesartan 300mg od (n = 1000) for 5 weeks. A greater reduction in mean DBP was found in the group treated with irbesartan 300mg (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in terms of number or severity of adverse events between the two groups of patients.

Pharmacology of irbesartan

Despite the introduction of new antihypertensive agents such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel antagonists, the blood pressure of fewer than 30% of hypertensive patients is controlled with current therapies; compliance and continuation with medication are poor. The renin-angiotensin system is important in the pathophysiology of hypertension, end-organ damage and congestive cardiac failure. Irbesartan is an angiotensin II receptor antagonist that provides dose-dependent, specific, insurmountable blockade of the AT1 receptor both in vivo and in vitro. It is rapidly absorbed after oral administration, has a bioavailability of 60-80% with no food effect, does not require metabolism to a bioactive compound, and is excreted by both biliary and renal routes so that dosage adjustments are unnecessary in patients with renal or hepatic disease. Irbesartan produces dose-dependent blood pressure reductions, with 24 h activity confirmed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Irbesartan is effective in the elderly and non-elderly, men and women and in cases of mild and severe hypertension. The recommended starting dosage is 150 mg once daily (o.d.), which can be increased to 300 mg. Its antihypertensive effect is accentuated by diuretic co-administration. In controlled clinical trials, irbesartan was at least as effective as atenolol, hydrochlorothiazide, amlodipine and enalapril. In a double-blind study, irbesartan 300 mg was more effective than losartan 100 mg, and in a dose-titration study, irbesartan 150-300 mg produced significantly greater blood pressure reductions than losartan 50-100 mg. In pooled data from nine placebo-controlled studies, adverse event and discontinuation rates for irbesartan were similar to those for placebo, and there was no relationship between dose and adverse effects. Preliminary clinical data suggest positive haemodynamic effects in heart failure and renoprotective effects in diabetic nephropathy.

Irbesartan: a review of its use in hypertension and in the management of diabetic nephropathy

Irbesartan (Avapro, Aprovel) is a potent and selective angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor antagonist indicated for use in patients with hypertension, including those with type 2 diabetes mellitus and nephropathy. Once-daily administration of irbesartan provided 24-hour control of blood pressure (BP). In patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension irbesartan was as effective as enalapril, atenolol and amlodipine, and more effective than valsartan in terms of absolute reduction in BP and response rates. Irbesartan produced a greater reduction in diastolic BP at trough than once-daily losartan, but had a smaller effect than olmesartan; the reduction in systolic BP achieved with irbesartan was similar or greater than that with losartan and similar to that seen with olmesartan. The combination of irbesartan with hydrochlorothiazide produced additive effects on BP reduction. Irbesartan also induced regression of left ventricular mass in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. In two large studies (IRbesartan MicroAlbuminuria type 2 diabetes mellitus in hypertensive patients [IRMA 2] and the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial [IDNT]) irbesartan exerted a renoprotective effect in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes at both the early and later stages of diabetic nephropathy. The renoprotective effect was at least partly independent of the BP-lowering effect. In the IRMA 2 trial, the proportion of patients progressing to overt nephropathy was significantly lower for recipients of irbesartan 300mg once daily than placebo. In patients with overt nephropathy in the IDNT, irbesartan 300mg once daily provided significantly greater renoprotection than amlodipine 10mg once daily or placebo. The relative risk of doubling of serum creatinine was significantly lower with irbesartan than amlodipine or placebo. Irbesartan is well tolerated in hypertensive patients, including those with type 2 diabetes and incipient or overt nephropathy. The overall incidence of adverse events with irbesartan was similar to that with placebo. Irbesartan was associated with a lower incidence of cough than enalapril and was not associated with ankle oedema or with any clinically significant drug interactions. In conclusion, irbesartan is a well tolerated and effective antihypertensive agent. It also slows the progression of renal disease in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes at both the early and later stages of diabetic nephropathy. Thus, irbesartan is a valuable agent in the management of patients with these indications.

