Nifedipine in ischemic heart disease

Pharmacotherapy of Vasospastic Angina

Vasospastic angina is a diagnosis of exclusion that manifests with signs and symptoms, which overlap with obstructive coronary artery disease, most often ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The pharmacotherapy that is available to treat vasospastic angina can help ameliorate angina symptoms. However, the etiology of vasospastic angina is ill-defined, making targeted pharmacotherapy difficult. Most patients receive pharmacotherapy that includes calcium channel blockers and/or long-acting nitrates. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of the pharmacotherapy used to treat vasospastic angina. High-dose calcium channel blockers possess the most evidence, with respect to decreasing angina incidence, frequency, and duration. However, not all patients respond to calcium channel blockers. Nitrates and/or alpha1-adrenergic receptor antagonists can be used in patients who respond poorly to calcium channel blockers. Albeit, evidence for use of nitrates and alpha1-adrenergic receptor antagonists in vasospastic angina is not as robust as calcium channel blockers and can exacerbate adverse effects when added to calcium channel blocker therapy. Despite having a clear benefit in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease, the benefit of beta-adrenergic receptor antagonists, statins, and aspirin remains unclear. More data are needed to elucidate whether or not these agents are beneficial or harmful to patients being treated for vasospastic angina. Overall, the use of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of vasospastic angina should be guided by patient-specific factors, such as tolerability, adverse effects, drug–drug, and drug–disease interactions.

Regulatory mechanisms of cAMP levels as a multiple target for antiplatelet activity and less bleeding risk

Platelet activation is a critical component of atherothrombosis. The multiple pathways of platelet activation limit the effect of specific receptor/pathway inhibitors, resulting in limited clinical efficacy. Recent research has confirmed that combination therapy results in enhanced antithrombotic efficacy without increasing bleeding risk. In this way, the best-known inhibitor and turn off signaling in platelet activation is cAMP. In this article we discuss the mechanisms of regulation of intraplatelet cAMP levels, a) platelet-dependent pathway: Gi/Gs protein-coupled receptors, phosphodiesterase inhibition and activation of PPARs and b) platelet-independent pathway: inhibition of adenosine uptake by erythrocytes. With respect to the association between intraplatelet cAMP levels and bleeding risk it is possible to establish that compounds/drugs with pleitropic effect for increased intraplatelet cAMP level could have an antithrombotic activity with less risk of bleeding.

Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) in the treatment of coronary heart disease and hypertension

Since the 1960s, calcium antagonists have been available for the treatment of angina pectoris and hypertension. The first of this class, nifedipine, was introduced and readily accepted as the third treatment option for angina, alongside beta-blockers and nitrates. However, the short-acting formulations of nifedipine had pharmacokinetic properties that were far from ideal and in 1995, several studies involving various dosing regimens reported possible dangerous effects in secondary prevention. Since then, large-scale, randomized controlled trials with new controlled-released formulations of nifedipine have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of this drug. As a consequence of these results, guidelines for both hypertension and angina pectoris have been recently reconsidered, and have put the modern formulations of calcium channel blockers in a pole position. Within this group of therapeutics, nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system has a unique position and it cannot be replaced by other controlled-release formulations of nifedipine, the pharmaceutical properties of which have yet to be tested in large-scale outcome trials.

The calcium-channel blocker controversy: historical perspective and important lessons for future pharmacotherapies. An international society of pharmacoepidemiology 'hot topic'

Reports of adverse events in association with calcium-channel blockers led to heated controversy over the safety and efficacy of these drugs, as well as to panic among the general public. At the 1998 International Conference of Pharmacoepidemiology, four experts were asked to summarize, and draw lessons from, the controversy's development. We conducted our own review in order to provide a broader historical perspective on the subject and to present the discussants' views within the framework of additional published opinions. Several years after the controversy's onset, many uncertainties still remain about the merits of CCBs. Yet the media scare generated by a few studies might have been prevented had investigators placed greater emphasis, particularly in their reports to the media, on the limitations of their observational and meta-analytic designs. These studies, however, did call attention to the persistent use of CCBs for off-label indications, and the imperative to improve clinician prescribing practices. Moreover, they showed the pitfalls of reliance on surrogate endpoints, stressing the need for data on major clinical outcomes-with funding a responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry-before approving drugs destined for widespread, long-term use. Attention to these lessons will do us well as we evaluate emerging pharmacotherapies. Copyright (c) 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Nifedipine nanoparticle agglomeration as a dry powder aerosol formulation strategy

Efficient administration of drugs represents a leading challenge in pulmonary medicine. Dry powder aerosols are of great interest compared to traditional aerosolized liquid formulations in that they may offer improved stability, ease of administration, and simple device design. Particles 1-5microm in size typically facilitate lung deposition. Nanoparticles may be exhaled as a result of their small size; however, they are desired to enhance the dissolution rate of poorly soluble drugs. Nanoparticles of the hypertension drug nifedipine were co-precipitated with stearic acid to form a colloid exhibiting negative surface charge. Nifedipine nanoparticle colloids were destabilized by using sodium chloride to disrupt the electrostatic repulsion between particles as a means to achieve the agglomerated nanoparticles of a controlled size. The aerodynamic performance of agglomerated nanoparticles was determined by cascade impaction. The powders were found to be well suited for pulmonary delivery. In addition, nanoparticle agglomerates revealed enhanced dissolution of the drug species suggesting the value of this formulation approach for poorly water-soluble pulmonary medicines. Ultimately, nifedipine powders are envisioned as an approach to treat pulmonary hypertension.

