T-lymphocyte and plasma angiotensin-converting enzyme activity during enalapril and losartan administration in humans

Antihypertensives and melanoma: An updated review

Antihypertensive medications are commonly prescribed and well-studied. Given the widespread use and potential side effects, various theories have been made about the relationship between antihypertensives and malignancy, including melanoma. This review describes the current understanding of the most commonly prescribed antihypertensives and their associations with melanoma. The literature demonstrates that diuretics, specifically hydrochlorothiazide and indapamide, may increase the risk of melanoma. While there is no evidence that antihypertensives have a role in melanoma prevention, non-selective β-blocker therapy has been associated with a decreased risk of disease progression and recurrence and may also improve outcomes in patients undergoing immunotherapy. In addition, experimental studies reveal that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and calcium channel blockers have anti-tumor effects, meriting further study.

Blood pressure lowering efficacy of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

ACE inhibitors 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 ACE inhibitors 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 ACE inhibitor compared with placebo for a duration of 3 to 12 weeks in patients with primary hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. WDAE information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety two trials evaluated the dose-related trough BP lowering efficacy of 14 different ACE inhibitors in 12 954 participants with a baseline BP of 157/101 mm Hg. The data do not suggest that any one ACE inhibitor is better or worse at lowering BP. A dose of 1/8 or 1/4 of the manufacturer's 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 90% of Max. ACE inhibitor doses above Max did not significantly lower BP more than Max. Combining the effects of 1/2 Max and higher doses gives an estimate of the average trough BP lowering efficacy for ACE inhibitors as a class of drugs of -8 mm Hg for SBP and -5 mm Hg for DBP. ACE inhibitors reduced BP measured 1 to 12 hours after the dose by about 11/6 mm Hg.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no clinically meaningful BP lowering differences between different ACE inhibitors. The BP lowering effect of ACE inhibitors is modest; the magnitude of trough BP lowering at one-half the manufacturers' maximum recommended dose and above is -8/-5 mm Hg. 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 ACE inhibitors because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in many of the trials.

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.

Combination Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Therapy: Its Role in Clinical Practice

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are commonly prescribed for the management of hypertension. In addition, each of these drug classes has been shown to be effective in the treatment of congestive heart failure, proteinuric chronic kidney disease, and most recently the high-cardiac-risk profile patient. The individual success of each of these drug classes has fueled the theory that given together, the overall biologic effect of both would surpass that of either given alone. The foundation of this premise, although biologically plausible, has yet to be proven in a compelling enough fashion to support the everyday use of these two drug classes in combination. Additional clarifying studies are required to establish whether specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.

Combination ACE Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Therapy-Future Considerations

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are regularly prescribed for the management of hypertension. Each of these drug classes has also been shown to provide survival benefits for patients with heart failure, proteinuric chronic kidney disease, and/or a high cardiac risk profile. The individual gains seen with each of these drug classes have led to speculation that their combination might offer additive if not synergistic outcome benefits. The foundation of this hypothesis, although biologically possible, has thus far not been sufficiently well proven to support the everyday use of these 2 drug classes in combination. Additional outcomes trials, which are currently proceeding to their conclusion, may provide the necessary proof to support an expanded use of these 2 drug classes in combination.

Irbesartan inhibits human T-lymphocyte activation through downregulation of activator protein-1

1 Irbesartan is a promising antihypertensive drug with beneficial effects on atherosclerotic processes. In the progression of atherosclerosis, human T-lymphocytes play an important role, but it is not yet known how irbesartan modulates human T-lymphocytes activation. To gain insight into the mechanisms by which irbesartan acts, we investigated its effects on human T-lymphocytes. 2 Primary human T-lymphocytes were isolated from whole blood. Cytokines were determined by ELISA. Activator protein-1 (AP-1) and related protein activities were determined by electrophoretic mobility shift assays, kinase assays, Western blotting and transfection assays. 3 Irbesartan inhibited the production of both tumor necrosis factor-alpha and interferon-gamma by activated T-cells, especially at therapeutic concentrations. Further investigation at the molecular level indicated that the inhibition of activated human T-lymphocytes specifically correlated with the downregulation of AP-1 DNA-binding activity. In the Jurkat T-cell line, irbesartan also inhibited AP-1 transcriptional activity. Finally, we revealed that irbesartan is unique in its ability to inhibit the activation of both c-Jun NH2-terminal protein kinase and p38 MAPK. 4 Our studies show that irbesartan may modulate inflammation-based atherosclerotic diseases through a cell-mediated mechanism involving suppression of human T-lymphocytes activation via downregulation of AP-1 activity.

The practical aspects of combination therapy with angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for the management of hypertension. ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) and, more recently, ARBs have an established track record of success in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF), proteinuric renal disease and most recently the hypertensive patient with a high cardiac-risk profile. The individual success of each of these drug classes has fuelled speculation that given together the overall effect of both would exceed that of either given alone. This premise, although biologically plausible, has yet to be proven in a convincing enough fashion to support the routine use of these two drug classes in combination. Additional clarifying studies are needed to establish whether specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in combination: theory and practice

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are commonly used to treat hypertension and/or a range of progressive end-organ diseases. The success of each of these drug classes in disease-state management is without dispute, and has led to speculation that given together the observed response would improve upon that observed with a member of each drug class individually given. Few studies are available, however, which carefully address the effect(s) of the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker. Review of available studies would seem not to strongly support combination therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker as preferred therapy in the broad base of general hypertensive patients with or without end-organ disease. Additional clarifying studies are needed to determine if specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.