Comparative Efficacy of Two Different β-Blockers on 24-Hour Blood Pressure Control

The controversial role of beta-blockers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Beta-blocker (BB) therapy is a main pillar in treating patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and has shown a prognostic benefit. However, evidence for application of BB in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), especially in the absence of coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation or arterial hypertension, is scarce. HFpEF is characterized by elevations in left atrial pressure and reduced compliance of the left ventricle leading to a hampered increase of cardiac output (CO) during exercise, which results in exertional dyspnea. This may be due to either a limited increase in stroke volume or reduced chronotropy during physical activity. We critically discuss the pathophysiological background of HFpEF, current data on BB in heart failure therapy, as well as the potential benefits and harms of BB therapy in HFpEF. Furthermore, we argue that non-cardio selective BB with peripheral activity to reduce afterload may be more suitable in this population than cardio-selective BB. Although preliminary data on BB in HFpEF are available, multicenter prospective trials to assess a reduction of cardiovascular morbidity are warranted. Future trials need to focus on phenotyping HFpEF patients and assess who may benefit most from tailored BB therapy.

Twice-daily versus once-daily lisinopril and losartan for hypertension: Real-world effectiveness and safety

BACKGROUND

Lisinopril and losartan manufacturer labels recommend twice-daily dosing (BID) if once-daily (QDay) is insufficient to lower blood pressure (BP).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective cohort study of patients taking QDay lisinopril and losartan who experienced a dose-doubling (index date). A text-processing tool categorized BID and QDay groups at the index date based on administration instructions. We excluded: pregnant/hospice, regimens other than BID/QDay, and without BP measurements -6 months/+12 months of the index date. The most proximal BP measurements -6 months and +2 weeks to 12 months of the index date were used to evaluate BP differences. Propensity scores were generated, and differences in BP and adverse events (angioedema, acute kidney injury, hyperkalemia) between BID/QDay groups were analyzed within dosing cohorts using inverse propensity of treatment-weighted regression models. Of 11,210 and 6,051 patients who met all criteria for lisinopril and losartan, 784 (7.0%) and 453 (7.5%) were taking BID, respectively. BID patients were older and had higher comorbidity and medication burdens. There were no differences in systolic/diastolic BP between BID and QDay, with absolute differences in mean systolic BP ranging from -1.8 to 0.7 mmHg and diastolic BP ranging from -1.1 to 0.1 mmHg (all 95% confidence intervals [CI] cross 0). Lisinopril 10mg BID was associated with an increased odds of angioedema compared to lisinopril 20mg QDay (odds ratio 2.27, 95%CI 1.13-4.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted models do not support improved effectiveness or safety of BID lisinopril and losartan.

Efficacy and safety of twice- vs once-daily dosing of lisinopril for hypertension

This retrospective cohort study compared administration of lisinopril twice daily and once daily for hypertension. Data were collected from an ambulatory electronic health record between 2011 and 2014. Patients previously receiving lisinopril 20 mg were placed into the once-daily cohort if changed to 40 mg once daily or into the twice-daily cohort if changed to 20 mg twice daily. Efficacy outcome measures were change in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure and achievement of blood pressure control (<140/90 mm Hg). Of 90 patients included (45 per cohort), the mean age was 61.8 years and 17.8% were black. Once- and twice-daily administrations were associated with blood pressure reductions of 6.2/1.5 mm Hg and 16.5/5.9 mm Hg, with a 10.2/4.3 mm Hg greater reduction with twice-daily administration (systolic blood pressure, P=.016; diastolic blood pressure, P=.068). Twice-daily lisinopril dosing was associated with greater systolic blood pressure reductions compared with the same total daily dose administered once daily.