Interventions for deliberately altering blood pressure in acute stroke

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether blood pressure should be altered actively during the acute phase of stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1997, and previously updated in 2001.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of altering blood pressure in people with acute stroke, and the effect of different vasoactive drugs on blood pressure in acute stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched July 2007), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2 2008), MEDLINE, EMBASE and other databases, reference lists of relevant publications and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of interventions that aimed to alter blood pressure in patients within one week of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials involving 1153 participants were included (603 participants were assigned active therapy and 550 participants received placebo/control). The trials tested angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARA), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), clonidine, glyceryl trinitrate (GTN), thiazide diuretic and mixed antihypertensive therapy. One trial tested phenylephrine. At 24 hours after randomisation ACEIs reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP, mean difference, MD -6 mmHg, 95% confidence interval, CI -22 to 10) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP, MD -5 mmHg, 95% CI -18 to 7), ARA reduced SBP (MD -3, 95% CI -7 to 2) and DBP (MD -3, 95% CI -6 to 0.4), iv CCBs reduced SBP (MD -32 mmHg, 95% CI -65 to 1) and DBP (MD -13 mmHg, 95% CI -31 to 6), oral CCBs reduced SBP (MD -13 mmHg, 95% , CI -43 to 17) and DBP (MD -6 mmHg, 95% CI -14 to 2), GTN reduced SBP (MD -10 mmHg, 95% CI -18 to -3) and DBP (MD -1 mmHg, 95% CI -5 to 3) while phenylephrine, non-significantly increased SBP (MD 21 mmHg, 95% CI -13 to 55) and DBP (MD 1 mmHg, 95% CI -15 to 16). Functional outcome and death were not altered by any of the drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of altering blood pressure on outcome during the acute phase of stroke. In patients with acute stroke, CCBs, ACEI, ARA and GTN each lower blood pressure while phenylephrine probably increases blood pressure.

Calcium channel blockers: an update

This paper reviews the current literature pertaining to calcium channel blockers, including their classification, properties, and therapeutic indications, in light of several recent trials that have addressed their safety. Calcium channel blockers are a structurally and functionally heterogeneous group of medications that are used widely to control blood pressure and manage symptoms of angina. They are classified as dihydropyridines or nondihydropyridines. As a class, they are well tolerated and are associated with few side effects. The question of whether they may precipitate cardiovascular events has been largely settled by recent trials, such as the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), the International Verapamil Slow-Release/Trandolapril Study (INVEST), and the Controlled Onset Verapamil Investigation of Cardiovascular Endpoints (CONVINCE) study, in which no such association was found. Even so, the use of these agents has been linked with an increased risk of heart failure. Thus, long-acting calcium channel blockers may be safely used in the management of hypertension and angina. However, as a class, they are not as protective as other antihypertensive agents against heart failure.

Meta-analyses of antihypertensive therapy: Are some of them misleading?

Meta-analysis has become a very popular tool to compare the efficacy of different antihypertensive regimens. Combining results from various outcome studies may provide evidence to guide the therapeutic approach even before results from large prospective studies are available. However, meta-analysis may be misleading if it is not done meticulously. Some meta-analyses that received broad news media coverage in the recent years were misleading. One analysis suggested that the use of short-acting nifedipine in moderate to high doses in patients with coronary disease increased mortality. This claim was refuted later by observational studies. Based on another meta-analysis, it was claimed that diuretics and beta-blockers are equally effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Another more careful meta-analysis, omitting one study in which most patients were on combination therapy and not on beta-blocker monotherapy, showed the superiority of diuretic versus b-blocker treatment in the elderly. Calcium antagonists were recently blamed for increasing the rate of myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure in hypertensive patients, and therefore their use was not recommended as first-line therapy in hypertension. This recommendation was based on a meta-analysis subject to major drawbacks and was misleading. Another notion based on meta-analysis was that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors reduce left ventricular mass more than diuretics. This notion was refuted by three large randomized studies. A recent meta-analysis, which showed a similar blood pressure lowering effect for all angiotensin receptor blockers, was refuted by head-to-head studies. Thus, when performed correctly, meta-analysis can be an important tool, but when uncritically employed, it is prone to be misleading.

Interventions for deliberately altering blood pressure in acute stroke

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether hypertension should be treated after acute stroke, and some have hypothesised that blood pressure should be increased to improve cerebral perfusion.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effect of lowering or elevating blood pressure in people with acute stroke, and the effect of different vasoactive drugs on blood pressure in acute stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register, the Ottawa Stroke Trials Registry (1994), Medline (from 1965), Embase (from 1981), ISI, and existing review articles. We contacted researchers in the field and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of interventions that aimed to alter blood pressure in patients within two weeks of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently applied the inclusion criteria and assessed trial quality. Two reviewers extracted the data.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials involving 133 people were included. The trials tested the following vasodilators: nimodipine (66 people), nicardipine (five people), captopril (three people) and clonidine (two people). Oral calcium channel blockers (nimodipine, nicardipine) reduced systolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference 10.9mmHg, 95% confidence interval 2.0 to 19.7), diastolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference 9.5mmHg, 95% confidence interval 4.0 to 15.1) and heart rate (weighted mean difference 4.7 beats per minute, 95% confidence interval 0.2 to 9.2) at 48 hours. The greatest fall in blood pressure over the first 24 hours was shown in patients given the highest dose of nimodipine. The relationship between change in blood pressure and clinical outcome was not clear. There was not enough information to assess the effect of drugs other than calcium channel blockers. No studies of interventions to raise blood pressure were found.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is not enough evidence to evaluate the effect of altering blood pressure after acute stroke. Although oral calcium channel blockers appear to reduce blood pressure following acute stroke, the balance of benefit and risk remains unclear.

Amlodipine therapy in congestive heart failure: hemodynamic and neurohormonal effects at rest and after treadmill exercise

