Effect of candesartan and lisinopril alone and in combination on blood pressure and microalbuminuria

Efficacy and safety of dual vs single renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in chronic kidney disease: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To lower albuminuria and to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals, dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are sometimes used in clinical practice for the treatment of CKD. However, the efficacy and safety of dual RAAS blockade therapy remains controversial.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched, and random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes of eligible studies. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected by meta-regression and subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

The present meta-analysis of 72 randomized controlled trials with 10,296 patients demonstrated that dual RAAS blockade therapy was superior to monotherapy in reducing the urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion, and BP. These beneficial effects were related to the decrease of glomerular filtration rate, the increase of serum potassium level, and higher rates of hyperkalemia and hypotension. Meanwhile, these effects did not lead to improvements in short-term or long-term outcomes, including doubling of serum creatinine, acute kidney injury, end-stage renal disease, mortality, and hospitalization. Compared with the single therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in combination with angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist in decreasing urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion and BP, and the combination was not associated with a lower glomerular filtration rate.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the single therapy, ACEI in combination with ARB was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist. Although ACEI in combination with ARB was associated with higher incidences of hyperkalemia and hypotension, careful individualized management and potassium binders may further expand its application (PROSPERO number CRD42020179398).

Efficacy and Safety of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in Combination with Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker in Chronic Kidney Disease Based on Dose: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the controversy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in combination with angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) in the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) based on dose.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to March 2020. The random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected using sensitivity analysis and meta-regression.

Results: This meta-analysis of 53 RCTs with 6,375 patients demonstrated that in patients with CKD, ACEI in combination with ARB was superior to low-dose ACEI or ARB in reducing urine albumin excretion (SMD, −0.43; 95% CI, −0.67 to −0.19; p = 0.001), urine protein excretion (SMD, −0.22; 95% CI, −0.33 to −0.11; p < 0.001), and blood pressure (BP), including systolic BP (WMD, −2.89; 95% CI, −3.88 to −1.89; p < 0.001) and diastolic BP (WMD, −3.02; 95% CI, −4.46 to −1.58; p < 0.001). However, it was associated with decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (SMD, −0.13; 95% CI, −0.24 to −0.02; p = 0.02) and increased rates of hyperkalemia (RR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.55 to 2.76; p < 0.001) and hypotension (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.54; p = 0.001). ACEI in combination with ARB was more effective than high-dose ACEI or ARB in reducing urine albumin excretion (SMD, −0.84; 95% CI, −1.26 to −0.43; p < 0.001) and urine protein excretion (SMD, −0.24; 95% CI, −0.39 to −0.09; p = 0.002), without decrease in GFR (SMD, 0.02; 95% CI, −0.12 to 0.15; p = 0.78) and increase in rate of hyperkalemia (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.37; p = 0.76). Nonetheless, the combination did not decrease the BP and increased the rate of hypotension (RR, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.13 to 13.84; p = 0.03) compared with high-dose ACEI or ARB.

Conclusion: ACEI in combination with ARB is superior in reducing urine albumin excretion and urine protein excretion. The combination is more effective than high-dose ACEI or ARB without decreasing GFR and increasing the incidence of hyperkalemia. Despite the risk of hypotension, ACEI in combination with ARB is a better choice for CKD patients who need to increase the dose of ACEI or ARB (PROSPERO CRD42020179398).