The KARTAN study: A postmarketing assessment of Irbesartan in patients with hypertension

BACKGROUND

An important purpose of postmarketing surveillance of drugs is to better characterize the safety profile of drug therapy in the clinical setting. Another goal is to confirm the effectiveness of these drugs in patients who are candidates for antihypertensive therapy and who may have been excluded from Phase III studies. Irbesartan is a long-acting angiotensin II-receptor blocker specific for the angiotensin 1-receptor subtype that, in clinical trials in patients with hypertension, reduces blood pressure.

OBJECTIVES

The KARTAN (this word was derived from the first and last syllables of Karvea [trademark of Bristol-Myers Squibb Group, Madrid, Spain] and irbesartan) study was designed to confirm and extend the findings from previous clinical trials using data from a large number of patients with hypertension treated with irbesartan in routine clinical practice. The primary goal was to assess the types and incidences of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurring at a low frequency (<0.05%) with irbesartan. The secondary objectives were to study the effect of irbesartan as an antihypertensive agent, to assess the types and incidences of the most frequent ADRs (>/=0.05%) occurring in routine clinical practice, and to detect possible interactions between irbesartan and other drugs frequently used in the primary care setting.

METHODS

This 6-month, observational, open-label, uncontrolled, national, longitudinal, prospective study was conducted by 852 primary care physicians across Spain. Men and women aged >/=18 years with mild to moderate hypertension who, in their physicians' opinion, should have been treated with irbesartan were included. Each patient was followed up for 6 months, attending visits at baseline (ie, the start of treatment) and 1, 3, and 6 months after the start of treatment. A sample size of 3219 patients was calculated for the detection of >/=1 low-incidence (<0.05%) ADR. After the baseline visit, therapy typically was begun with irbesartan 150 mg/d. The initial dose was titrated up, at 300-mg increments based on the patient's response, at each visit as needed to achieve the treatment goals (systolic blood pressure, <140 mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure, <90 mm Hg). Information regarding ADRs was collected on case-report forms designed for each visit and analyzed by the scientific committee of the study. All recruited patients were included in the tolerability analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 4887 patients were enrolled (2165 men, 2 772 women; mean [SD] age, 61.1 [11.0] years [range, 19-94 years]; 23.3% of patients were aged >70 years); 4612 were assessable for efficacy. One hundred eight patients (2.2%) experienced ADRs over the 6-month treatment period; 3 of these patients (0.1%) experienced >1 ADR. Of the total number of clinical manifestations of ADRs, 24 occurred at an incidence <0.05%. Irbesartan produced reductions in blood pressure that were statistically significant from the first visit (all p < 0.001), and 39.9% of the patients achieved the treatment goal at the end of the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

In this postmarketing surveillance study of patients with hypertension treated in routine clinical practice, irbesartan showed a satisfactory tolerability profile that was consistent with that seen in randomized, controlled trials.

Comparative Effects of Irbesartan Versus Amlodipine on Left Ventricular Mass Index in Hypertensive Patients with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy

The aim of this study was to comparatively assess the effects of irbesartan and amlodipine monotherapies on left ventricular mass index (LVMI) in patients with mild to moderate untreated hypertension and echocardiographically determined left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Sixty hypertensive patients (35 men, 25 women; mean age, 52.8 years +/- 12.6) with diastolic blood pressure (BP) > or = 100 mm Hg were randomized to irbesartan 150 mg once daily or amlodipine 5 mg once daily for a 4-week titration period. Dosage of both drugs was increased to irbesartan 300 mg once daily or amlodipine 10 mg once daily in case of sitting diastolic BP still >90 mm Hg after the first 2 weeks of treatment. Dosage doubling was necessary in more than 50% of patients in both treatment groups. After the titration period, only the responders (sitting diastolic BP < or = 90 mm Hg) entered a 5-month maintenance period. After 3 months, echocardiographically estimated LVMI decreased by 23.2% in the irbesartan-treated patients and 11.4% in the amlodipine-treated patients, with an adjusted mean difference of 11.8% in favor of irbesartan (P < 0.0001). After 6 months, it decreased by 24.7% in the irbesartan-treated patients and 13.0% in the amlodipine-treated patients, with an adjusted mean difference of 11.6% in favor of irbesartan (P < 0.0001).