This study examined the acute effects of amlodipine treatment on left ventricular pump function, systemic hemodynamics, neurohormonal status, and regional blood flow distribution in an animal model of congestive heart failure (CHF), both at rest and with treadmill exercise. A total of 14 pigs were studied under control conditions and after the development of pacing-induced CHF (240 beats per minute, 3 weeks, n = 7) or with CHF and acute amlodipine treatment for the last 3 days of pacing (1.5 mg/kg per day, n = 7). Under resting conditions, left ventricular stroke volume (mL) was reduced with CHF compared with the normal state (15+/-2 vs. 31+/-1, p<0.05) and increased with amlodipine treatment (23+/-4, p<0.05). At rest, systemic vascular resistance increased with CHF compared with the normal state (3,078+/-295 vs. 2,131+/-120 dyne x s cm(-5), p<0.05) and was reduced after amlodipine treatment (2,472+/-355 dyne x s cm(-5), p<0.05). With exercise, left ventricular stroke volume remained lower and systemic vascular resistance higher in the CHF group, but was normalized with amlodipine treatment. With exercise, left ventricular myocardial blood flow increased from resting values, but was reduced from the normal state with CHF (normal: 1.69+/-0.12 to 7.62+/-0.74 mL/min per gram vs. CHF: 1.26+/-0.12 to 4.77+/-0.45 mL/min per gram, both p<0.05) and was normalized with acute amlodipine treatment (1.99+/-0.35 to 6.29+/-1.23 mL/min per gram). Resting plasma norepinephrine was increased by >5-fold in the CHF group at rest and was not affected by amlodipine treatment. However, with exercise, amlodipine treatment blunted the increase in plasma norepinephrine by >50% when compared with untreated CHF values. Resting plasma endothelin levels increased with CHF compared with the normal state (10.9+/-0.9 vs. 2.8+/-0.4 fmol/mL, p<0.05) and was reduced with amlodipine treatment (7.5+/-1.5 fmol/mL, p<0.5). In other vascular beds, acute amlodipine treatment with CHF improved pulmonary and renal blood flow both at rest and with exercise; however, there were no effects observed on skeletal muscle blood flow. With the development of CHF, acute amlodipine treatment does not negatively influence left ventricular pump function, but rather may provide favorable hemodynamic and neurohormonal effects.

Effects of mebudipine and dibudipine, two new calcium-channel blockers, on rat left atrium, rat blood pressure and human internal mammary artery

Mebudipine and dibudipine are two new dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers that have been synthesized in our laboratory. In a previous study, they showed considerable relaxant effect on vascular and ileal smooth muscle. Here, the pharmacological effects of mebudipine and dibudipine on isolated rat left atrium, rat blood pressure and isolated human internal mammary artery are described. Results are compared with those obtained for nifedipine. Mebudipine and dibudipine reduced contraction force of rat left atrium (pIC30 values: 5.37+/-0.13 and 5.49+/-0.15, respectively) but their negative inotropic effects were significantly weaker than that of nifedipine (pIC30 value: 6.63+/-0.11). Mebudipine and dibudipine lowered rat blood pressure. The hypotensive effect of mebudipine was similar to that of nifedipine while dibudipine was weaker than nifedipine. It was found that the half-life of the hypotensive action of dibudipine (41.91+/-3.77 min, 31.13+/-2.26 min and 28.20+/-4.37 min at 2, 4 and 8 mg kg(-1) orally administered doses, respectively) was longer than that of nifedipine (11.85+/-2.88 min, 16.65+/-2.42 min and 14.03+/-0.10 min at the same doses, respectively). Also, it appeared that mebudipine had a slower rate of absorption compared with nifedipine (the time to reach peak hypotensive action at 2, 4 and 8 mg kg(-1) orally administered doses were, respectively, 24.00+/-6.96 min, 23.75+/-2.39 min and 15.00+/-2.04 min for mebudipine and 7.80+/-0.86 min, 13.75+/-3.15 min and 833+/-0.88 min for nifedipine). The two new compounds, as well as nifedipine, relaxed KCl-treated isolated human internal mammary artery (pEC50 values; 7.87+/-0.12, 7.22+/-0.24 and 7.67+/-0.12 for mebudipine, dibudipine and nifedipine, respectively). The relaxant effects of mebudipine and dibudipine did not show any significant difference compared with that of nifedipine. It is concluded that these new compounds are weak cardiodepressants and, with due attention to its significant vasorelaxant action, mebudipine is a vasoselective compound. In addition, these two compounds have potent blood pressure lowering effects. Also, their vasorelaxant action can be reproduced in human vascular preparations.

Influence of calcium antagonists on long-term survival of patients treated with coronary angioplasty

A meta-analysis reported that nifedipine increased mortality dose-dependently in patients with coronary artery disease. However, there have been few studies (specifically in Asians) on the long-term prognosis of patients treated with calcium antagonists after successful coronary angioplasty (PTCA). The subjects consisted of 583 consecutive patients (461 males, aged 59 +/- 10), who underwent successful elective PTCA between 1985 and 1990. First, they were divided into two groups; the calcium antagonist (+) group (n = 560) and the calcium antagonist (-) group (n = 23), and were evaluated in terms of total survival and cardiac events. Second, the calcium antagonist (+) group was further divided into 4 groups according to calcium antagonist type, i.e., short-acting nifedipine group (n = 156), long-acting nifedipine group (n = 203), diltiazem group (n = 184) and the other group (n = 17), and these groups were evaluated in the same way. The primary end-point was set as death from any cause. Secondary end-points were any cardiac events, including non-fatal acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass surgery and repeat PTCA. The mean follow-up period was 4.5 +/- 1.8 years. A multivariate analysis was performed with the Cox proportional-hazard model. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the calcium antagonist (-) group had significantly worse prognoses than the calcium antagonist (+) group (p < 0.05), and that there was no significant difference among the prognoses of the four calcium antagonists groups. The multivariate analysis revealed that the use of a calcium antagonist was one of the independent factors positively contributing to the prognosis. The use of any type of calcium antagonist did not increase mortality in patients who underwent successful elective PTCA, rather, it contributed to a favorable outcome.

Rationale and design of the International Verapamil SR/Trandolapril Study (INVEST): an Internet-based randomized trial in coronary artery disease patients with hypertension

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the International Verapamil SR/Trandolapril Study (INVEST) is to compare the risk for adverse outcomes (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] or nonfatal stroke) in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) treated with either a calcium antagonist-based or a noncalcium antagonist-based strategy.

BACKGROUND

Treatment recommendations for hypertension include initial therapy with a diuretic or beta-adrenergic blocking agent, for which reductions in morbidity and mortality are documented from randomized trials but are less than expected from epidemiologic data. For this reason, recent attention has focused on calcium antagonists or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. While these agents reduce blood pressure, outcome data from large randomized trials are lacking, but some case-control data, dominated by short-acting dihydropyridines, suggest an increased risk of cardiovascular events. These studies had methodologic limitations and did not differentiate among calcium antagonist types and formulations. Several studies differentiating among calcium antagonist types and an overview of published randomized trials show no increased risk with verapamil and suggestion for benefit in CAD patients.