Sex-specific long-term blood pressure regulation: Modeling and analysis

Hypertension is a global health challenge: it affects one billion people worldwide and is estimated to account for >60% of all cases or types of cardiovascular disease. In part because sex differences in blood pressure regulation mechanisms are not sufficiently well understood, fewer hypertensive women achieve blood pressure control compared to men, even though compliance and treatment rates are generally higher in women. Thus, the objective of this study is to identify which factors contribute to the sexual dimorphism in response to anti-hypertensive therapies targeting the renin angiotensin system (RAS). To accomplish that goal, we develop sex-specific blood pressure regulation models. Sex differences in the RAS, baseline adosterone level, and the reactivity of renal sympathetic nervous activity (RSNA) are represented. A novel aspect of the model is the representation of sex-specific vasodilatory effect of the bound angiotensin II type two receptor (AT2R-bound Ang II) on renal vascular resistance. Model simulations suggest that sex differences in RSNA are the largest cause of female resistance to developing hypertension due to the direct influence of RSNA on afferent arteriole resistance. Furthermore, the model predicts that the sex-specific vasodilatory effects of AT2R-bound Ang II on renal vascular resistance may explain the higher effectiveness of angiotensin receptor blockers in treating hypertensive women (but not men), compared to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors.

Anti-diabetic and renoprotective effects of aliskiren in streptozotocin-induced diabetic nephropathy in female rats

Since chronic kidney disease due to diabetic nephropathy (DN) is becoming an ever larger health burden worldwide, more effective therapies are desperately needed. In the present study, the anti-diabetic and renoprotective effects of aliskiren have been evaluated in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced DN in rats. DN was induced by a single intraperitoneal injection of STZ (65 mg/kg). Three weeks after STZ, rats were divided into four groups; normal, diabetic, diabetic treated with gliclazide (10 mg/kg/day) for 1 month, and diabetic treated with aliskiren (50 mg/kg/day) for 1 month. At the end of the experiment, mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate were recorded. Rats were then euthanized and serum was separated for determination of glucose, insulin, kidney function tests, superoxide dismutase activity (SOD), adiponectin, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α). One kidney was used for estimation of malondialdehyde (MDA), reduced glutathione (GSH), and nitric oxide (NO) contents. Other kidney was used for histopathological study and immunohistochemical measurement of caspase-3 and transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β). In addition, islets of Langerhans were isolated from normal rats by collagenase digestion technique for in vitro study. Aliskiren normalized STZ-induced hyperglycemia, increased insulin level both in vivo and in vitro, normalized kidney function tests and blood pressure, and alleviated STZ-induced kidney histopathological changes. This could be related to the ability of aliskiren toward preserving hemodynamic changes and alleviating oxidative stress and inflammatory and apoptotic markers induced by STZ in rats. However, aliskiren was more effective than gliclazide in relieving STZ-induced DN. These findings support the beneficial effect of aliskiren treatment in DN which could be attributed to its anti-diabetic, renoprotective, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-apoptotic effects. Moreover, clinical studies are required to establish the effectiveness of aliskiren treatment in patients suffering from hypertension and diabetes.

Combined Treatment With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers: A Review of the Current Evidence

Several studies have shown that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers are useful in the treatment of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, chronic heart failure, and some types of nephropathy. In this context, dual renin-angiotensin system blockade with both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers may be more effective than treatment with each agent alone. Many clinical trials have demonstrated the beneficial effect of this combined treatment on proteinuria, hypertension, heart failure, and cardiovascular events. Moreover, these studies demonstrated that dual renin-angiotensin system blockade is generally safe and well tolerated. Long-term studies are under way to confirm these effects and also investigate the effectiveness of dual reninangiotensin system blockade on cerebrovascular disease and prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus. These studies are expected to define the optimal use of combination treatment in everyday clinical practice. This review considers the most important clinical trials that evaluated the effect of dual renin-angiotensin system blockade on blood pressure, heart failure, and renal function.

Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are available in different dosages and it is common clinical practice to uptitrate if blood pressure goal is not achieved with the initial dose. Data on the incremental antihypertensive efficacy with uptitration are scarce. It is also unclear if antihypertensive efficacy of losartan is comparable with other ARBs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically reviewed PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane databases for all randomized clinical trials until December 2012 reporting 24 h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) for most commonly available ARBs in patients with hypertension. Reduction in ABP with ARBs was evaluated at 25% of the maximum (max) dose, 50% of the max dose, and at the max dose. Comparison was made between 24 h BP-lowering effect of losartan 50 and 100 mg and other ARBs at 50% max dose and the max dose, respectively. Sixty-two studies enrolling 15 289 patients (mean age 56 years; 60% men) with a mean duration of 10 weeks were included in the analysis. Overall, the dose-response curve with ARBs was shallow with decrease of 10.3/6.7 (systolic/diastolic), 11.7/7.6, and 13.0/8.3 mmHg with 25% max dose, 50% max dose, and with the max dose of ARBs, respectively. Losartan in the dose of 50 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at 50% max dose by 2.5 mmHg systolic (P < 0.0001) and 1.8 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.0003). Losartan 100 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at max dose by 3.9 mm Hg systolic (P = 0.0002) and 2.2 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In this comprehensive analysis of the antihypertensive efficacy of ARBs by 24 h ABP, we observed a shallow dose-response curve, and uptitration marginally enhanced the antihypertensive efficacy. Blood pressure reduction with losartan at starting dose and at max dose was consistently inferior to the other ARBs.

Comparison of the effects of aliskiren/valsartan in combination versus valsartan alone in patients with stage 2 hypertension

The extent to which the combination of a renin inhibitor with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) lowers clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) versus an ARB alone in stage 2 hypertension is not well known. Hence, we performed an 8-week, randomized, double-blind study in 451 patients with stage 2 hypertension to compare the efficacy of the combination of aliskiren/valsartan 300/320 mg versus valsartan 320 mg. The primary endpoint was change in seated systolic BP from baseline to week 8 analyzed on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population using the last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) approach; patients completing the entire treatment period (per-protocol completers) were similarly analyzed. For the predefined primary analysis, systolic BP reductions for aliskiren/valsartan (n = 230) and valsartan (n = 217) were -22.1 and -20.5 mm Hg, respectively (P = .295). In per-protocol completers, aliskiren/valsartan (n = 201) lowered BP significantly greater than valsartan (n = 196); -23.7 mm Hg versus -20.3 mm Hg, respectively (P = .028). Although limited by a small sample size (n = 76) using ambulatory BP monitoring, aliskiren/valsartan lowered the 24-hour BP significantly more than valsartan alone (-14.6/-9.0 mm Hg versus -5.9/-4.2 mm Hg; P < .01). Safety and tolerability were similar for the two treatment groups. These data demonstrate the importance of multiple modalities to assess BP changes in clinical trials of antihypertensive therapies, particularly in stage 2 hypertension.

Role of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in the treatment of hypertension in patients aged >or=65 years

Systolic blood pressure (SBP) increases with age, and hypertension affects approximately two-thirds of adults in the US aged >60 years. Blood pressure (BP) increases as a consequence of age-related structural changes in large arteries, which lead to loss of elasticity and reduced vascular compliance. Increased pulse wave velocity augments SBP, resulting in a high prevalence of isolated systolic hypertension. Because age itself elevates cardiovascular risk, effective treatment of hypertension in an older (aged >or=65 years) patient population prevents many more events per 1000 patients treated than treatment of younger hypertensive patients. Recommendations for treating hypertension are similar in older patients compared with the general population. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Prevention, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure recommends target BP goals of <140/90 mmHg for patients with uncomplicated hypertension, and <130/80 mmHg for those with diabetes mellitus or renal disease. Recent guidelines and position papers have extended these aggressive treatment goals to include patients with coronary artery disease, other types of vascular disease and heart failure. Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of calcium channel antagonists (calcium channel blockers [CCBs]), low-dose diuretics, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) in reducing the risk of stroke and other adverse cardiovascular outcomes in older patients; beta-adrenoceptor antagonists are less effective in terms of endpoint reduction. The majority of older patients require two or more drugs to achieve BP goals. Despite active treatment, half of these patients do not achieve target BP, in part because of the reluctance of physicians to intensify treatment, a phenomenon referred to as 'clinical inertia'. ARBs are effective antihypertensive agents in older patients and have been shown to reduce cardiovascular endpoints in patients with hypertension, diabetic nephropathy, cerebrovascular disease and heart failure. ARBs produce additive BP reduction when combined with diuretics or CCBs. They also have the advantage of placebo-like tolerability, and this contributes favourably to patient compliance with long-term treatment, which is a prerequisite for reducing morbidity and mortality.

ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and direct renin inhibitors in combination: a review of their role after the ONTARGET trial

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have shown organ-protective effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs); however, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity rates, and decline in renal function remain high. In the ONTARGET trial in patients with hypertension at high cardiovascular risk, ACE inhibitor/ARB combination therapy provided no significant clinical outcome benefits over monotherapy, and was associated with a worse safety and tolerability profile. These results raise the question of whether ACE inhibitor/ARB, direct renin inhibitor (DRI)/ACE inhibitor and DRI/ARB combinations are of clinical value.

SCOPE

Using PubMed and EMBASE databases, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials published before June 2008 evaluating dual intervention with ACE inhibitors and ARBs, and compared these with trials of DRI/ACE inhibitor or DRI/ARB combinations.

FINDINGS

A total of 70 studies met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. In patients with hypertension, ACE inhibitor/ARB combinations provided limited additional reductions in blood pressure (BP) over monotherapy. Outcomes benefits were unclear: VALIANT and ONTARGET demonstrated no enhanced outcome benefit of combination therapy over monotherapy; Val-HeFT and CHARM-Added showed reduced morbidity/mortality in patients with heart failure, but at the expense of poorer tolerability. Combination therapy with the DRI aliskiren and an ACE inhibitor or ARB provided significant additional BP reductions over monotherapy in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, and reduced surrogate markers of organ damage in patients with heart failure or diabetic nephropathy, with generally similar safety and tolerability to the component monotherapies. No morbidity and mortality data for DRI/ACE inhibitor or DRI/ARB combinations are currently available.

CONCLUSIONS

ACE inhibitor/ARB combinations showed equivocal effects on clinical outcomes. DRI/ACE inhibitor and DRI/ARB combinations reduced markers of organ damage, but longer-term trials are required to establish whether more complete renin--angiotensin--aldosterone system control with aliskiren-based therapy translates into improved outcome benefits.

Combination renin-angiotensin system blockade with the renin inhibitor aliskiren in hypertension

Combining an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) and angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) lowers blood pressure (BP) by 4/3 mmHg compared to either agent alone, although this additive effect may be abolished with maximal monotherapy dosing. The recent ONTARGET study showed no reduction in primary outcomes when an ACE-I-ARB combination was compared to an ACE-I alone, despite 2.4/1.4 mmHg lower BP in the former group. In proteinuric chronic kidney disease, an ACE-I-ARB combination reduces proteinuria and disease progression more than monotherapy, but the ONTARGET study showed an increase in renal endpoints in the combined group. Aliskiren offers a novel approach to renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibition. As monotherapy in hypertension, aliskiren is of similar efficacy to thiazides, calcium channel blockers and ARBs. In combination with other RAS inhibitors at maximal dosage aliskiren has a small synergistic effect on BP (additional 4/2 mmHg reduction). Early data suggest a role for aliskiren in preventing end-organ damage but, considering the ONTARGET results with an ACE-I-ARB combination, outcome studies are needed before the use of aliskiren can be recommended in combination with other RAS inhibitors. As monotherapy, aliskiren should probably be reserved for use as an alternative to ACE-Is or ARBs, where these are ineffective or poorly tolerated.

On target to dual block RAS?

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are thought to possess cardioprotective, cerebroprotective, and nephroprotective properties. Both classes of agents can prevent or reverse endothelial dysfunction and atherosclerosis, thereby potentially reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. Such a reduction has been shown with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease, but no such data are scarce with angiotensin receptor blockers (Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction study). Both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers have been shown to reduce damage in target organs, such as the heart and kidney, and to decrease cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients with congestive heart failure. These drugs (especially angiotensin receptor blockers) may successfully prevent atrial fibrillation and play a protective role in metabolic syndrome. In some clinical settings, combined therapy angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors with angiotensin receptor blocker (double blockade of the renin-angiotensin- aldosterone system) may appear the most effective.