Once-daily fixed-combination irbesartan 300 mg/ hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg and circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension

BACKGROUND

More than 60% of patients with hypertension included in morbidity and mortality trials needed >or=2 drugs to achieve a substantial, sustained reduction in blood pressure. Tolerable combinations using higher doses of antihypertensive drugs are frequently required to control blood pressure.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to assess the effect of a once-daily fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg on the circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension that was not controlled with full-dose single therapy or low-dose combined therapy.

METHODS

Study patients were recruited consecutively from the outpatient hypertension clinics of 3 university hospitals in Spain. After a 1-week washout period, patients with a mean daytime blood pressure >135/85 mm Hg were treated with irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed at the end of the washout period and during the last week of treatment.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients with essential hypertension (28 men, 29 women) were enrolled; their mean (SD) age was 60.4 (7.2) years (range, 45-78 years). After treatment, a significant reduction in both clinic and ambulatory mean (SD) blood pressure values was observed in the whole group of 57 patients (from 146.0 [11.0] mm Hg to 123.3 [13.3] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour systolic blood pressure [SBP]; from 89.9 [8.2] mm Hg to 76.5 [9.4] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour diastolic blood pressure [DBP]. The mean lowering of ambulatory SBP and DBP at peak was 25.2 (14.5) mm Hg and 14.7 (9.5) mm Hg, respectively, and at trough, 22.3 (18.3) mm Hg and 12.3 (10.9) mm Hg. The trough-to-peak ratio of the group was 0.92 for SBP (0.97 in responders) and 0.84 for DBP (0.89 in responders). The smoothness index, calculated as the mean of all individual values, was 1.7 (1.0) for SBP (1.8 [0.9] in responders) and 1.3 (0.8) for DBP (1.5 [0.6] in responders). Seven side effects in 6 patients were reported. No metabolic changes were observed, and no patient discontinued the study because of treatment-related adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 administered once daily produced a crude meaningful effect in reducing 24-hour blood pressure and was well tolerated. The circadian profile was preserved, as shown by trough-to-peak ratios and smoothness index values for both SBP and DBP.

Use of candesartan cilexetil decreases proteinuria in renal transplant patients with chronic allograft dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Posttransplant proteinuria and hypertension are difficult to treat after renal transplantation. Therefore, we examined whether candesartan cilexetil is effective in reducing urinary protein excretion or in controlling hypertension in patients with renal allograft dysfunction.

METHODS

Sixty-two renal transplant recipients with proteinuria were enrolled in this study. They underwent kidney transplantation under cyclosporine or tacrolimus immunosuppression between February 1983 and December 1998. Causes of proteinuria were chronic rejection in 28, glomerulonephritis in 16, cyclosporine or tacrolimus nephrotoxicity in 9, and unknown in 9 recipients. The dose of candesartan cilexetil ranged from 4 to 12 mg/day. Eleven patients with proteinuria who had not been treated with candesartan cilexetil constituted a matched control population.

RESULTS

Hypertension was well controlled by administration of candesartan cilexetil. Both systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure significantly decreased from 141.7+/-14.8 mm Hg to 118.7+/-11.9 mm Hg and 121.2+/-11.6 mm Hg, and from 89.0+/-13.0 mm Hg to 72.0+/-10.4 mm Hg and 74.9+/-9.4 mm Hg, at 2 months and 1 year after administration, respectively. Urinary protein excretion was reduced from 0.93+/-1.2 g/day to 0.34+/-0.7 g/day and 0.43+/-1.2 g/day at 2 months and 1 year after administration, respectively. The levels of creatinine clearance were 55.7+/-28.9 mL/min before treatment, 50.9+/-24.8 mL/min at 2 months, and 52.6+/-24.8 mL/min at 1 year after treatment, respectively. There was no clinically significant difference between them. Regarding the calcineurin inhibitor levels, there was no significant difference between the levels before and 1 year after treatment. There was a significant difference in all examinations (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, proteinuria, and renal function) between the patients with and without candesartan at 1 year after treatment. No significant adverse effects occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Candesartan cilexetil can effectively control hypertension and proteinuria without deterioration in renal allograft function. These data suggest that treatment with candesartan cilexetil may be useful for maintaining long-term renal allograft function.