METHODS

A total of 27,000 CAD patients with hypertension will be randomized at 1,500 primary care sites to receive either a calcium antagonist-based (verapamil) or beta-blocker/diuretic-based (atenolol/hydrochlorothiazide) antihypertensive care strategy. The study uses a novel, electronic "paper-less" system for direct on-screen data entry, randomization and drug distribution from a mail pharmacy linked to the coordination center via the Internet.

RESULTS

Contract negotiations with the United States and international sites are ongoing. Patients being enrolled are predominantly elderly (72% aged 60 years or older) men (54%), with either an abnormal coronary angiogram or prior MI (71%). In addition to hypertension, CAD and elderly age, most patients (89%) have one or more associated conditions (diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking, cerebral or peripheral vascular disease, etc.) contributing to increased risk for adverse outcome. While 26% have diabetes, most of these are noninsulin dependent. Using the protocol strategies, target blood pressures (according to JNC VI) have been reached in 58% at the fourth visit, and as expected most (89%) are requiring multiple antihypertensive drugs.

CONCLUSION

The design and baseline characteristics of the initial patients recruited for a prospective, randomized, international, multicenter study comparing two therapeutic strategies to control hypertension in CAD patients are described.

Calcium channel blockers in cardiac failure

Congestive cardiac failure is an increasingly prevalent syndrome associated with a high morbidity and mortality. The role of calcium channel blockers in the treatment of heart failure is unclear. The potential benefits of these agents derive not only from their vasodilator properties, but also from anti-ischemic effects, beneficial effects on endothelial function and the development of atherosclerosis, and favorable effects on calcium cycling at a molecular level. Pitted against this array of potential benefits are direct negative inotropic effects and the potential for neuroendocrine activation. Treatment with short-acting dihydropyridine agents has not resulted in long-term clinical benefits in patients with cardiac failure. Diltiazem may be beneficial in patients with nonischemic heart failure, and verapamil has a neutral effect in cardiac failure, although it may have a role in combination with ace inhibition. To date, amlodipine has been associated with the most promising results, with evidence of a mortality benefit in nonischemic heart failure. Mibefradil is of no benefit in the management of heart failure, although the trend toward increased mortality in the treatment arm of the Mortality Assessment in Congestive Heart Failure (MACH)-1 trial may have been due to drug interactions. The potential role of calcium blockers in diastolic dysfunction and in combination with ace-inhibition requires further study.

Isradipine lowers human arterial low density lipoprotein retention in vivo

During the recent past it has been discussed that calcium antagonists may exert antiatherosclerotic actions at the vessel wall. Apolipoprotein B containing lipoproteins were isolated by immunoaffinity chromatography and radiolabeled with 123-iodine. The effect of 2 x 2.5 mg isradipine on the low density lipoproteins (LDL) entry into the carotid and femoral arteries of 12 hypertensive patients with primary hyperlipoproteinemia (total cholesterol >6.5 mmol/l [250 mg/dL) was examined. Cholesterol -1.7% (P< 0.05 664), high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol +4.5% (P< 0.01 123), and LDL cholesterol -1% (P< 0.01 563) did not change, nor did any of the safety parameters. The types of entry kinetics reflecting vascular surface lining did not change while the LDL retention 20 h after tracer application was depressed by up to 23.5%. The data were comparable in the carotid and femoral artery segments, the significance level ranging up to 0.0009. These results indicate a decreased LDL retention in the arterial wall of hypertensive patients induced by isradipine. The clinical implications of the findings ought to be pursued in properly designed clinical trials.

Grapefruit juice-drug interactions

The novel finding that grapefruit juice can markedly augment oral drug bioavailability was based on an unexpected observation from an interaction study between the dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist, felodipine, and ethanol in which grapefruit juice was used to mask the taste of the ethanol. Subsequent investigations showed that grapefruit juice acted by reducing presystemic felodipine metabolism through selective post-translational down regulation of cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) expression in the intestinal wall. Since the duration of effect of grapefruit juice can last 24 h, repeated juice consumption can result in a cumulative increase in felodipine AUC and Cmax. The high variability of the magnitude of effect among individuals appeared dependent upon inherent differences in enteric CYP3A4 protein expression such that individuals with highest baseline CYP3A4 had the highest proportional increase. At least 20 other drugs have been assessed for an interaction with grapefruit juice. Medications with innately low oral bioavailability because of substantial presystemic metabolism mediated by CYP3A4 appear affected by grapefruit juice. Clinically relevant interactions seem likely for most dihydropyridines, terfenadine, saquinavir, cyclosporin, midazolam, triazolam and verapamil and may also occur with lovastatin, cisapride and astemizole. The importance of the interaction appears to be influenced by individual patient susceptibility, type and amount of grapefruit juice and administration-related factors. Although in vitro findings support the flavonoid, naringin, or the furanocoumarin, 6',7'-dihydroxybergamottin, as being active ingredients, a recent investigation indicated that neither of these substances made a major contribution to grapefruit juice-drug interactions in humans.

Safety of long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in hypertensive patients

Issues raised recently concerning the safety of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) prompted an analysis of the occurrence of cardiovascular events and death in the Pfizer Inc. hypertension clinical trial databases for amlodipine (Norvasc) and nifedipine in the gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) formulation (Procardia XL). Prospectively defined analyses of data from comparative and noncomparative trials of amlodipine and nifedipine GITS were conducted. Outcome measures included cardiovascular and noncardiovascular deaths, and adverse cardiovascular events including new/worsened angina, myocardial infarction (MI), serious arrhythmia, stroke, congestive heart failure, and bleeding. Among all amlodipine-treated patients (n = 32,920), the incidence rates for all-cause death, MI, and new/worsened angina were 3.0, 3.3, and 1.6/1,000 patient-years of exposure, respectively. Among those in comparative trials alone (n = 4,126), the all-cause death rate was 4.1/1,000 patient-years, which was comparable to that of other non-CCB agents and significantly less than that of other CCBs (23.8/1,000 patient-years, p = 0.015), although the difference in rates represents only 2 deaths. Among all nifedipine-GITS-treated patients (n = 2,645), the rate of all-cause death was 4.1/1,000 patient-years, of MI 6.5/1,000 patient-years, and of new/ worsened angina 5.7/1,000 patient-years. The incidence rates for MI and other cardiac events were low in these hypertension trials, and did not differ among treatment groups in either the amlodipine or nifedipine GITS comparative analyses. In the clinical trial databases analyzed, there is no signal suggesting excessive risk of death or cardiovascular events for hypertensive patients treated with amlodipine or nifedipine GITS.