Valsartan in combination with lisinopril versus the respective high dose monotherapies in hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria: the VALERIA trial

OBJECTIVES

Microalbuminuria is known as an independent predictor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and death. The purpose of the VALERIA trial was a comparison of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy of valsartan and lisinopril with valsartan and lisinopril high-dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, interventional, parallel-group study. After a washout/placebo-run-in phase of 3 weeks, 133 patients were randomized to treatment (1: 1:1) with either lisinopril 40 mg, valsartan 320 mg, or a combination of valsartan/lisinopril 320/20 mg for 30 weeks.

RESULTS

At baseline, the urine albumin creatinine ratio was similar for the three treatment groups (geometric means, lisinopril 9.6 mg/mmol, valsartan 9.1 mg/mmol, and valsartan/lisinopril 9.5 mg/mmol). After 30 weeks of treatment, the geometric mean urine albumin creatinine ratio had decreased in all three groups by 41, 51, and 62% to 5.7 mg/mmol (lisinopril), 4.5 mg/mmol (valsartan), and 3.6 mg/mmol (valsartan/lisinopril). The decrease for valsartan/lisinopril was statistically significantly greater compared with lisinopril [adjusted ratio 60%, confidence interval (38-94%), P = 0.029]. Normalization of microalbuminuria was greatest with valsartan and valsartan/lisinopril (lisinopril 17%, valsartan 31%, and valsartan/lisinopril 38% of patients) and was statistically significant for lisinopril in contrast with valsartan/lisinopril (P = 0.034). Differences in blood pressure reduction between the groups were not statistically significant. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The combination of valsartan and lisinopril provided a significantly better reduction of urine albumin creatinine ratio and more than doubled the rate of patients with normalized urine albumin creatinine ratio compared with lisinopril alone. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.

Aldosterone and TGF-beta1 synergistically increase PAI-1 and decrease matrix degradation in rat renal mesangial and fibroblast cells

Aldosterone is thought to modulate renal fibrosis, in part, through increasing plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1), a major inhibitor of ECM degradation. The present study investigated aldosterone effects on PAI-1 and transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta(1) and asked whether PAI-1 effects were TGF-beta mediated and whether aldosterone and TGF-beta(1) acted synergistically to increase PAI-1 and decrease ECM degradation. Rat mesangial cells (MCs) and fibroblast cells [normal rat kidney (NRK)-49F] were used. (3)H-labeled ECM was produced by MCs. The effect of aldosterone and TGF-beta on ECM degradation by newly plated MCs or NRK-49F was measured by the release of (3)H into medium. Aldosterone markedly increased PAI-1 mRNA and protein in both cell types, increases completely blocked by spironolactone and partially blocked by TGF-beta neutralizing antibody. Adding both aldosterone and TGF-beta(1) produced PAI-1 mRNA and protein increases higher than the sum of increases seen with either compound alone. Aldosterone or TGF-beta(1) alone inhibited matrix degradation by 39 and 49% in MCs and 21 and 23% in NRK-49F, respectively. When both compounds were added, matrix degradation was further decreased by 93% in MCs and 61% in NRK-49F. The results indicate that aldosterone-induced PAI-1 increases are partially mediated by TGF-beta(1) and lead to decreased ECM degradation. While aldosterone alone induced TGF-beta(1) weakly, aldosterone and TGF-beta(1) added together produced dramatic synergistic effects on PAI-1 production and subsequent ECM accumulation. Thus the elevated aldosterone induced by renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation may amplify renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system profibrotic actions.

