Comparison of rilmenidine and lisinopril on ambulatory blood pressure and plasma lipid and glucose levels in hypertensive women with metabolic syndrome

The role of selective imidazoline receptor agonists in modern hypertension management: an international real-world survey (STRAIGHT)

BACKGROUND

Multiple pharmacologic strategies are currently available to lower blood pressure (BP). Renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-inhibitors, calcium channel blockers and diuretics are widely recommended as first line therapies. Sympathetic activation is an important contributor to BP elevation but remains unopposed or is even increased by some of these drug classes. Selective imidazoline receptor agonists (SIRAs) reduce increased central sympathetic outflow and are considered as add-on therapy in most guidelines. We conducted an international survey to evaluate contemporary hypertension management strategies in countries with high prescription rates of SIRAs to better understand the rationale and practical indications for their use in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Physicians from seven countries (India, Jordan, Lebanon, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, United Arab Emirates) were asked to complete a web-based questionnaire and comment on clinical case scenarios to provide information on their current practice regarding antihypertension strategies, underlying rationale for their choices, and adherence to relevant guidelines.

RESULTS

281 physicians completed the questionnaire including mainly cardiologists (35%) and general practitioners (32%). 96% reported using European (60%) or local (56%) guidelines in their daily practices. The majority of responding physicians (83%) had knowledge of SIRAs and 70% prescribed SIRAs regularly typically as a third line antihypertensive strategy (63%). The preferred combination partners for SIRAs were RAS-inhibitors (72%).

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary hypertension management varies between countries and therapeutic approaches in a real-world setting are not always in line with recommendations from available guidelines. In the countries selected for this survey prescription of SIRAs was common and appeared to be guided predominantly by considerations relating to the underlying pathophysiologic mechanism of sympathetic inhibition.

The Peculiarity of Process and Treatment of Arterial Hypertension in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Arterial hypertension (AH) is powerful and modifying factor of developing macrovascular and microvascular complications of diabetes. Patients with AH and diabetes belong to group with high and very high levels risk of developing cardiovascular complications and chronic kidney disease. The combination of type 2 diabetes mellitus and AH dramatically increases the risk of developing terminal stages of microvascular and macrovascular diabetic complications: blindness, end-stage chronic kidney disease, amputation of the lower extremities, myocardial infarction, cerebral stroke, worsens the patients prognosis and quality of life. There is ample evidence that blood pressure control in diabetic patients may be critical for improving long-term prognosis. This observation does not lose its relevance even with the emergence of new antidiabetic drugs with proven cardio- and nephroprotective effects. Modern clinical researchers and meta-analysis show the priority of combined antihypertensive therapy, which increases the efficacy of blood pressure correction and prophylaxis of long-term complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. In this article we want to pay attention to features of AH in patients with diabetes, to bi-directional pathogenic mechanisms, to discuss the new algorithms of the treatment and therapeutic needs of these patients. It is important to accent the understanding of the integrity and unity of pathogenic mechanisms which are needed in correction. Innovative antihyperglycemic therapy demonstrates the ability of blood pressure decrease. The synergy of effects let us successfully realize the strategy of multi-factor control and reduce a risk of micro- and macrovascular complications.

Medications that cause weight gain and alternatives in Canada: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

The cause of the obesity epidemic is multifactorial, but may, in part, be related to medication-induced weight gain. While clinicians may strive to do their best to select pharmacotherapy(ies) that has the least negative impact on weight, the literature regarding the weight effects of medication is often limited and devoid of alternative therapies.

RESULTS

Antipsychotics, antidepressants, antihyperglycemics, antihypertensives and corticosteroids all contain medications that were associated with significant weight gain. However, there are several medication alternatives within the majority of these classes associated with weight neutral or even weight loss effects. Further, while not all of the classes of medication examined in this review have weight-favorable alternatives, there exist many other tools to mitigate weight gain associated with medication use, such as changes in dosing, medication delivery or the use of adjunctive therapies.

CONCLUSION

Medication-induced weight gain can be frustrating for both the patient and the clinician. As the use of pharmaceuticals continues to increase, it is pertinent for clinicians to consider the weight effects of medications prior to prescribing or in the course of treatment. In the case where it is not feasible to make changes to medication, adjunctive therapies should be considered.