Conflict of interest in the debate over calcium-channel antagonists

BACKGROUND

Physicians' financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry are controversial because such relationships may pose a conflict of interest. It is unknown to what extent industry support of medical education and research influences the opinions and behavior of clinicians and researchers. The recent debate over the safety of calcium-channel antagonists provided an opportunity to examine the effect of financial conflicts of interest.

METHODS

We searched the English-language medical literature published from March 1995 through September 1996 for articles examining the controversy about the safety of calcium-channel antagonists. Articles were reviewed and classified as being supportive, neutral, or critical with respect to the use of calcium-channel antagonists. The authors of the articles were asked about their financial relationships with both manufacturers of calcium-channel antagonists and manufacturers of competing products (i.e., beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, diuretics, and nitrates). We examined the authors' published positions on the safety of calcium-channel antagonists according to their financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

RESULTS

Authors who supported the use of calcium-channel antagonists were significantly more likely than neutral or critical authors to have financial relationships with manufacturers of calcium-channel antagonists (96 percent, vs. 60 percent and 37 percent, respectively; P<0.001). Supportive authors were also more likely than neutral or critical authors to have financial relationships with any pharmaceutical manufacturer, irrespective of the product (100 percent, vs. 67 percent and 43 percent, respectively; P< 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a strong association between authors' published positions on the safety of calcium-channel antagonists and their financial relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers. The medical profession needs to develop a more effective policy on conflict of interest. We support complete disclosure of relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers for clinicians and researchers who write articles examining pharmaceutical products.

Outcome with calcium channel antagonists after myocardial infarction: a community-based study

OBJECTIVES

We sought to estimate the risk of death and recurrent myocardial infarction associated with the use of calcium antagonists after myocardial infarction in a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND

Calcium antagonists are commonly prescribed after myocardial infarction, but their long-term effects are not well established.

METHODS

Patients 25 to 69 years old with a suspected myocardial infarction were identified and followed up through a community-based register of myocardial infarction and cardiac death (part of the World Health Organization Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease [MONICA] Project in Newcastle, Australia). Data were collected by review of medical records, in-hospital interview and review of death certificates.

RESULTS

From 1989 to 1993, 3,982 patients with a nonfatal suspected myocardial infarction were enrolled in the study. At hospital discharge, 1,001 patients were treated with beta-adrenergic blocking agents, 923 with calcium antagonists, 711 with both beta-blockers and calcium antagonists and 1,346 with neither drug. Compared with patients given beta-blockers, patients given calcium antagonists were more likely to suffer myocardial infarction or cardiac death (adjusted relative risk [RR] 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0 to 1.9), cardiac death (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.7) and death from all causes (RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.6). Compared with patients given neither beta-blockers nor calcium antagonists, patients given calcium antagonists were not at increased risk of myocardial infarction or cardiac death (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.3), cardiac death (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.6 to 1.2) or death from all causes (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.3). No excess in risk of myocardial infarction or cardiac death was observed among patients taking verapamil (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.6 to 1.6), diltiazem (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.4) or nifedipine (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.2) compared with patients taking neither calcium antagonists nor beta-blockers.

CONCLUSIONS

These results are consistent with randomized trial data showing benefit from beta-blockers after myocardial infarction and no effect on the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction and death with the use of calcium antagonists. Comparisons between beta-blockers and calcium antagonists favor beta-blockers because of the beneficial effects of beta-blockers and not because of adverse effects of calcium antagonists.

Mibefradil in the treatment of systemic hypertension: comparative studies with other calcium antagonists

This paper summarizes the results of 4 double-blind studies of antihypertensive therapy in which mibefradil was compared with other commonly used calcium antagonists (diltiazem CD, amlodipine, nifedipine SR, and nifedipine GITS) at the recommended dose range. A total of 640 patients were included, with 361 randomized to mibefradil, 98 to diltiazem CD, 119 to amlodipine, 71 to nifedipine SR, and 36 to nifedipine GITS. Trials included an active treatment phase of 6 or 12 weeks in duration. Compared with diltiazem CD or nifedipine SR, mibefradil demonstrated statistically significant greater efficacy. Decreases in sitting diastolic blood pressure (SDBP) after treatment with mibefradil 100 mg once daily were 14.0 +/- 7.8 mm Hg compared with 9.5 +/- 7.5 mm Hg with diltiazem CD 360 mg once daily (p = 0.001), and 12.8 +/- 8.4 mm Hg compared with 8.1 +/- 19.2 mm Hg with nifedipine SR 40 mg twice daily (p = 0.014). Patients on mibefradil also had higher normalization (SDBP reduced to < or = 90 mm Hg) and response (SDBP reduction > or = 10 mm Hg or normalization) rates than did those on diltiazem CD or nifedipine SR. The overall incidence of adverse events was similar among these 3 compounds, but the number of premature withdrawals due to adverse events was greater with both comparators than with mibefradil. Treatment with 100 mg mibefradil or 10 mg amlodipine once daily resulted in statistically significant decreases from baseline in SDBP of 11.5 +/- 8.2 mm Hg and 13.2 +/- 7.9 mm Hg, respectively, which were statistically equivalent. However, patients treated with amlodipine had a considerably greater incidence of leg edema than did those treated with mibefradil (33.6% vs 4.2%, respectively). Similarly, 100 mg mibefradil was equivalent in efficacy to 60 mg nifedipine GITS once daily, but patients on mibefradil experienced fewer vasodilatory related adverse events. In summary, mibefradil demonstrated superior efficacy to diltiazem CD and nifedipine SR and equivalent efficacy to amlodipine and nifedipine GITS in the treatment of hypertension.

