Effects of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist on electrical and structural remodeling in atrial fibrillation

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) antagonist on chronic structural remodeling in atrial fibrillation (AF).

BACKGROUND

We previously reported that an AT1R antagonist, candesartan, prevents acute electrical remodeling in a rapid pacing model. However, the effect of candesartan on chronic structural remodeling in AF is unclear.

METHODS

Sustained AF was induced in 20 dogs (10 in a control group and 10 in a candesartan group) by rapid pacing of the right atrium (RA) at 400 beats/min for five weeks. Candesartan was administered orally (10 mg/kg/day) for one week before rapid pacing and was continued for five weeks. The AF duration, atrial effective refractory period (AERP) at four sites in the RA, and intra-atrial conduction time (CT) from the RA appendage to the other three sites were measured every week.

RESULTS

The mean AF duration in the control group after five weeks was significantly longer than that with candesartan (1,333 +/- 725 vs. 411 +/- 301 s, p < 0.01). The degree of AERP shortening after five weeks was not significantly different between the two groups. The CT from the RA appendage to the low RA after five weeks with candesartan was significantly shorter than that in the control (43 +/- 14 vs. 68 +/- 10 ms, p < 0.05). The candesartan group had a significantly lower percentage of interstitial fibrosis than the control group (7 +/- 2% vs. 16 +/- 1% at the RA appendage, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Candesartan can prevent the promotion of AF by suppressing the development of structural remodeling.

Use of angiotensin receptor blockers and risk of dementia in a predominantly male population: prospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether angiotensin receptor blockers protect against Alzheimer's disease and dementia or reduce the progression of both diseases.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Administrative database of the US Veteran Affairs, 2002-6. Population 819 491 predominantly male participants (98%) aged 65 or more with cardiovascular disease.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to incident Alzheimer's disease or dementia in three cohorts (angiotensin receptor blockers, lisinopril, and other cardiovascular drugs, the "cardiovascular comparator") over a four year period (fiscal years 2003-6) using Cox proportional hazard models with adjustments for age, diabetes, stroke, and cardiovascular disease. Disease progression was the time to admission to a nursing home or death among participants with pre-existing Alzheimer's disease or dementia.

RESULTS

Hazard rates for incident dementia in the angiotensin receptor blocker group were 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.84) compared with the cardiovascular comparator and 0.81 (0.73 to 0.90) compared with the lisinopril group. Compared with the cardiovascular comparator, angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with pre-existing Alzheimer's disease were associated with a significantly lower risk of admission to a nursing home (0.51, 0.36 to 0.72) and death (0.83, 0.71 to 0.97). Angiotensin receptor blockers exhibited a dose-response as well as additive effects in combination with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. This combination compared with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors alone was associated with a reduced risk of incident dementia (0.54, 0.51 to 0.57) and admission to a nursing home (0.33, 0.22 to 0.49). Minor differences were shown in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures between the groups. Similar results were observed for Alzheimer's disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Angiotensin receptor blockers are associated with a significant reduction in the incidence and progression of Alzheimer's disease and dementia compared with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or other cardiovascular drugs in a predominantly male population.

Drug-induced angioedema without urticaria

Angioedema without urticaria is a clinical syndrome characterised by self-limiting local swellings involving the deeper cutaneous and mucosa tissue layers. Most occurrences of angioedema respond to treatment with a histamine H1 receptor blocker (antihistamine) because they are an allergic or parallergic reaction. A small number of cases do not respond to antihistamine treatment. Such cases tend to occur in patients with deficiency or dysfunction of the inhibitor of the first component of the complement (C1-INH), but more rarely can occur in patients with other conditions and as an adverse drug reaction. Angioedema is well documented in patients taking ACE inhibitors. Considering that 35 to 40 million patients are treated worldwide with ACE inhibitors, this drug class could account for several hundred deaths per year from laryngeal oedema. ACE inhibitors certainly do not mediate angioedema through an allergic or idiosyncratic reaction. For this reason the relationship with this drug is often missed and consequently quite underestimated. Rare instances of angioedema have also been reported with angiotensin II receptor antagonists. This adverse effect seems to occur less frequently with angiotensin II receptor antagonists than with ACE inhibitors. However, we do not know whether this adverse effect has the same mechanism with the 2 classes of medications. Some cases of severe angioedema have been recently reported after treatment with fibrinolytic agents. Scattered reports suggest the possibility of angioedema associated with the use of estrogens, antihypertensive drugs other than ACE inhibitors, and psychotropic drugs. Angioedema can also occur with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Prevention of angioedema relies first on the patient history. Estrogen and ACE inhibitors should be avoided in a patient with congenital or acquired C1-INH deficiency. In the case of ACE inhibitors, the appearance of angioedema following long term treatment does not lessen the probability that such an agent could be the cause. The most important action to take in a patient with suspected drug-induced angioedema is to discontinue the pharmacological agent. Epinephrine (adrenaline), diphenydramine and intravenous methylprednisolone have been proposed for the medical management of airway obstruction, but so far no controlled studies have demonstrated their efficacy. If the acute airway obstruction leads to life-threatening respiratory compromise an emergency cricothyroidotomy must be performed.

