Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts: Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound   Target Concepts: Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound

---

Query: EC:3.4.15.1 (ACE)
18,300 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Standard laboratory rats were maintained on a daily regimen involving deprivation of fluids for 22 h followed by a 2-h opportunity to drink water and a sweetened alcoholic beverage. Angiotensin II, in doses ranging from 0.1 to 1.25 mg/kg, dose relatedly decreased rats' mean intake of ethanol. All doses increased rats' mean intake of water. Angiotensin II, 0.25 mg/kg, reliably reduced intake of ethanol when it was presented alone during the 1st h of the daily 2-h drinking session, and reliably increased intake of water when it was subsequently presented alone during the 2nd h. Thus the reduction in intake of ethanol seen when the alcoholic beverage is presented concurrently with water is probably not merely due to the increase in intake of water. Lisinopril, an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, in doses of 0.3, 1.0, and 3.0 mg/kg, dose relatedly decreased intake of ethanol, but only after several days of injections. Concurrent intake of water was increased dose relatedly. When injections of lisinopril ceased, intakes of both ethanol and water took several days to return to control levels. Pretreatment with lisinopril, 3.0 mg/kg, for 8 days, had no effect on subsequent intakes of either water or ethanol. Lisinopril, 3.0 mg/kg, had no effect on rats' intake of a sweet solution without ethanol. These results confirm previous work and extend the data base supporting the idea that the renin-angiotensin system plays a role in modulating intake of ethanol.
...
PMID:Manipulations of the renin-angiotensin system and intake of a sweetened alcoholic beverage among rats. 131 Feb 48

1. The effect of administration of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), lisinopril (Carace; 10-40 mg twice daily) and the calcium channel blocker, nifedipine (Adalat Retard; 20-40 mg twice daily) on ex vivo [45Ca2+] uptake by platelets from hypertensive diabetic (type 1 and 2) patients was investigated. 2. At the end of at least 3 months treatment, blood was collected prior to the patient taking the morning dose of medication and washed platelets prepared. [45Ca2+] uptake was monitored following the addition of adrenaline, isoprenaline and dibutyryl cAMP (dbcAMP), as well as in unstimulated (zero) platelets. 3. Both nifedipine and lisinopril significantly inhibited the ex vivo uptake of [45Ca2+] by platelets when this process was stimulated by adrenaline, isoprenaline and dibutyryl cAMP. Basal uptake was also inhibited in both groups. 4. These data consolidate the hypothesis that ACE inhibitors may possess calcium channel/calcium mobilisation blocking properties. Apart from its hypertensive action, lisinopril may also reduce platelet activity via modulation of calcium dynamics, thereby reducing the incidence of vascular complications associated with diabetes mellitus.
...
PMID:Lisinopril and nifedipine administration inhibits the ex vivo uptake of [45Ca2+] by platelets from hypertensive diabetic patients. 131 54

Lisinopril is a potent competitive inhibitor of purified rabbit lung ACE (dissociation t1/2 = 105 min). To examine reversibility of binding and ACE functional activity in situ, the single-pass extraction (E) of an 125I-lisinopril analogue (351A) and the hydrolysis of an ACE substrate, benz-phe-ala-pro (BPAP) were studied. Lungs were perfused at 50 ml/min with a Krebs-albumin (3%) solution. A bolus containing [14C]dextran, [3H]BPAP, and 351A was injected and (E)351A measured by multiple indicator dilution technique. BPAP metabolism (M) was reflected by the appearance of its hydrolysis product [3H]benz-phe in lung effluent. Control (E)351A was 66 +/- 5% (mean +/- SD, n = 6) and (M)BPAP was 69 +/- 9% (n = 6). Unlabeled lisinopril (30 nmol) in the bolus significantly reduced E(351A) and M(BPAP) to 16 +/- 16% and 3 +/- 3%, respectively. Ten minutes later E(351A) and M(BPAP) had returned to control values. Reduction of E(351A) was partially reversible and M(BPAP) completely reversible after 1 min. After recirculation with 0.25 mM lisinopril for 30 min, however, significant depression of E(351A) was evident for 60 min after exposure to lisinopril was discontinued. Thus, rapid as well as slowly reversible components of inhibition of ACE inhibitor binding can be demonstrated in the perfused rabbit lung.
...
PMID:Rapid reversal of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition by lisinopril in the perfused rabbit lung. 131 50