The calcium antagonist controversy: the emerging importance of drug formulation as a determinant of risk

Calcium antagonists are one of the widely available classes of antihypertensive agents. Their broad appeal is attributable to several features, including their efficacy, their beneficial characteristics such as metabolic neutrality, and the occurrence of relatively few nuisance-type side effects. Despite these attributes, a number of retrospective analyses have suggested that calcium antagonists may be detrimental and may both promote adverse cardiovascular events and increase the risk of cancer by interfering with cellular apoptosis. On the basis of this and other retrospective analyses, Furberg and Psaty (Am J Hypertens 1996; 9: 122-125) have proposed that the use of calcium antagonists as first-line antihypertensive agents should be discontinued. I have previously countered these allegations and have suggested that they are not relevant to the newer calcium antagonist formulations in current use. It is not widely appreciated that different formulations of the same chemical moiety can produce markedly different hemodynamic and neurohormonal effects, due to differences in the rate of drug delivery into the systemic circulation. During chronic treatment with dihydropyridine calcium antagonists, major fluctuations in blood pressure (rapid onset and offset of antihypertensive effects) during the dosing interval may occur for drugs and formulations that are short acting. In contrast, slow-release formulations of otherwise rapidly absorbed dihydropyridines achieve a more gradual and sustained antihypertensive effect. It is probable that newer calcium antagonist formulations that are truly once daily and do not provoke intermittent sympathetic activation or a cardioacceleratory response will not promote adverse cardiovascular events.

Effect of sustained-release Verapamil on the morning systemic arterial pressure surge during daily activity in patients with systemic hypertension

In a placebo-controlled study of 13 subjects with systemic hypertension, sustained-release verapamil reduced the morning surge in systolic pressure by 10.2 mm Hg (p = 0.04), diastolic pressure by 11.1 mm Hg (p = 0.008), and heart rate by 3.3 beats/min (p = 0.17). Blunting of the morning hemodynamic surge may be a mechanism by which verapamil could reduce the risk of plaque disruption and acute coronary events in the morning.

Nisoldipine coat-core. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and clinical efficacy in the management of ischaemic heart disease

Nisoldipine coat-core is an extended-release once-daily formulation of a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist effective in the treatment of chronic stable angina pectoris. With immediate-release formulations of nisoldipine, plasma drug concentrations that produce therapeutic effects result rapidly, but are not sustained and do not maintain the effects throughout a 12-hour dosage interval. In contrast, with nisoldipine coat-core, a gradual increase in plasma nisoldipine concentrations occurs over 12 hours and therapeutic concentrations are then maintained for the duration of a 24-hour dosage interval. In dosages of 10 to 60 mg once daily, nisoldipine coat-core controls symptoms of angina and improves exercise-induced signs of ischaemia in patients with stable angina. Compared with placebo, daily nisoldipine coat-core doses of > or = 20 mg provide statistically significant increases in total exercise time and time to produce angina and a trend towards an increase in the time to produce 1 mm ST segment depression, in exercise tests conducted approximately 23 hours postdose. When administered in 20 and 40 mg daily doses, nisoldipine coat-core produces improvements in exercise test parameters that are similar to those seen with amlodipine 5 or 10 mg/day or regular-release or sustained-release (SR) diltiazem 240 mg/day. The frequency of daily angina attacks and consumption of short-acting nitrates are also reduced by nisoldipine to a similar extent to that observed with these other agents. After longer term (1 year) administration of 10 to 60 mg daily, improvements in exercise test parameters are maintained, with equivalent anti-ischaemic efficacy seen in patients receiving nisoldipine coat-core alone or with background nitrate or beta-blocker therapy. Adverse events associated with nisoldipine coat-core are typical of the dihydropyridine class of calcium antagonists, with peripheral oedema and headache being most common. Nisoldipine coat-core appears to be associated with fewer deaths than placebo, notably in the DEFIANT-II (Doppler Flow and Echocardiography in Functional Cardiac Insufficiency: Assessment of Nisoldipine Therapy II) study, where only 1 death occurred with nisoldipine compared with 7 in the placebo group. Nisoldipine should not be taken during phenytoin therapy. In addition, grapefruit juice should be avoided during nisoldipine therapy and nisoldipine should not be taken concurrently with high-fat meals. Thus, the coat-core formulation of nisoldipine appears to have overcome the limitations of the shorter duration of action of immediate-release nisoldipine. Nisoldipine coat-core is well tolerated and once-daily administration produces a long duration of effective anti-ischaemic relief in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris.

Cardioprotective and hypolipidemic effects of nisoldipine in the JCR:LA-cp rat

The JCR:LA-cp rat exhibits the obesity/insulin resistance/hypertriglyceridemia syndrome in an extreme form. These normotensive rats spontaneously develop advanced atherosclerosis and ischemic myocardial lesions. The calcium channel antagonist, nisoldipine, was administered to obese rats of the JCR:LA-cp strain in drinking water at a dose of 1 mg/kg from age 6 weeks. Nisoldipine-treated rats showed no change in food consumption or body weight compared with control animals. Plasma glucose and insulin levels also were unchanged in the nisoldipine-treated rats. Insulin-mediated total glucose turnover, an index of insulin sensitivity as measured by euglycemic insulin clamp, was similarly not improved. Serum triglyceride levels in obese male rats were markedly reduced (57%; p < 0.001, at age 12 weeks), whereas obese female rats showed no significant change in triglyceride levels and an increase in esterified cholesterol in response to nisoldipine treatment. The impaired endothelium-dependent (nitric oxide-mediated) vascular relaxation of the male cp/cp rats was not improved by nisoldipine treatment. The severity of atherosclerotic raised lesions in the aortic arch of male cp/cp rats was significantly reduced (p < 0.01) by nisoldipine treatment, and this was accompanied by a major reduction in the incidence of ischemic myocardial lesions (85%; p < 0.01). Thus nisoldipine treatment ameliorates atherosclerotic damage and myocardial injury even in the presence of gross obesity, hyperinsulinemia, and significant hyperlipidemia. This effect appears to involve protection of the vascular wall from atherogenesis and probably antivasocontractile effects at the smooth muscle level as well.