Efficacy and safety of valsartan 160/HCTZ 25 mg in fixed combination in hypertensive patients not controlled by candesartan 32 mg plus HCTZ 25 mg in free combination

OBJECTIVE

Free combination hypertension medication is associated with a lower compliance and less persistence compared to fixed combination therapy and can, therefore, be associated with insufficient blood pressure reductions. This non-randomized study investigated whether valsartan 160 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (Val 160/HCTZ 25) in fixed dose combination could provide additional blood pressure control in hypertensive patients not adequately controlled by the free combination of candesartan 32 mg plus HCTZ 25 mg.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

One hundred and ninety-seven patients with a mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP) between 100 and 110 mmHg entered a 4-week treatment phase with 32 mg of candesartan in free combination with 25 mg of HCTZ once daily. One hundred and thirty-eight patients with uncontrolled BP at Week 4, entered a second 4-week treatment phase with Val160/HCTZ 25 once daily.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary efficacy parameter was the reduction in MSDBP at trough between Week 4 and Week 8 in the intent-to-treat population.

RESULTS

At baseline, MSDBP was 103.0 +/- 2.8 mmHg. After Week 4, MSDBP had decreased to 93.8 +/- 4.5 mmHg. Subsequent treatment with Val 160/HCTZ 25 for 4 weeks reduced MSDBP to 88.7 +/- 8.6 mmHg. This represented an additional decrease in MSDBP of 5.1 +/- 7.9 mmHg (p < 0.0001). Val 160/HCTZ 25 reduced mean sitting systolic BP by 3.4 +/- 13.0 mmHg (p = 0.0029).

CONCLUSIONS

The fixed dose combination of valsartan 160/HCTZ 25 mg provided a statistically and clinically significant additional BP reduction in patients not controlled by the free combination of candesartan 32 mg and HCTZ 25 mg.

Rationale for Combining Blockers of the Renin-Angiotensin System

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) with angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and AT1-receptor (AT1R) blockers has become one of the most successful therapeutic approaches in medicine. The question is no longer whether RAS inhibition helps, but rather how we can optimize inhibition to achieve optimal cardiovascular and renal protection. Indeed, numerous data have shown that the RAS is not blocked fully over 24 hours with current doses of RAS blockers because they trigger a counter-regulatory renin release that can offset pharmacologic inhibition of the RAS. This absence of full blockade may have clinical implications. Combination therapy with ACE inhibitors and AT1R antagonists thus has been proposed to inhibit the biological effects of the reactive renin release triggered by single-site RAS inhibition. By using this approach, numerous experimental and clinical studies have suggested that this combination therapy has additive or synergistic effects on blood pressure and on the prevention of cardiovascular and renal lesions. Although similar intensity of RAS blockade can be achieved by either combination therapy or by using high doses of an AT1-receptor antagonist given alone, the ACE inhibitor present in the combination interferes with the bradykinin-nitric oxide pathway and the N-acetyl-Ser-Asp-Lys-Pro metabolism, which both may have additional biological effects.

Hormonal and hemodynamic effects of aliskiren and valsartan and their combination in sodium-replete normotensive individuals

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

An AT1 receptor antagonist induces a counterregulatory renin release whose intensity and duration reflect the magnitude of the renin-angiotensin blockade. We investigated whether a renin inhibitor may neutralize this counterregulation and amplify the effects of AT1 receptor antagonists.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In 12 normotensive male individuals who were on a high-sodium diet, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover design was used to study the hormonal and BP effects of single oral administrations of 300 mg of the renin inhibitor aliskiren, 320 mg of valsartan, and a combination of these two drugs, each at half dosage (150 mg of aliskiren and 160 mg of valsartan).

RESULTS

Valsartan (320 mg) increased plasma renin activity and angiotensin I and angiotensin II levels, but 300 mg of aliskiren decreased them for 48 h. Aliskiren (300 mg) stimulated immunoreactive renin release more strongly than 320 mg of valsartan, decreased urinary aldosterone excretion for longer than 320 mg of valsartan, and had a similar BP-lowering effect as 320 mg of valsartan. In combination, 150 mg of aliskiren neutralized the valsartan (160 mg)-induced increase in plasma angiotensins for 48 h. The renin and aldosterone effects of the combination of 150 mg of aliskiren and 160 mg of valsartan were similar to those of 300 mg of aliskiren and greater than those of 320 mg of valsartan. When plasma drug concentrations were taken into account, the combination of 150 mg of aliskiren and 160 mg of valsartan had a synergistic effect on renin release. The BP-lowering effect of 150 mg of aliskiren and 160 mg of valsartan was similar to that of 300 mg of aliskiren and 320 mg of valsartan at peak but was more prolonged.