Effect of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibition on cardiovascular events in older hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Insulin resistance has been hypothesized as the underlying feature of MetS. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are widely used antihypertensives that may improve insulin sensitivity. The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of ACEI/ARB on incident CVD events in older hypertensive patients with MetS.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We used the Cardiovascular Health Study, a prospective cohort study of individuals>65years of age to evaluate ACEI/ARB use and time to CVD events (including coronary and cerebrovascular events). The study included 777 subjects who had hypertension and ATP III-defined MetS, but free of CVD and diabetes at baseline. Cox regression models were used to evaluate the effect of ACEI/ARB as compared to other antihypertensives on the time to the first CVD events.

RESULTS

ACEI/ARB use was associated with a decreased risk of CVD events (adjusted HR=0.658, 95 % C.I. [0.436-0.993]) compared to other antihypertensives. When CVD endpoints were evaluated separately, use of ACEI/ARB was associated with lower rates of angioplasty and coronary events (HR of 0.129 and 0.530 respectively, with 95 % CI [0.017-0.952] and [0.321-0.875]).

CONCLUSIONS

ACEI/ARB use was associated with a lower risk of CVD events in older hypertensive patients with MetS, primarily due to a reduction in coronary events. The potential protective effect of ACEI/ARB on CVD events in older individuals with MetS will need further confirmation from prospective studies.

Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil and ramipril in elderly mild to moderate essential hypertensive patients with or without metabolic syndrome: a pooled post hoc analysis of two comparative trials

BACKGROUND

Two recent identically designed trials (one Italian and one European multinational) have compared the head-to-head efficacy and safety of the angiotensin II receptor blocker olmesartan medoxomil and the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril, in elderly patients with essential hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to assess the antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan and ramipril in elderly patients with hypertension, with or without metabolic syndrome, by performing a pooled analysis of data from the two head-to-head trials.

METHODS

After a 2-week, placebo wash-out, 1,453 treated or untreated elderly hypertensive patients aged 65-89 years [with sitting office diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 90-109 mmHg and/or sitting office systolic BP (SBP) 140-179 mmHg] were randomized to 12-weeks of double-blind treatment with olmesartan 10 mg or ramipril 2.5 mg once daily. Treatment could be up-titrated to 20 and 40 mg for olmesartan, and 5 and 10 mg for ramipril, after the first 2 and 6 weeks, respectively, in patients with inadequately controlled BP (BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg for non-diabetics and ≥ 130/80 mmHg for diabetics). Office BP was measured at randomization and after 2, 6 and 12 weeks of treatment. 24-h ambulatory BP recordings were obtained at randomization and after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 1,426 patients in the intent-to-treat analysis, 735 (51.5 %) had metabolic syndrome (olmesartan, n = 372; ramipril, n = 363). After 12 weeks of treatment, baseline-adjusted office BP reductions were greater (p < 0.05) with olmesartan (SBP 17.0 mmHg; 95% CI 18.4, 15.6; DBP 9.6 mmHg; 95% CI 10.4, 8.8) than with ramipril (SBP 14.7 mmHg; 95% CI 16.1, 13.2; DBP 8.4 mmHg; 95% CI 9.2, 7.6) in patients with metabolic syndrome. In these patients, BP normalization rates were also greater with olmesartan than with ramipril (46.0 vs. 35.8%, p < 0.01). Similarly, in patients without metabolic syndrome, the antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan was also significantly (p < 0.05) better than that of ramipril. In the subgroup of patients with valid ambulatory BP (ABP) recordings and metabolic syndrome (olmesartan, n = 182; ramipril, n = 170), the reduction in mean 24-h ABP was greater with olmesartan (SBP 10.2 mmHg; 95% CI 11.8, 8.6; DBP 6.6 mmHg; 95% CI 7.5, 5.6) than with ramipril (SBP 8.5 mmHg; 95% CI 10.2, 6.9; DBP 4.7 mmHg; 95% CI 5.7, 3.7), with a statistically significant (p < 0.01) difference for the DBP comparison. The proportion of patients experiencing drug-related adverse events was comparable in patients with (olmesartan 2.4 % vs. ramipril 2.8 %) and without (3.5 vs. 3.7 %) metabolic syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Olmesartan provides more effective BP control than ramipril in elderly hypertensive patients with and without metabolic syndrome.