Association of calcium channel blocker use with increased rate of acute myocardial infarction in patients with left ventricular dysfunction

The Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) assessed the effect of enalapril in patients with systolic left ventricular dysfunction (LVD). We performed retrospective analyses of the association between calcium channel blocker (CCB) use and fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) in these patients. MI occurred in 11.5% of 845 patients receiving CCBs versus 7.5% of 2551 patients not receiving CCBs in the enalapril group and in 14.4% of 874 patients receiving CCBs versus 9.3% of 2527 patients not receiving CCBs in the placebo group. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, adjusting for comorbidity, cause and severity of LVD, heart failure, and concomitant drug use, CCB use was an independent predictor of MI (relative risk [RR] 1.37, confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 1.63). The increase in MI risk was greater among patients with a higher heart rate (RR 1.46, CI 1.14 to 1.86) and lower blood pressure (RR 1.45, CI 1.14 to 1.86). The adjusted risk ratio for all-cause mortality associated with CCB use was 1.14 (CI 1.00 to 1.28; p = 0.0454). In this analysis of patients with LVD, CCB use was associated with significantly increased risk of fatal or nonfatal MI.

Evidence of increased sympathetic vasomotor drive with shorter acting dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists in human hypertension: a study using spectral analysis of RR interval and systolic arterial pressure variability

We studied the effects of common antihypertensive regimens on autonomic cardiovascular control. We considered calcium channel antagonists (nicardipine twice a day and isradipine once a day, respectively) and also examined, as reference treatments, once-a-day atenolol and cilazapril. A noninvasive evaluation of autonomic cardiovascular profile was obtained with spectral analysis of RR interval and systolic arterial pressure variability. We studied moderate essential hypertensives before and after 2 weeks of treatment, both at rest and during active standing and mental arithmetic. All treatments reduced arterial pressure equally well; however, marked differences in spectral profiles were observed. The low-frequency spectral component of RR interval variability [in normalized units, marker of sympathetic modulation of the sinoatrial (SA) node] tended to be greater at rest and during stimuli (p < 0.001) in subjects treated with dihydropyridines. No differences at rest, but striking increases of the low-frequency component of systolic arterial pressure variability were observed in nicardipine-treated patients during both standardized excitatory stimuli, suggesting a marked increase in sympathetic vasomotor drive. As to reference treatments, patients treated with atenolol displayed the lowest values, and patients treated with cilazapril (for 4 weeks) provided intermediate values. In conclusion, shorter acting dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists may induce an exaggerated increase in sympathetic vasomotor drive during standardized laboratory stressors.

Felodipine and amlodipine in stable angina pectoris: results of a randomized double-blind crossover trial

A randomized, double-blind, crossover study tested the antiischemic and antianginal efficacy of felodipine, extended-release 5-10 mg, versus amlodipine, 5-10 mg once daily. Fifty-two patients with documented exercise-induced angina pectoris and myocardial ischemia during 24-h electrocardiographic monitoring were included in the study. Forty-seven patients completed the 8-week treatment period, whereas five patients withdrew from the study. The mean number of ischemic episodes/24 h was reduced from 19.9 at baseline to 2.3 during amlodipine and to 2.4 during felodipine; the total duration of ischemic episodes decreased from 69.8 min/24 h to 15.2 min and 15.5 min during amlodipine and felodipine, respectively (for both variables, p = 0.83 and p = 0.53 between treatments, and for both treatments, p < 0.001 compared with baseline). Eighteen (38%) patients receiving amlodipine and 19 (40%) patients receiving felodipine showed no ST-segment depression during treatment. Maximal ST-depression was reduced from an average of 2.1 mm to 1.1 and 1.2 mm on amlodipine and felodipine, respectively (p = 0.68 between treatments and p < 0.001 compared with baseline). Mean heart rate remained unchanged compared with baseline. Anginal attacks were reduced from 16.4/week at baseline to 4.7/week with amlodipine and to 4.3/week with felodipine (p = 0.26 between treatments, and p < 0.001 vs. baseline). Accordingly, nitrate consumption was reduced from 14.7 capsules per week to 4.0 and 3.8 with amlodipine and felodipine, respectively (p = 0.40 between treatments, and p < 0.001 compared with baseline). Adverse reactions were infrequent and distributed similarly between the two treatments. It is concluded that both drugs effectively reduced ischemic episodes and anginal attacks and were well tolerated in patients with stable angina pectoris. There was no evidence that the two regimens were different in their antiischemic and antianginal properties.

Calcium channel blockers and hypertension: 2. Safety issues

As the safety of calcium channel blockers continues to be debated, it is important to realize that not all calcium channel blockers are alike. Safety, and efficacy, depend on the kinetic as well as the pharmacologic properties of the drug.

Safety of calcium antagonists: dissecting the evidence

Based on reports about short-acting calcium antagonists, several recent publications have questioned the safety of agents in this class, particularly of nifedipine. However, these articles contain major limitations and pitfalls; one includes several errors. This does not imply that acute-release nifedipine is safe; in fact, it is well known that short-acting nifedipine can cause a precipitous and potentially dangerous fall in arterial pressure. Calcium antagonists differ from each other in clinically significant ways; therefore, conclusions about one type of calcium antagonist are not automatically applicable to others. Preliminary evidence supports the safety and efficacy of long-acting calcium antagonists.

Controversies concerning calcium antagonists

The paper discusses the controversial attitude regarding the safety of calcium channel blockers (CCBs), especially of the dihydropyridine nifedipine, induced through several meta-analyses of studies with CCBs by Dr. Furberg et al.; as a result, a detrimental effect of CCBs, especially during acute myocardial infarction, has been claimed. Several independent re-analyses of the 16 studies, all performed in the 1980s and mainly using the short-acting nifedipine capsule, did not confirm Furberg's results and showed an insignificant mortality difference between patients on CCBs versus those on control. Nevertheless, new safety studies applying long-acting CCBs (half-lives of 1 or more days) combined with efficacy assessments are necessary, both in hypertension as well as coronary artery disease, to finally clear up this important question.