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists inhibit basal as well as low-density lipoprotein and platelet-activating factor-stimulated human monocyte chemoattractant protein-1

Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) is a potent chemotactic agent for monocytes and other cells and is thought to be involved in atherosclerosis, recruiting monocytes to the subendothelial space or to the site of inflammation. Angiotensin II has been demonstrated, at least in animal models, to stimulate MCP-1 expression. We investigated the effect of the angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonists irbesartan and losartan on MCP-1 production by freshly isolated human monocytes. Irbesartan and losartan inhibited basal MCP-1 production in a dose-dependent manner. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) stimulated MCP-1 in a concentration-dependent manner, with 200 microg/ml LDL protein giving a 2-fold increase in MCP-1. Irbesartan and losartan dose dependently blocked LDL-stimulated MCP-1. An angiotensin II type 2 receptor antagonist, S-(+)-1-([4-(dimethylamino)-3-methylphenyl]methyl)-5-(diphenylacetyl)-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-imidazo(4,5-c)pyridine-6-carboxylic acid (PD123319), had no significant effect on basal MCP-1 levels or LDL-stimulated MCP-1. After noting homology between the AT1 receptor and the platelet-activating factor (PAF) receptor, we showed that irbesartan inhibited both [3H]PAF binding to human monocytes and carbamyl-PAF stimulation of MCP-1. However, irbesartan affinity for the PAF receptor was 700 times less than PAF, suggesting that there may be another mechanism for irbesartan inhibition of PAF-stimulated MCP-1. This is the first report showing that AT1 receptor antagonists inhibit basal as well as LDL- and PAF-stimulated MCP-1 production in freshly isolated human monocytes.

Pharmacokinetics of irbesartan are not altered in special populations

Studies were conducted to determine whether pharmacokinetics of irbesartan (IRBE), a potent, long-acting angiotensin (AT)-II receptor antagonist selective for AT-II type 1 receptor subtype, are altered in patients with renal impairment (RI), hepatic impairment (HI), or heart failure (HF) or by patient gender, age, or race. IRBE pharmacokinetics and blood pressure (BP) response in hypertensive (HT) children and adolescents were also studied. HI or RI (including end-stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis) had no effect on IRBE pharmacokinetics after single or repeated dosing. IRBE was not removed by hemodialysis. In patients with New York Heart Association class II or III HF, IRBE single-dose pharmacokinetics were not altered following either oral or IV administration. There were no clinically significant differences in IRBE pharmacokinetics between men and women, elderly and young, or black and white patients. No accumulation of IRBE occurred with repeated dosing in RI or HI patients or in HT men or women. In a pediatric study, IRBE pharmacokinetics were comparable between 6- to 12-year and 13- to 16-year age groups and to that previously determined for adult subjects receiving the same dose; accumulation of IRBE was minimal during multiple dosing. IRBE lowered BP in the pediatric population. Adverse event profile with IRBE was similar in all patient groups. Based on these pharmacokinetic and safety data, no dosage adjustments of IRBE are necessary for patients with RI, HI, or HF, or based on patient age, gender, or race. IRBE may be a treatment option for pediatric HT patients. The pharmacokinetic profile of IRBE and lack of necessary dosage adjustments in special populations suggest that IRBE is an excellent choice for management of hypertension across all patient groups.