Differences between general practitioners and cardiologists in diagnosis and management of heart failure: a survey in every-day practice

BACKGROUND

Data on diagnosis and management of heart failure in every-day care are scarce.

AIMS

To compare general practitioners' and cardiologists' diagnostic work-up and management of patients with (suspected) heart failure.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional survey we studied a sample of 103 files of patients coded as heart failure in primary care (31 general practices), and 99 files of out-patients coded as heart failure from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. We defined patients as heart failure "GP patients", when they were managed by a general practitioner without co-treatment of a cardiologist.

RESULTS

Patients managed in general practice were older (mean age 79 years (S.D. 8.5) and more often female than "cardiology patients" (mean age 64 years (S.D. 11.7)). Ischaemic heart disease (31 vs. 57%) was more prevalent in "cardiology patients". Additional investigations such as chest radiography (51% vs. 84%), electrocardiography (39% vs. 100%), and (Doppler-) echocardiography (12% vs. 97%) were performed more often in "cardiology patients". Most patients received diuretics (85% vs.79%). Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (40% vs. 76%), beta-blockers (9% vs. 30%), spironolactone (11% vs. 32%), and angiotensin-II-antagonists (6% vs. 13%) were prescribed much more often to "cardiology patients".

CONCLUSION

General practitioners more often treat elderly, female patients with heart failure than cardiologists. General practitioners use less additional investigations and prescribe less potentially beneficial medication, compared to cardiologists. Population characteristics only partly explain these differences, suggesting that the physician's attitude has an important bearing on the uptake of treatment.

Vascular and cardiac benefits of angiotensin receptor blockers

Angiotensin II not only is a vasoconstrictor, but it also affects cell growth and apoptosis, inflammation, fibrosis, and coagulation. Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system, either with inhibitors of the generation of angiotensin (angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors) or with blockers of angiotensin receptors, reduces blood pressure and inhibits other pathophysiological actions. These other effects provide benefits in coronary heart disease, heart failure, diabetic nephropathy, and stroke beyond blood pressure reduction. These benefits were first demonstrated with ACE inhibitors. However, the mechanism of action of angiotensin receptor blockers, which block angiotensin II stimulation at the angiotensin type 1 receptor but not at the type 2 receptor, may have advantages, particularly for endothelial dysfunction and vascular remodeling, as well as cardiac and renal protection. Recent multicenter trials suggest that ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers may reduce morbidity and mortality associated with cardiovascular and renal disease beyond blood pressure reduction. Several studies with different angiotensin receptor blockers, including comparisons with ACE inhibitors, are under way, and should provide further guidance for their clinical use.

Vasodilatory edema: a common side effect of antihypertensive therapy

Vasodilatory edema, a common adverse effect of antihypertensive therapy with vasodilators, is related to several mechanisms, including arteriolar dilatation (causing an increase in intracapillary pressure), stimulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and fluid volume retention. Vasodilatory edema is dose-dependent and most common with direct arteriolar dilators such as minoxidil or hydralazine, and in decreasing order of frequency with the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists, a-blockers, antiadrenergic drugs, and nondihydropyridine calcium antagonists. Not all dihydropyridine calcium antagonists are created equal with regard to vasodilatory edema. At an equal antihypertensive efficacy, lercanidipine and lacidipine are associated with less vasodilatory edema than amlodipine and nifedipine. The addition of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) to a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist significantly reduces vasodilatory edema. In contrast, the addition of a diuretic has little effect on vasodilatory edema. Thus, low-dose combination therapy (of a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist with either an ACE inhibitor or an ARB) may be preferred over high-dose monotherapy.