CONCLUSION

The stronger and longer lasting effects on plasma active renin and urinary aldosterone of aliskiren, alone or in combination, demonstrate a more effective blockade of the renin-angiotensin system than that obtained with 320 mg of valsartan alone.

New opportunities in cardiovascular patient management: a survey of clinical data on the combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) differ in their actions on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). ACE inhibitors prevent the formation of angiotensin II, although angiotensin II may still be generated by alternative pathways. However, ACE inhibitors interrupt bradykinin breakdown, which in turn potentially enhances nitric oxide and prostacyclin mechanisms. In contrast, ARBs selectively prevent the binding of angiotensin II to the angiotensin type 1 (AT(1)) receptor while leaving the potentially beneficial effects of the AT(2) receptor unaffected. The supposition is that dual blockade of the RAAS effectively overcomes the harmful effects of angiotensin II mediated by the AT(1) receptor while offering the additional effects of the ACE inhibitor. This concept was first evaluated clinically more than a decade ago in small-scale studies that were not sufficiently powered to conclusively demonstrate benefits from dual blockade. Subsequently, larger-scale trials have been conducted to determine the effects of a combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB in combating the effects of angiotensin II at different stages of cardiovascular and renal disease. This review explores these data in areas, such as hypertension, renal disease, and cardiovascular disease, and draws on this preliminary evidence to support the rationale for the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET) program, which aims to fully explore the clinical end points and effects of dual RAAS blockade in patients at high risk for cardiovascular outcomes.

Candesartan cilexetil--a review of effects on cardiovascular complications in hypertension and chronic heart failure

Therapeutic interventions that block the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) have an important role in slowing the progression of cardiovascular risk actors to established cardiovascular diseases. In recent years, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have emerged as effective and well-tolerated alternatives to an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) for RAAS blockade. The ARB candesartan was initially established as an effective once-daily antihypertensive treatment, providing 24-h blood pressure (BP) control with a trough:peak ratio close to 100%.

SCOPE

A Medline literature search was undertaken to identify randomised, controlled trials that examined the efficacy and cardiovascular outcomes associated with candesartan cilexetil in hypertension and chronic heart failure (CHF).

FINDINGS

Compared with other ARBs, candesartan demonstrates the strongest binding affinity to the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. Clinical trials have demonstrated that candesartan is well tolerated in combination with diuretics or calcium channel blockers (CCBs), making it a suitable treatment option for patients whose hypertension is not adequately controlled by monotherapy. Subsequently, candesartan became the only ARB licensed in the UK to treat patients with CHF and left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 40% as add-on therapy to an ACEi or when an ACEi is not tolerated. Studies in patients with symptomatic HF have indicated that candesartan treatment was associated with significant relative risk reductions in cardiovascular mortality and hospitalisation due to CHF.

CONCLUSIONS

There are clear indications that the clinical benefits of candesartan may extend beyond its proven antihypertensive effects to a wider range of complications across the cardiovascular continuum, including diabetes, left ventricular hypertrophy, atherosclerosis and stroke. Such results suggest that candesartan treatment may offer significant patient benefits as well as practical advantages over conventional treatment.