Efficacy of angiotensin II receptor antagonists in preventing headache: a systematic overview and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To determine whether angiotensin II receptor antagonists prevent headaches.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts for studies in which participants were randomly assigned to an angiotensin II receptor antagonist or placebo. We also contacted experts and manually reviewed all references to identify additional articles. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. We estimated the pooled relative risk (RR) for headache using the random-effects model and examined dose response using random-effects Bayesian logistic regression.

RESULTS

Data from 27 studies involving 12,110 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of headache was about one third lower in patients taking an angiotensin II receptor antagonist than in those taking placebo (RR = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62 to 0.76; the test of heterogeneity was negative, P = 0.2). The odds ratio for having a headache per unit dose of the reference drug losartan was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.93).

CONCLUSION

Angiotensin II receptor antagonists appear to be effective in preventing headaches, but the mechanism of this benefit and the types of headaches that are prevented are not known. Randomized trials are warranted.

An ambulatory blood pressure monitoring study of the comparative antihypertensive efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and valsartan

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to compare the change from baseline in mean diastolic ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) at 24 h post dose (trough measurement) after 8 weeks of treatment with irbesartan or valsartan in subjects with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Secondary objectives included comparing the mean changes from baseline in systolic ABP at trough; 24-h ABP; morning and night-time ABP; self-measured systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP); and office-measured SBP and DBP at trough.

DESIGN

After a 3-week, single blind, placebo lead-in period, 426 subjects were randomized to receive either irbesartan 150 mg or valsartan 80 mg for 8 weeks.

METHODS

Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were obtained at baseline and at week 8. Self-measured morning and evening DBP and SBP readings were obtained at home over a 7-day period at baseline and at week 8. Office-measured seated DBP and SBP measurements were obtained at trough, at baseline, and at week 8.

RESULTS

Irbesartan demonstrated significantly greater reductions than valsartan for mean change from baseline in diastolic ABP at trough (-6.73 versus -4.84 mmHg, respectively; P = 0.035). Irbesartan produced significantly greater reductions than valsartan for mean systolic ABP at trough (-11.62 versus -7.5 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and for mean 24-h diastolic ABP (-6.38 versus -4.82 mmHg, respectively; P = 0.023) and systolic ABP (-10.24 versus -7.76 mmHg; P < 0.01). Irbesartan also produced significantly greater reductions than valsartan for office-measured seated DBP (-10.46 versus 7.28 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and SBP (-16.23 versus -9.96 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and for self-measured morning DBP (-6.28 versus -3.75 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and SBP (-10.21 versus -6.97 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01). Both drugs were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Irbesartan was more effective than valsartan in reducing DBP and SBP at trough and in providing greater overall 24-h blood pressure-lowering efficacy.

Drug interactions with irbesartan

Irbesartan is an angiotensin II receptor antagonist indicated for the treatment of patients with hypertension. Although irbesartan does not require biotransformation for its pharmacological activity, it does undergo metabolism via the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 isoenzyme and negligible metabolism by the CYP3A4 isoenzyme. The long term treatment of patients with hypertension is generally required for effective management of the disease, and the use of concurrent medications is usually inevitable. This paper reviews the drug and food interaction trials involving irbesartan that have been conducted to date. Based on the available literature, no significant interactions have been identified between irbesartan and hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine, simvastatin, tolbutamide, warfarin, magnesium and aluminum hydroxides, digoxin or food. Fluconazole did increase the steady-state peak plasma concentration (by 19%) and area under the concentration-time curve (by 63%) of irbesartan, but these increases are not likely to be clinically significant. In summary, irbesartan has demonstrated minimal potential for drug or food interactions in trials conducted to date.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of irbesartan and enalapril in adults with mild to moderate essential hypertension, as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: the MAPAVEL Study (Monitorización Ambulatoria Presión Arterial APROVEL)