Effect of crossing over hypertensive patients from a beta-blocker to an angiotensin receptor antagonist on resistance artery structure and on endothelial function

BACKGROUND

Treatment of essential hypertensive patients with an AT1 angiotensin receptor antagonist has previously resulted in correction of resistance artery structure and endothelial function, whereas in a parallel group treated with the beta-blocker atenolol there was no improvement of altered vascular structure and function. To test the hypothesis that patients previously treated with atenolol could present improvement of vascular structure and endothelial function if they were subjected to blockade of the renin-angiotensin system, we crossed over hypertensive patients that had been randomized to treatment with the beta-blocker atenolol to treatment with the AT1 antagonist irbesartan, and studied small artery structure and endothelial function before and after treatment.

METHODS

Eleven essential hypertensive patients (51 +/- 2 years, range 38-65; 75% male) that had previously been randomized to treatment with atenolol and treated for 1 year with good blood pressure control, were crossed over to treatment with the AT1 antagonist irbesartan for 1 year. Small resistance arteries were dissected from gluteal subcutaneous biopsies that were performed before and after 1 year of treatment. The structure and endothelial function of the resistance arteries were studied on a pressurized myograph.

RESULTS

Blood pressure control (129 +/- 3.3/85 +/- 1.8 mmHg) was identical to that achieved previously with atenolol (131 +/- 3.3/84 +/- 1.1 mmHg). Following 1 year of treatment, the arterial media width to lumen ratio (M/L) of resistance arteries (lumen diameter, 150-350 microm), which had remained unchanged under atenolol treatment, decreased from 8.44 +/- 0.45% when patients were on atenolol, to 6.46 +/- 0.30%, P < 0.01, when patients received irbesartan. Maximal acetylcholine-induced endothelium-dependent relaxation was 81.1 +/- 4.1% when patients were on atenolol, unchanged from before starting treatment with the beta-blocker, and was normalized by irbesartan (to 94.8 +/- 2.0%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Crossing over essential hypertensive patients with well-controlled blood pressure from the beta-blocker atenolol to the AT1 receptor antagonist irbesartan resulted in correction of previously persistently altered vascular structure and endothelial function, suggesting a structural and endothelial vascular protective effect of antihypertensive treatment with the AT1 receptor antagonist.

Additive antiproteinuric effect of combined ACE inhibition and angiotensin II receptor blockade

BACKGROUND

Limitation of systemic and glomerular hypertension reduces urinary protein excretion and prevents renal function deterioration.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether, in hypertensive patients with glomerulonephritis, a combination of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI, fosinopril 20 mg/day) with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB, irbesartan 150 mg/day) produces a more profound antiproteinuric effect than either drug alone.

METHODS

Ten non-diabetic patients with glomerulonephritis, normal or slightly reduced but stable renal function (creatinine clearance 40-106 ml/min) without immunosuppression were studied. Clinical evaluations, 24 h blood pressure measurements and laboratory tests were performed as follows: (1) without medication (baseline) and in random sequence; (2) ACEI alone; (3) ARB alone; and (4) combination of ACEI + ARB. Each period lasted for 6 weeks, separated by three washout periods of 4 weeks each without therapy.

RESULTS

ACEI and ARB alone reduced proteinuria from 7.9 +/- 7.1 to 5.3 +/- 5.2 and 5.0 +/- 4.9 g/24 h (mean +/- SD), respectively. The combination of ACEI + ARB induced a more remarkable reduction of proteinuria in every patient (to 3.3 +/- 3.7 g/24 h) than either drug alone (P = 0.039 by ANOVA). The enhanced antiproteinuric effect of the combined therapy could not be attributed to a more pronounced reduction of 24 h mean arterial pressure (basal, 106 +/- 8; ACEI, 97 +/- 5; ARB, 98 +/- 5; ACEI+ARB, 95 +/- 5 mmHg) or creatinine clearance (basal, 77 +/- 27; ACEI, 73 +/- 31; ARB 80 +/- 30; ACEI + ARB, 73 +/- 32 ml/min).

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of ACEI and ARB in patients with glomerulonephritis produces a more profound decrease in proteinuria than either drug alone. This additive antiproteinuric effect is not dependent on changes in blood pressure or creatinine clearance. A long-term controlled study is required to confirm the positive effect of this treatment on the progression of renal function loss.