Rilmenidine – its antihypertensive efficacy, safety and impact on quality of life in perimenopausal women with mild to moderate essential hypertension

OBJECTIVES

A prospective, open-labeled study to assess the antihypertensive effect of monotherapy with rilmenidine and its impact on quality of life (QoL), as well as on biochemical parameters in perimenopausal women with essential hypertension.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Fifty-five perimenopausal women with mild to moderate essential hypertension (mean age 51.4+/-2.4 years) were enrolled. At baseline and after 12-week monotherapy with rilmenidine, we assessed: systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), fasting glucose, serum creatinine and total cholesterol levels. QoL was also assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks by two standardized questionnaires: the Short Form - 36 (SF-36) and the Subjective Symptoms Assessment Profile (SSAP). Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test to compare changes in BP, QoL and biochemical parameters during therapy with rilmenidine.

RESULTS

After 12 weeks of therapy, there was a significant decrease in BP and HR. Normalization of BP was observed in 46 (84%) women. Rilmenidine did not influence serum creatinine, fasting glucose and lipid profile. Treatment was very well tolerated by the patients and no side-effects were noted. Both the SF-36 and the SSAP demonstrated improvement in general QoL. We observed a significant improvement in all SF-36 subscales. In the SSAP, a similar significant improvement was found, except dizziness subscale. Improvement in QoL was not related to reduction of BP.

CONCLUSIONS

Monotherapy with rilmenidine is safe and effective in BP treatment and significantly improves QoL in perimenopausal women with essential hypertension.

The sympathetic nervous system and the metabolic syndrome

Studies performed in the past two decades have unequivocally shown that several of the components of the metabolic syndrome are associated with indirect and direct markers of adrenergic overdrive. This is the case for hypertension and obesity, in which resting tachycardia, elevated plasma norepinephrine values, increased sympathetic nerve traffic, as well as augmented levels of total and regional norepinephrine spillover have been reported. This is also the case for insulin resistance, i.e. a metabolic condition frequently complicating the various components of the pathological condition identified as the 'metabolic syndrome'. After briefly describing the epidemiological and the cardiovascular risk profile of the disease, this paper will examine the behaviour of the sympathetic nervous system in the metabolic syndrome as well as the mechanisms potentially responsible for this neurogenic abnormality. This will be followed by an analysis of the role played by neuroadrenergic factors in disease progression as well as in the pathogenesis of its complications. Finally, the therapeutic implications of these findings will be highlighted.

Marked Insulin Resistance in Obese Spontaneously Hypertensive Rat Adipocytes Is Ameliorated by in Vivo but Not in Vitro Treatment with Moxonidine

The obese spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHROB) is a model of marked insulin resistance with normoglycemia. We sought to determine whether insulin resistance extends to adipocytes and the impact of an insulin-sensitizing imidazoline, moxonidine (4 mg/kg/days for 21 days). Gonadal adipocytes were isolated from SHROB and lean spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) littermates. In lean SHR adipocytes, Akt activation by 100 nM insulin peaked at 3 min at 25-fold, whereas SHROB adipocytes showed only 4-fold activation. In dose-response experiments, the maximal response (E(max)) was markedly reduced 18.8 +/- 2.3 versus 3.7 +/- 0.8. Insulin sensitivity was also attenuated, with higher concentrations required for responses (EC(50) = 3.5 +/- 0.5 versus 29 +/- 3.8 nM). Glucose uptake as determined with [(3)H]2-deoxyglucose was also less responsive to insulin in SHROB relative to lean SHR. Moxonidine had little or no effect when applied acutely in vitro, but adipocytes isolated from SHROB treated with moxonidine in vivo showed significantly improved responses to insulin, both in terms of Akt activation and facilitation of glucose uptake. Chronic but not acute moxonidine treatment partially restores insulin sensitivity in SHROB adipocytes, suggesting an indirect action of this agent.