Functional renin receptors in renal mesangial cells

Activation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and generation of angiotensin II (Ang II) play a crucial role in fibrotic renal disease beyond this system's hemodynamic actions. Ang II blockade was a great therapeutic breakthrough for renal and cardiovascular diseases; however, this slows, but does not stop, disease progression. These limitations leave other molecules unopposed to sustain disease progression. One is renin, which is markedly elevated by Ang II blockade. Recently, a new renin receptor was cloned in renal mesangial cells. This receptor acts as a renin/prorenin cofactor on the cell surface, enhancing efficiency of angiotensinogen cleavage by renin and unmasking prorenin catalytic activity. Unexpectedly, the receptor induces angiotensin-independent cellular effects in renal mesangial cells, suggesting that renin has novel receptor-mediated actions that could play a role in renal fibrosis. Proof of this could lead to a pharmacological compound blocking renin/prorenin binding and activity as an alternative or adjunct to classical inhibitors of the RAS.

Sarcopenia – A Potential Target for Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition?

Society is ageing. There has been a steady increase in the number of people aged 65 years and over throughout the 20th century and this trend is predicted to continue worldwide. This has resulted in an increase in the incidence of sarcopenia, which is a loss of muscle mass and function with age. Maintenance of muscular function into old age is critical to sustaining normal daily activity and functional independence. Sarcopenia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Till now most efforts to counteract sarcopenia have met with limited success. We postulate that targeting the renin-angiotensin system through angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition could play a role in countering sarcopenia. ACE inhibitors could work by preventing mitochondrial decline and improving endothelial function and muscle metabolism. We describe the literature to support our hypothesis that sarcopenia may be a potential therapeutic target for ACE inhibitors.

Preserving cardiac function in the hypertensive patient: why renal parameters hold the key

The relationship between cardiovascular and renal pathologies is well recognized in advanced nephropathy and heart failure, but in early disease it has received less attention. Consequently, microalbuminuria screening and interventions that treat early nephropathy remain under-utilized cardioprotective strategies in the hypertensive patient. Agents that delay the progression of renal disease are likely to be cardioprotective by lessening the systemic consequences of renal dysfunction and may have additional cardioprotective effects by exerting beneficial effects on endothelia elsewhere in the body and within the heart. A critical driving factor within both renal and wider cardiovascular pathologies is overactivation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Accordingly, RAAS-directed antihypertensive agents including both angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have been demonstrated to have renoprotective effects. In major prospective trials, two ARBs, losartan and irbesartan, have been demonstrated to be renoprotective in patients with frank proteinuria, and one ARB, irbesartan, has been shown to have renoprotective properties in patients with microalbuminuria. For patients with incipient or frank renal dysfunction, an aggressive RAAS-based approach to hypertension management, combining potent blood pressure control with proven renoprotection, may therefore constitute a key component of therapy targeted towards long-term cardioprotection.

Systematic Review of Combined Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition and Angiotensin Receptor Blockade in Hypertension

Some evidence suggests that long-term angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition may become less effective, thereby increasing angiotensin II levels, which could be inhibited by the addition of an angiotensin receptor blocker. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials with searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Overall, the combination of an ACE inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker reduced ambulatory blood pressure by 4.7/3.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9 to 6.5/1.6 to 4.3) compared with ACE inhibitor monotherapy and 3.8/2.9 mm Hg (2.4 to 5.3/0.4 to 5.4) compared with angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy. Clinic blood pressure was reduced by 3.8/2.7 mm Hg (0.9 to 6.7/0.8 to 4.6) and 3.7/2.3 mm Hg (0.4 to 6.9/0.2 to 4.4) compared with ACE inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker, respectively. However, the majority of these studies used submaximal doses or once-daily dosing of shorter-acting ACE inhibitors and, when a larger dose of shorter-acting ACE inhibitor was given or a longer-acting ACE inhibitor was used, there was generally no additive effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker on blood pressure. Proteinuria was reduced by the combination compared with ACE inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy, an effect that was independent of blood pressure in several studies, suggesting that the combination could have benefits in proteinuric nephropathies. None of the studies was of sufficient size and duration to determine whether there may be safety concerns. In conclusion, although there is a small additive effect on blood pressure with an ACE inhibitor-angiotensin receptor blocker combination, the routine use of this combination in uncomplicated hypertension is not recommended until more carefully controlled studies are performed.