Frequency and risk factors of severe hypoglycaemia in insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional survey

AIMS

The reported risk of severe hypoglycaemia in insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes is highly variable and few studies have evaluated the influence of risk factors. We assessed the incidence and the influence of potential risk factors for severe hypoglycaemia in a questionnaire survey in subjects with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes receiving currently recommended multifactorial intervention.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes (n = 401) completed a questionnaire about occurrence of hypoglycaemia in the past, hypoglycaemia awareness and socio-demographic factors. A zero-inflated negative binomial model was used to assess the influence of potential risk factors on the rate of severe hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of severe hypoglycaemia in the preceding year was 0.44 episodes/person year. Sixty-six (16.5%) patients had experienced at least one event. The risk of any episode of severe hypoglycaemia positively correlated with impaired hypoglycaemia awareness, being married and long duration of diabetes. The risk of repeated episodes of severe hypoglycaemia positively correlated with the presence of peripheral neuropathy, while long duration of diabetes prior to insulin treatment and treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARBs) were associated with reduced risk. C-peptide concentration and HbA1c were not associated with the risk of severe hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of insulin-treated Type 2 diabetic patients, the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia is higher than reported in most studies, corresponding to about one-third of that in Type 1 diabetes. Impaired hypoglycaemia awareness is the most important risk factor for severe hypoglycaemia.

Combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker for diabetic nephropathy: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) prevent the progression of diabetic nephropathy (DN). Studies suggest that combination renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS)-inhibiting therapy provides additive benefit in DN. However, these studies are small in size. We performed a meta-analysis of studies investigating combination therapy for DN.

METHODS

Studies were identified through a search of medline, embase, cinahl and the Cochrane Database. All trials involving combined ACEI and ARB for slowing progression of DN were included. The primary end point was 24-h urinary protein excretion. Blood pressure, serum potassium and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were secondary end points.

RESULTS

In the 10 included trials, 156 patients received ACEI + ARB and 159 received ACEI only. Most studies were 8-12 weeks in duration. Proteinuria was reduced with ACEI + ARB (P = 0.01). This was associated with significant statistical heterogeneity (P = 0.005). ACEI + ARB was associated with a reduction in GFR [3.87 ml/min (7.32-0.42); P = 0.03] and a trend towards an increase in serum creatinine (6.86 micromol/l 95% CI -0.76-13.73; P = 0.09). Potassium was increased by 0.2 (0.08-0.32) mmol/l (P < 0.01) with ACEI + ARB. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were reduced by 5.2 (2.1-8.4) mmHg (P < 0.01) and 5.3 (2.2-8.4) mmHg (P < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that ACEI + ARB reduces 24-h proteinuria to a greater extent than ACEI alone. This benefit is associated with small effects on GFR, serum creatinine, potassium and blood pressure. These results should be interpreted cautiously as most of the included studies were of short duration and the few long-term studies (12 months) have not demonstrated benefit.

A population-based European cohort study of persistence in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients

This study assessed the percentage of patients after 1 year who persisted on initially prescribed antihypertensive therapy. Medical records of 2416 patients with newly diagnosed hypertension who were prescribed initial antihypertensive monotherapy by general practitioners in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom were evaluated. Comparisons were made among the angiotensin II receptor antagonist (AIIRA) irbesartan, all other antihypertensive classes (including AIIRAs other than irbesartan), and the AIIRA losartan. Patients initiated on the AIIRA irbesartan scored highest with a persistence rate of 60.8%, followed by patients who received all other AIIRA agents with a persistence rate of 51.3%. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, beta-blockers, and losartan were associated with comparable persistence rates, between 42.0% and 49.7%. Patients who received diuretics scored lowest with a persistence rate of 34.4%. Persistence has emerged as an essential factor for blood pressure control. Prescribing an antihypertensive agent that provides a favourable efficacy and tolerability profile may provide greater persistence with therapy and hence a higher level of blood pressure control.