How can we block sympathetic overactivity? Effects of rilmenidine and atenolol in overweight hypertensive patients

The aim of the present study was to evaluate effects of long-term treatment with rilmenidine compared with atenolol on lipid and glucose metabolism and cardiovascular remodelling in hypertension. In total, 37 patients with hypertension were randomised to rilmenidine 1-2 mg/day or atenolol 50-100 mg/day for 26 weeks. Standard oral glucose tolerance test with a parallel measurement of insulin and glucose levels was performed. The 'areas under the curve' (AUC) for insulin and glucose were calculated. Plasma lipids, left ventricular mass index (LVMI), and intima-media thickness (IMT) were measured. Brachial artery diameter during reactive hyperaemia was used to test endothelium-dependent vasodilatation (EDVD). Blood pressure reduction was equally achieved in both treatment arms. The fasting glucose level increased in the atenolol group from 4.8+/-0.6 to 5.2+/-0.7 mmol/l (P<0.01). The AUC of glucose in rilmenidine group decreased from 860+/-93 to 737+/-66 mmol/min/l (P<0.05), and in the atenolol group it increased from 937+/-86 to 989+/-88 mmol/min/l (P<0.05). Rilmenidine showed a positive effect on lipid levels, whereas in the atenolol group a significant decrease of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was observed. Left ventricular mass index decreased with rilmenidine by 9.6% and by 6.9% with atenolol (P<0.05). Intima-media thickness significantly decreased in the rilmenidine group. Endothelium-dependent vasodilatation slightly increased on in the rilmenidine group, while on in the atenolol group it remained unchanged. Our data suggest that in hypertensive patients central inhibition of sympathetic drive can produce favourable effects on glucose and lipid metabolism compared with standard beta-blockade with a similar antihypertensive efficacy. Rilmenidine also provides beneficial effects on cardiovascular remodelling and altered endothelial function in hypertension.

Metabolic effects of antihypertensive agents: role of sympathoadrenal and renin-angiotensin systems

Reports of beneficial, neutral and adverse impacts of antihypertensive drug classes on glucose and lipid metabolism can be found in human data. Furthermore, mechanisms for these diverse effects are often speculative and controversial. Clinical trial data on the metabolic effects of antihypertensive agents are highly contradictory. Comparisons of clinical trials involving different agents are complicated by differences in the spectrum of metabolic disturbances that accompany hypertension in different groups of patients. Two physiological systems are predominant at the interface between metabolic and cardiovascular regulation: the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) and the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). These two systems are major targets of antihypertensive drug actions, and also mediate many of the beneficial and adverse effects of antihypertensive agents on glucose and lipid metabolism. Thiazides and beta-adrenergic antagonists can adversely affect glucose and lipid metabolism, which are frequently compromised in human essential hypertension, and increase the incidence of new cases of diabetes. Laboratory studies confirm these effects, and suggest that compensatory activation of the SNS and RAS may be one mechanism. Other antihypertensives directly targeting the SNS and RAS may have beneficial effects on glucose and lipid metabolism, and may prevent diabetes. Resolution of the controversies surrounding the metabolic effects of antihypertensive agents can only be resolved by further laboratory studies, in addition to controlled clinical trials.

Lipid-lowering actions of imidazoline antihypertensive agents in metabolic syndrome X

Agonists active at I1-imidazoline receptors (I1R) not only lower blood pressure but also ameliorate glucose intolerance, insulin resistance, and hyperlipidemia with long-term treatment. We sought to determine the possible mechanism for the lipid-lowering actions of imidazolines in a model of metabolic Syndrome X, the spontaneously-hypertensive obese (SHROB) rat. The acute actions of moxonidine and rilmenidine, selective I1R agonists, were compared to a specific alpha2-adrenergic receptor agonist, guanabenz, with and without selective receptor blockers. Moxonidine and rilmenidine rapidly reduced plasma triglyceride (20+/-4% and 21+/-5%, respectively) and cholesterol (29+/-9% and 27+/-9%). In contrast, the specific alpha2-adrenergic receptor agonist guanabenz failed to reduce plasma lipids. Blocking experiments showed that moxonidine's actions were mediated by I1R and not alpha2-adrenergic receptors. To evaluate a hepatic site of action, radioligand binding studies with liver plasma membranes confirmed the presence of I1R. Intraportal moxonidine reduced plasma triglycerides by 23+/-3% within 10 min. Moxonidine inhibited hepatic triglyceride secretion by 75% compared to vehicle treatment. Tracer studies with 2H2O suggested that moxonidine inhibits de novo fatty acid synthesis. Thus, activation of I1R lowers plasma lipids, with the main site of action probably within the liver to reduce synthesis and secretion of triglycerides. More selective I1R agonists might provide monotherapy for hyperlipidemic hypertension.