Calcium antagonists and mortality in patients with coronary artery disease: a cohort study of 11,575 patients

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to establish the risk ratio for mortality associated with calcium antagonists in a large population of patients with chronic coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND

Recent reports have suggested that the use of short-acting nifedipine may cause an increase in overall mortality in patients with coronary artery disease and that a similar effect may be produced by other calcium antagonists, in particular those of the dihydropyridine type.

METHODS

Mortality data were obtained for 11,575 patients screened for the Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention study (5,843 with and 5,732 without calcium antagonists) after a mean follow-up period of 3.2 years.

RESULTS

There were 495 deaths (8.5%) in the calcium antagonist group compared with 410 in the control group (7.2%). The age-adjusted risk ratio for mortality was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95 to 1.24). After adjustment for the differences between the groups in age and gender and the prevalence of previous myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, hypertension, New York Heart Association functional class, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes and current smoking, the adjusted risk ratio declined to 0.97 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.11). After further adjustment for concomitant medication, the risk ratio was estimated at 0.94 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The current analysis does not support the claim that calcium antagonist therapy in patients with chronic coronary artery disease, whether myocardial infarction survivors or others harbors an increased risk of mortality.

Current drug treatment and treatment patterns with antihypertensive drugs

The 4 major classes of antihypertensive drugs are diuretics, beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors and calcium antagonists. The diuretics have recently regained prominence, largely due to the results of recent controlled trials. These trials in elderly patients demonstrated that low-dose diuretics were effective not only in preventing stroke but also in greatly reducing coronary-related events. Diuretics also decrease left ventricular mass more than the other major drug classes. In addition, they are the most effective drugs for use in combination therapy. By contrast, the safety of calcium antagonists has recently been questioned because of report of increased coronary morbidity and mortality. However, these adverse events may be restricted to the short-acting preparations, especially nifedipine, which causes cardiac stimulation. ACE inhibitors, like beta-blockers, are not only effective in reducing blood pressure, particularly when combined with a diuretic, but also improve angina and decrease postinfarction mortality. They also benefit congestive heart failure, stabilise or improve renal function in hypertensive and diabetic nephropathy and reduce albuminuria. Beta-Blockers are especially effective in reducing sudden cardiac death in patients with coronary heart disease, particularly in postinfarction patients. Final proof of the relative effectiveness of these drugs in preventing morbidity and mortality must await the outcome of large comparative trials currently under way. A recent national survey in the US found that more than 75% of hypertensive patients did not have their hypertension completely controlled. Possible reasons for this disturbing statistic are discussed along with suggestions for improvement.

Prognosis of patients with unstable angina or acute myocardial infarction treated with calcium channel antagonists

The safety of calcium channel antagonists has become a controversial issue among cardiologists. Thus, the role of calcium antagonists in the treatment of myocardial infarction is reviewed, and the differences among the 3 classes of calcium channel antagonists, phenylalkylamines, dihydropyridines, and benzothiazepines, are discussed.

Prognosis of patients with stable angina pectoris on antianginal drug therapy

Antianginal drug treatment reduces symptoms and ischemia but may also influence the prognosis of patients with stable angina pectoris. The Atenolol Silent Ischemia Study (ASIST) compared atenolol and placebo treatment (about 140 patient-years on each) in patients with mainly silent ischemia and found less aggravation of angina and a tendency toward fewer cardiac complications with atenolol treatment. The Total Ischaemic Burden European Trial (TIBET) compared slow release nifedipine, atenolol, or the combination (about 450 patient-years on each) and found no significant differences with regard to cardiac complications, a nonsignificant trend toward better prognosis on combined treatment, and more side effects on nifedipine alone compared with the other treatments. The Angina Prognosis Study in Stockholm (APSIS) compared metoprolol and verapamil (about 1,400 patient-years on each) and found similar effects on cardiovascular endpoints, tolerability, and psychosocial variables with the 2 treatments. Hypothesis-generating subgroup analyses in APSIS suggest that treatment effects may differ in hypertensive and diabetic subgroups. Beneficial effects in primary and secondary prevention, together with data from ASIST, suggest that beta 1 blockade influences prognosis favorably. The safety of short-acting nifedipine in ischemic heart disease is questioned, but TIBET data suggest that slow release nifedipine may be safe. Verapamil has beneficial effects after myocardial infarction (Danish Verapamil Infarction Trial II) and shows similar efficacy as metoprolol in the APSIS study. The paucity of placebo data (antianginal treatment cannot be withheld during long periods of time in symptomatic patients) precludes firm conclusions regarding effects of drug treatment on prognosis. It is argued that patients with stable angina pectoris do well on medical treatment, and that beta 1 blockers, verapamil, and, possibly, slow-release nifedipine may influence their prognosis favorably.

Nisoldipine versus isosorbide dinitrate in coronary heart disease: results of a double-masked study

The efficacy and tolerability of a twice-daily dose of 5 mg of nisoldipine versus 40 mg of sustained-release isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) were compared in a randomized, double-masked study in 91 patients. During the 21-day treatment period, the mean time taken during bicycle ergometry to the appearance of an ST segment depression of at least 0.1 mV compared with the resting value increased from 287 +/- 129 seconds to 391 +/- 150 seconds in the nisoldipine group and from 254 +/- 140 seconds to 350 +/- 191 seconds in the ISDN group. The mean value at the end of treatment calculated by using analysis of covariance was 383 seconds in both groups. The difference between the two treatment groups was not statistically significant. The mean ST segment depression at individually maximal workload decreased from 0.19 +/- 0.07 mV to 0.12 +/- 0.08 mV in the nisoldipine group and from 0.18 +/- 0.07 mV to 0.14 +/- 0.08 mV in the ISDN group. The mean total duration of exercise increased from 420 +/- 161 seconds to 497 +/- 140 seconds in the nisoldipine group and from 425 +/- 167 seconds to 456 +/- 168 seconds in the ISDN group. In the nisoldipine group, 9 patients reported 12 adverse events that were considered to be possibly or probably related to the test medication; in the ISDN group, 13 patients reported 26 adverse events. Although the anti-ischemic effect of the two treatments was comparable, nisoldipine was descriptively superior to ISDN in terms of tolerability.