RAS inhibition in hypertension

Drugs that inhibit the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), namely angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) and angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARA) are gaining increasing popularity as initial medications for the management of hypertensive patients. In the year 2002, ACE-I were the most commonly prescribed drugs for the treatment of hypertension in USA. Although their antihypertensive efficacy as monotherapy is similar to other antihypertensive agents, they have the advantage of better tolerability, limited side effects and a favorable metabolic profile. When compared to other antihypertensive agents (diuretics, beta-adrenergic blockers and calcium antagonists) in large clinical trials, ACE-I and ARA provided no additional advantages regarding improvement in cardiovascular and total mortality. With the exception of the superiority of ARA in prevention of stroke, RAS inhibitors have no advantage over other agents in prevention of other cardiovascular morbid events, namely, heart failure (though ACE-I are superior to calcium antagonists), coronary heart disease and total cardiovascular events. However, there is the possibility that these agents have other benefits beyond blood pressure lowering. At equal degrees of blood pressure reduction, RAS inhibitors prevent or delay the development of diabetes mellitus and provide better end-organ protection, kidneys, blood vessels and the heart when compared with other antihypertensive agents. The combined use of ACE-I and ARA is particularly useful in organ protection. RAS inhibitors are specifically indicated in the treatment of hypertension in patients with impaired left ventricular systolic function, diabetes, proteinuria, impaired kidney function, myocardial infarction, multiple cardiovascular risk factors and possibly elderly patients. The main limitation of the ACE-I is cough and rarely angioedema. Elderly patients or those who are volume depleted or receiving large doses of diuretics or in heart failure are liable to develop hypotensive reaction and/or deterioration in kidney function.

Counteracting the sympathetic nervous system in essential hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper will provide an up-to-date overview of the adrenergic effects of the different classes of antihypertensive drugs in uncomplicated hypertension, as well as in hypertension associated with obesity, renal failure, diabetes or congestive heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Animal and human studies unequivocally show that sympathetic activation characterizes the hypertensive state and participates in the development, maintenance and progression of elevated blood pressure values. Evidence has also been provided that elevated sympathetic cardiovascular influences are involved in the pathogenesis of left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular hypertrophy and atherogenesis, as well as in the occurrence of metabolic disarray (i.e. metabolic syndrome, hypercholesterolemia, hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance), which frequently accompany the hypertensive state. Antihypertensive drugs with confirmed sympathoinhibitor effects are represented by beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers. In the case of the latter two classes of antihypertensive compounds the sympathoinhibitory effects have been shown to be associated with beneficial metabolic and cardiovascular effects, a finding that supports the use of these drugs in complicated hypertension.

SUMMARY

Investigation of the adrenergic effects of antihypertensive drugs has had a significant impact on cardiovascular pharmacology and hypertension treatment. Although remarkable progress has been made on this topic in recent years, future studies aimed at assessing the sympathetic effects of combination drug treatment will be helpful in improving the clinical use of the association of two or more drugs in hypertension treatment.

Diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular derangements: Pathophysiology and management

Hypertension frequently coexists with diabetes mellitus, occurring twice as frequently in diabetic as in nondiabetic persons. It accounts for up to 75% of added cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in people with diabetes, contributing significantly to the overall morbidity and mortality in this high-risk population. Patients with hypertension are two times more prone to have diabetes than are normotensive persons. Hypertension substantially increases the risk for coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, retinopathy, and nephropathy. In patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension usually clusters with the other components of the cardiometabolic syndrome, such as microalbuminuria, central obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, hypercoagulation, increased inflammation, and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). In type 1 diabetes, hypertension often occurs subsequent to the development of diabetic nephropathy. Hypertension in people with diabetes is characterized by volume expansion, increased salt sensitivity, isolated systolic blood pressure (BP) elevation, loss of the nocturnal dipping of BP and pulse, and increased propensity toward orthostatic hypotension and albuminuria. Among the treatment strategies tested in hypertensive diabetic persons, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol lowering to less than 100 mg/dL and aggressive BP control to less than 130/80 mm Hg have proven effective in CVD risk reduction. The combination of two or more drugs is usually necessary to achieve the target BP.

Effect of sildenafil on blood pressure and arterial wave reflection in treated hypertensive men