BACKGROUND

When blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy is assessed by measurements taken in a clinic setting, angiotensin II-receptor antagonists show similar efficacy to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and better tolerability. A search of MEDLINE to date, however, reveals no randomized, double-blind studies using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to compare the BP-lowering efficacy of irbesartan and enalapril in a large number of patients ( > 200) with essential hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared 24-hour BP reduction and BP control, as assessed by ABPM, in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension treated with irbesartan or enalapril. The relative tolerability of the 2 treatments was also evaluated.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (office diastolic BP [DBP] 90-109 mm Hg or systolic BP [SBP] 140-179 mm Hg). After a 3-week, single-blind placebo washout phase, patients with a mean daytime DBP > or = 85 mm Hg, as measured by ABPM between 10 AM and 8 PM, were randomized to 12 weeks of active treatment with irbesartan or enalapril. Starting doses were 150 and 10 mg/d, respectively, with titration to 300 or 20 mg/d if clinic DBP was > or = 90 mm Hg at week 4 or 8. Based on clinic measurements, BP control was defined as a BP reading < 140/90 mm Hg after 12 weeks of treatment; patients achieving a reduction in DBP of > or = 10 mm Hg at 12 weeks were considered responders. The ABPM criterion for BP control, independent of clinic values, was achievement of a daytime BP < 130/85 mm Hg after 12 weeks of treatment; patients achieving a reduction in 24-hour DBP > or = 5 mm Hg at 12 weeks were considered responders, in dependent of clinic values.

RESULTS

A total of 238 patients were randomized to treatment, 115 to irbesartan and 123 to enalapril. The study population was approximately 52.0% female and 48.0% male, with a mean ( +/- SD) age of 52.7 +/- 10.6 years. The study was completed by 111 patients in the irbesartan group (dose titrated to 300 mg/d in 72.0% of patients) and 115 patients in the enalapril group (dose titrated to 20 mg/d in 76.5% of patients). BP reductions were similar in the 2 groups, both as measured in the clinic (DBP, 12.7 +/- 8.8 mm Hg irbesartan vs 12.4 +/- 7.4 mm Hg enalapril; SBP, 19.0 +/- 14.1 mm Hg vs 17.5 +/- 14.0 mm Hg) and by 24-hour ABPM (DBP, 9.4 +/- 8.5 mm Hg vs 8.8 +/- 8.5 mm Hg: SBP, 14.7 +/- 14.7 mm Hg vs 12.6 +/- 13.1 mm Hg). As assessed by ABPM, rates of BP control were 40.5% (45/111) for irbesartan and 33.9% (39/115) for enalapril, and the response rates were a respective 71.2% (79/111) and 71.3% (82/115). The overall incidence of adverse events (40.0% irbesartan, 51.2% enalapril) was not statistically different between groups, although the incidence of adverse events considered probably related to antihypertensive treatment was significantly higher with enalapril than with irbesartan (24.6% vs 9.2%, respectively; P = 0.026), essentially because of the higher incidence of cough (8.1% vs 0.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

As assessed by ABPM, irbesartan 150 to 300 mg/d was as effective in lowering BP and achieving BP control as enalapril 10 to 20 mg/d. Based on the number of treatment-related adverse events, irbesartan was better tolerated than enalapril.

Comparison of angiotensin II receptor antagonists

Nonpeptide orally active angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonists are the most specific means presently available to block the renin-angiotensin enzymatic cascade. Six of these drugs have already been licensed in Europe and in the United States for the treatment of high blood pressure, and additional candidates are in the pipeline. The World Health Organisation has also recently endorsed their use for this condition. Inasmuch as AT1 receptor antagonists have proven themselves the equals of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors with respect to antihypertensive efficacy, but demonstrated better safety profiles, this class of drugs may be considered to be a qualitative improvement in the treatment of essential hypertension. Interestingly, the six agents now on the market diverge considerably with respect to their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, although it is not certain whether such differences are clinically relevant. A considerable number of large, multicentre trials are in progress to ascertain the possible longer-term organoprotective effects of these substances on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Because of their noteworthy safety record to date, and simple once-a-day dosage regimen, AT1 receptor antagonists have the potential to improve compliance in patients with chronic hypertension.