Beta-Blockers in the Management of Hypertension and/or Chronic Kidney Disease

This minireview provides current summaries of beta-blocker use in the management of hypertension and/or chronic kidney disease. Accumulated evidence suggests that atenolol is not sufficiently effective as a primary tool to treat hypertension. The less-than-adequate effect of beta-blockers in lowering the blood pressure and on vascular protection, and the unfavorable effects of these drugs, as compared to other antihypertensive agents, on the metabolic profile have been pointed out. On the other hand, in patients with chronic kidney disease, renin-angiotensin system blockers are the drugs of first choice for achieving the goal of renal protection. Recent studies have reported that vasodilatory beta-blockers have adequate antihypertensive efficacy and less harmful effects on the metabolic profile, and also exert beneficial effects on endothelial function and renal protection. However, there is still not sufficient evidence on the beneficial effects of the new beta-blockers.

The current status of beta blockers' use in the management of hypertension

The invention of beta (β)-blockers culminated in a new era in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases (CD), and changed the course of pharmacology research for years to come. Since the introduction of propranolol into clinical practice in 1964, β-blockers enjoyed a special place in the clinicians' armamentarium against CDs, especially for patients with ischemic heart diseases, and are still one of the most extensively used therapeutic drugs in both cardiac and non-cardiac ailments. Current uses of β-blockers in CDs include ischemic heart diseases, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, and heart failure. Other substantial non-cardiac uses include glaucoma, migraine, situational anxiety, benign essential tremors, and cardiac symptoms of thyrotoxicosis. This review covers some of the evolutionary changes of clinical uses of β-blockers, the rationale for their use, some recent controversies surrounding their use for treatment of hypertension, and advantages of newer additions to the group. 

β-Adrenergic blockade in cardiovascular disease

The development and subsequent clinical application of the β-adrenergic receptor blocking drugs represent one of the major advances in human pharmacotherapeutics. No other class of synthetic drugs has demonstrated such widespread therapeutic utility for the treatment and prevention of so many cardiovascular diseases. In addition, these drugs have proven to be molecular probes that have contributed to our understanding of the disease, and on the molecular level, both the structure and function of the 7 transmembrane G protein receptors that mediate the actions of many different hormones, neurotransmitters, and drugs. The evolution of β-blocker drug development has led to refinements in their pharmacodynamic actions that include agents with relative β1-selectivity, partial agonist activity, concomitant α-adrenergic blockers activity, and direct vasodilator activity. In addition, long-acting and ultra-short-acting formulations of β-blockers have also demonstrated a remarkable record of clinical safety in patients of all ages.

Optimal use of beta-blockers in high-risk hypertension: a guide to dosing equivalence

Hypertension is the number one diagnosis made by primary care physicians, placing them in a unique position to prescribe the antihypertensive agent best suited to the individual patient. In individuals with diabetes mellitus, blood pressure (BP) levels >130/80 mmHg confer an even higher risk for cardiovascular and renal disease, and these patients will benefit from aggressive antihypertensive treatment using a combination of agents. β-blockers are playing an increasingly important role in the management of hypertension in high-risk patients. β-blockers are a heterogeneous class of agents, and this review presents the differences between β-blockers and provides evidence-based protocols to assist in understanding dose equivalence in the selection of an optimal regimen in patients with complex needs. The clinical benefits provided by β-blockers are only effective if patients adhere to medication treatment long term. β-blockers with proven efficacy, once-daily dosing, and lower side effect profiles may become instrumental in the treatment of hypertensive diabetic and nondiabetic patients.

Metoprolol succinate combination in the treatment of hypertension

Metoprolol is a selective beta(1)-adrenergic antagonist extensively used since 1975. Metoprolol has proven its efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with hypertension and coronary heart disease. A recently developed controlled release/ extended-release formulation of metoprolol succinate was designed to provide relatively constant metoprolol plasma concentrations and beta(1)-blockade while retaining the convenience of once daily administration. A 100-mg metoprolol controlled/extended-release tablet contains 95 mg of metoprolol succinate and is considered to have equivalent activity of 100 mg metoprolol tartrate. After ingestion, the tablet disintegrates into individual pellets and each pellet acts as a diffusion cell releasing the drug at a relatively constant rate over a period of approximately 20 hours. The aim of this review was to determine the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of metoprolol succinate and to apply those properties in combination with other drugs mainly diuretics in the treatment of hypertension.