As the effects of sildenafil are in part mediated by enhancing the action of nitric oxide and nitrates given acutely markedly reduce early wave reflection, we explored the effects of a single oral dose of sildenafil citrate (50 mg) on blood pressure and arterial wave reflection in treated hypertensive men in a single-blind randomised placebo controlled crossover study. Eight men (aged 57-76 years) with well controlled hypertension and erectile dysfunction and no contraindications to the use of sildenafil, were given either sildenafil 50 mg or placebo orally, with the second drug being given 2 weeks later. Blood pressure and heart rate with an automated digital oscillometric device (Omron) HEM-705 CP) and the augmentation index, a measure of arterial wave reflection in the aorta derived using radial applanation tonometry, were measured before and at 15-min intervals for 2 h thereafter. The extent of individual maximum reductions (mm Hg) from baseline in systolic (24 +/- 10 vs. 6 +/- 8, P < 0.05) and diastolic blood pressure (8 +/- 5 vs. 3 +/- 2, P < 0.05) occurred on the sildenafil study day. On average the brachial blood pressure at 75 min following sildenafil was 17/11 mm less than on the placebo day (P < 0.01). Augmentation index was also reduced significantly at 90 min (P < 0.05) suggesting reduced vascular tone in the arteries. The area under the brachial and aortic blood pressure and augmentation index time curve (by the trapezoidal rule corrected for baseline reading) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) on the sildenafil study day. The study shows that the peripheral vasodilatory effects of sildenafil, possibly related to nitric oxide, are accompanied by a fall in systemic blood pressure and reduced arterial wave reflection.

Irbesartan lowers superoxide levels and increases nitric oxide bioavailability in blood vessels from spontaneously hypertensive stroke-prone rats

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of the angiotensin II receptor antagonist irbesartan, the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide/hydralazine on superoxide, NAD(P)H oxidase and nitric oxide bioavailability in spontaneously hypertensive stroke-prone rats (SHRSP).

METHODS

Drugs or vehicle were administered for 8 weeks to SHRSP and blood pressure was measured weekly by tail-cuff plethysmography. After 8 weeks, superoxide levels in carotid arteries and aortas were measured by lucigenin chemiluminescence and p22phox expression quantified by immunohistochemistry. In vitro the effects of exposure to drugs and vehicle for 30 min and 4 h on superoxide levels and nitric oxide bioavailability were examined. The latter was expressed as the increase in contractile responses of carotid arteries to phenylephrine in the presence of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor NG-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester(l-NAME).

RESULTS

In vivo irbesartan, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide/hydralazine produced similar falls in blood pressure, from 162 +/- 4 to 125 +/- 5, 132 +/- 4 and 131 +/- 6 mmHg, respectively, but irbesartan caused a greater reduction in superoxide and p22phox; superoxide levels in carotid arteries being 3.1 +/- 0.3, 1.1 +/- 0.2, 1.9 +/- 0.3 and 2.0 +/- 0.3 nmoles/mg per min, respectively. In vitro 4 h exposure to irbesartan decreased superoxide levels in the aorta from 2.08 +/- 0.68 to 1.48 +/- 0.62 nmoles/mg per min and increased nitric oxide bioavailability in carotid arteries. Neither 30 min incubation with irbesartan nor 4 h with amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide/hydralazine altered superoxide levels.

CONCLUSIONS

These studies support the hypothesis that AT1 receptor blockade has beneficial effects on superoxide production and nitric oxide bioavailability above that of other classes of antihypertensive agents. Reduced expression of components of the NAD(P)H oxidase may contribute to these effects.

Recent advances in management of type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: lessons from the RENAAL study

BACKGROUND

Diabetic nephropathy has become the single most important cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) worldwide. Strategies to slow the rate of loss of renal function in these patients recently have been developed. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system has proven to be an important target for intervention.

METHODS

The Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study was a randomized, double-blind, multinational, clinical trial that studied 1,513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy for a mean of 3.4 years. Patients were administered either losartan or placebo, each in addition to conventional antihypertensive therapy, with dosage adjustments as necessary to achieve a target blood pressure of less than 140/less than 90 mm Hg.

RESULTS

The study showed a significant benefit of losartan, beyond the effects of lowering blood pressure, on the primary composite end point of doubling serum creatinine level, ESRD, or death (-16%; P = 0.02). Losartan reduced the incidence of serum creatinine level doubling (-25%; P = 0.006) and ESRD (-28%; P = 0.002), but had no effect on rate of death. The composite end point of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality was similar in the two groups. The rate of first hospitalization for heart failure was reduced in the losartan group (-32%; P = 0.005), as was proteinuria (-35%; P < 0.001). The RENAAL study also provided the opportunity to evaluate risk factors that predict ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes in whom blood pressure was aggressively treated. In our multivariate model, four independent risk factors, proteinuria (most important), serum creatinine level, hypoalbuminemia, and anemia, were identified that predicted the development of ESRD.

CONCLUSION

Proteinuria is the single most powerful predictor of ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Thus, it is imperative that it be assessed in all patients with type 2 diabetes to identify those at risk for progressive renal disease. The routine availability of the urinary albumin-creatinine ratio as a diagnostic test provides an important opportunity to further improve the prognosis of individuals with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.

Effects of eprosartan versus hydrochlorothiazide on markers of vascular oxidation and inflammation and blood pressure (renin-angiotensin system antagonists, oxidation, and inflammation)

Antagonists of the renin-angiotensin system, such as angiotensin type 1 (AT(1)) receptor inhibitors and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, are becoming increasingly popular agents in treating patients with systemic hypertension and minimizing organ damage. In the present study, we compared the effects of eprosartan, an AT(1) receptor inhibitor, with the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide in a group of newly diagnosed hypertensive patients with multiple risk factors for atherosclerosis. The subjects were monitored and tested at 0 and 4 weeks to determine their individual effects on vascular and inflammatory markers. Although blood pressure reduction was comparable between the 2 agents, there were notable differences in their effects on markers of inflammation and oxidation. We observed a 28% reduction in neutrophil superoxide anion generating capacity, a 34% reduction in soluble monocyte chemotactic protein-1, and a 35% reduction in soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule with eprosartan therapy (all p <0.05 from the start of therapy). In addition, eprosartan showed further benefit in its ability to increase low-density lipoprotein oxidation lag time, suggesting an increased resistance to oxidation and/or modification of low-density lipoprotein. Although hydrochlorothiazide was effective in blood pressure reduction, there were no significant changes in any of the above parameters after 4 weeks of treatment. These findings suggest that eprosartan, an AT(1) receptor inhibitor, effectively reduces systemic blood pressure and, compared with hydrochlorothiazide, suggests additional benefits in the vasculature by inhibiting mechanisms of inflammation and oxidation.

Refill persistence with chronic medication assessed from a pharmacy database was influenced by method of calculation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In literature, different methods of calculating persistence are used. In this study, the effect of using these different methods on persistence and the association of patients characteristics and persistence are assessed.

METHODS

The PHARMO record linkage system was used to calculate persistence with antihypertensive drugs for a cohort of 14,466 new users of antihypertensives. Three different types of methods were used to define the maximum gap allowed between two prescriptions that a patient may have to be defined as a continuous user, one based on a defined number of days (varying from 9-365 days), the second based on the duration of the last prescription (varying from 0.1-4 times the duration), the third based on a combination of both methods, whichever leads to the lowest number of days.

RESULTS

Refill persistence varied between 19.7-86.4% (method 1), between 27.9-90.2% (method 2), and between 19.7-86.4% (method 3). Furthermore, patient characteristics associated with persistence differed between and within the three different methods.

CONCLUSION

The method used and the variation within a method influenced both persistence and the association between patient characteristics and persistence. Results of persistence studies are highly influenced by the researchers' method of the maximum allowed treatment gap.

Angiotensin receptor blockade decreases markers of vascular inflammation

A protective role against atherosclerosis can be attributed to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), since they have been shown to reduce mortality in patients at cardiovascular risk. Since plasma levels of adhesion molecules are considered surrogate markers of endothelial cell activation and atherogenesis, we compared the levels of adhesion molecules after treatment with the ACE-I enalapril or the direct angiotensin- receptor antagonist losartan or placebo. In a randomized, controlled trial, 21 hypercholesterolemic volunteers received 50 mg/d losartan or 20 mg/d enalapril or placebo for twelve weeks. Plasma levels of circulating intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (cICAM-1), vascular adhesion molecule-1 (cVCAM-1), and E-selectin (cE-SEL) were measured by ELISA. Surface expression of ICAM-1 on circulating leukocytes was determined by flow cytometry. Enalapril and losartan but not placebo induced a small but stable decrease of cICAM-1 and cVCAM-1, while cE-SEL and leukocyte expression of ICAM-1 remained unchanged. The lowering of plasma adhesion molecules may indicate an antiatherogenic effect of angiotensin II blockade in hypercholesterolemia. While such preventive effect will have to be proven in clinical trials, our results do not support a preference for either enalapril or losartan with regard to their possible vasoprotective role.

Geographic variation in patient and hospital characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with fibrinolysis. Results from InTIME-II

AIMS

We examined the geographic variations in InTIME-II, a randomized double-blind trial comparing alteplase with lanoteplase for myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We compared baseline characteristics, management, and outcomes in four regions (Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America, and Latin America) and in countries with historically different management approaches (Germany vs the U.K., the U.S. vs Canada). Thirty-day mortality in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America and Latin America was 6.7%, 7.3%, 5.7%, 10.1%, P<0.0001. Adjusted mortality for Europe was intermediate between North America and Latin America (odds ratios (OR) [95% confidence intervals (CI)] compared to Western Europe: North America 0.84 [0.67-1.0], Eastern Europe 1.2 [1.0-1.4], and Latin America 1.8 [1.3-2.7]). Revascularization rates varied 10-fold but did not explain regional mortality differences. Germany and the U.K. had similar adjusted 1-year mortality (OR for the U.K. 1.16 [0.92-1.5]), although invasive procedures were four- to 10-fold more common in Germany. Similarly the U.S. and Canada had equal adjusted 1-year mortality (OR for Canada 0.85 [0.61-1.17]) despite three-fold higher use of invasive procedures in the U.S.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant geographic variations in practice and adjusted mortality following fibrinolysis persist despite recent guidelines. These findings have important implications in the design and interpretation of international studies, identify under- and over-utilized therapies, and support further study of treatments with marked worldwide variations.

Comparative effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on blood pressure and the kidney

Many clinicians are uncomfortable about using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (AT(1)-blockers) to treat patients with renal disease because of concerns about increasing serum creatinine levels. However, the benefits of these medications, particularly their efficacy in slowing the progression of renal disease, outweigh such concerns. ACE inhibitors are effective in patients with type 1 diabetes and renal disease, as well as in those with nondiabetic renal disease and proteinuria >0.5 g/d. AT(1)-blockers slow the progression of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Although these classes of medications should not be used in patients with severe renal insufficiency (e.g., glomerular filtration rate <20 mL/min), they may be beneficial in patients with mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency. Nonetheless, caution should be exercised in those with a glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min, and serum creatinine and potassium levels should be checked approximately 1 week after starting treatment. There is also evidence suggesting that these medications lead to greater reductions in blood pressure and proteinuria when used in combination than when alone. The purpose of this paper is to review the mechanisms of action of these two classes of medication, as well as the experimental and clinical evidence that they slow the progression of renal disease.

Issues in hypertension: drug tolerability and special populations

Improvements in the death rate from coronary heart disease and in the control of hypertension have leveled off in recent years, reversing a trend toward steady improvement that began in 1972. Of the roughly 20% of Americans who suffer from hypertension, only 29% achieve adequate control (<140/90 mm Hg) with treatment and nearly half receive no treatment at all. Poor adherence to therapy doubtless plays a key role in this failure. As a major cause of poor adherence, tolerability becomes an extremely important element in any discussion of effective antihypertensive treatment. Despite their efficacy in treating hypertension, diuretics, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers have all been associated with numerous side effects, including increased serum lipid levels, insulin resistance, and edema. With the introduction of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, patients were able to achieve blood pressure goals with fewer side effects. These agents, however, cause an irritating cough in up to 19% of patients. A newer class of drugs, the angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), have similar effects to the ACE inhibitors, but their highly selective nature produces even fewer side effects. Eprosartan is a structurally unique ARB. Like the other ARB, this promising new agent has a side effect profile similar to placebo, and its response rate rivals or exceeds that of enalapril. Although it remains to be seen whether the ARB can significantly reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease, preliminary data from the Evaluation of Losartan in the Elderly (ELITE) trial appear to be promising.

Candesartan

Candesartan cilexetil is the prodrug of candesartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist. Candesartan binds selectively and non-competitively to the angiotensin II receptor type 1, thus preventing the actions of angiotensin II. Clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy at a dose range of 2 to 32 mg once daily in hypertension of all grades, heart failure, in reducing urinary albumin excretion in diabetes mellitus and in coexisting hypertension and renal failure. Pharmacokinetic properties of candesartan cilexetil in elderly patients are not significantly different from those in younger individuals. Hepatic impairment does not change pharmacokinetics of candesartan cilexetil at doses up to 12 mg/day. No dose adjustment is necessary in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. Tolerability of candesartan cilexetil is not much different from that of placebo. All adverse events are usually of mild to moderate severity and not dose-related. The most common adverse events were headache, upper respiratory tract infection, back pain, and dizziness. The incidence of these adverse effects, as well as of cough, was similar in patients treated with candesartan cilexetil or placebo. The incidence of adverse events in long-term trials was not different from that in short-term trials. Tolerability of candesartan cilexetil does not differ with either age or gender.