The effects of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril on slow and fast twitch muscle contractile properties, nerve conduction and hypoxic resistance, and muscle and nerve capillary density were examined in streptozotocin-diabetic rats. Prolongation of soleus contraction and relaxation were partially prevented by treatment (p less than 0.01). A 22% deficit in fast twitch extensor digitorum longus tetanic tension production was also ameliorated (p less than 0.01). Sciatic motor and sensory conduction velocity, 25% and 12% reduced by diabetes respectively, were 75% normalized by lisinopril (p less than 0.01). There was a 47% increase in resistance to hypoxic conduction block with diabetes (p less than 0.01). Lisinopril treatment resulted in normal hypoxic resistance. Capillarization of nerve and muscle was little affected by diabetes; however, there was a 17% increase in capillary density in sciatic nerve, and a 40% increase in extensor digitorum longus muscle with lisinopril (p less than 0.01). For soleus, a smaller treatment-induced increase in capillary density led to an elevated capillary/muscle fibre ratio (p less than 0.01). These results suggest that lisinopril promoted angiogenesis. It was concluded that the beneficial effect of preventive lisinopril treatment is likely to depend upon a reduction of peripheral vascular resistance and improvement of tissue blood flow, which implicates relative hypoxia as an important factor in the development of myopathy and neuropathy in experimental diabetes.
...
PMID:Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition prevents development of muscle and nerve dysfunction and stimulates angiogenesis in streptozotocin-diabetic rats. 137 57

The antihypertensive and hemodynamic effects of lisinopril and atenolol were evaluated in 21 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Left ventricular systolic and diastolic performances were assessed prior to and following treatment by first-pass radionuclide cineangiography at rest and during peak upright bicycle exercise. Both lisinopril and atenolol treatment significantly reduced the blood pressure. Lisinopril therapy was associated with a reduction in systemic vascular resistance and left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes but no change in stroke volume, cardiac output, peak ejection rate, peak filling rate, time to peak ejection rate, or time to peak filling rate. In contrast, atenolol therapy was associated with an increase in end-diastolic volume and stroke volume but no change in cardiac output; the left ventricular peak ejection and peak filling rates were decreased by atenolol treatment. Although both lisinopril and atenolol each significantly reduced the blood pressure, lisinopril had no effect on left ventricular systolic or diastolic performance; in contrast, atenolol decreased both systolic and diastolic parameters of ventricular performance. Left ventricular function may be affected in significantly different ways despite apparent similarities in blood pressure control in patients who respond to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition or beta-adrenergic receptor blockade. Differences in hemodynamic response to an antihypertensive agent may be important in the selection of a drug for the treatment of subsets of patients with cardiac function abnormalities.
...
PMID:Comparison of the cardiac and hemodynamic effects of lisinopril and atenolol in patients with hypertension: therapeutic implications. 138 Oct 12

The incidence of both systolic and diastolic hypertension is increased in elderly patients, therefore antihypertensive drugs are commonly used in this population. In addition to changes in blood pressure, the aging process also causes numerous changes in other physiological parameters, resulting in altered pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to the drugs. The dosage regimens for thiazide diuretics and amiloride must be individually titrated in the elderly patient, since the elimination of these agents decreases concurrently with decreased renal function, as indicated by compromised creatinine clearance. The initial doses of the calcium antagonists should be decreased in elderly patients, since representative compounds from all 3 chemically heterogeneous classes have been shown to have decreased clearance in these patients which appears to be primarily due to the status of hepatic function in the patient. However, with verapamil, the dosage should be further decreased in association with compromised renal function. The dosage of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors should be adjusted according to renal function rather than age. Lisinopril, which is primarily eliminated unchanged, is usually given in lower doses in the elderly, and doses of both captopril and enalapril may need to be reduced, depending on renal function. While there is no need to adjust the dosage regimen for the alpha-adrenoceptor blocking drugs (prazosin, terazosin), caution should be used with the beta-adrenergic blockers, particularly the hydrophilic agents, since they are renally eliminated. Labetalol may be a suitable alternative beta-blocker for the elderly patient, since its pharmacodynamic properties of decreased systemic vascular resistance without changes in heart rate or stroke volume are preferential for the elderly patient, and its pharmacokinetics are relatively unchanged in this population. Drugs that act primarily through the central nervous system, such as clonidine, methyldopa and guanfacine, require smaller doses in the presence of renal dysfunction. In contrast, guanabenz is metabolised primarily by the liver, so it would appear to be useful in elderly patients with renal dysfunction despite the lack of studies in this population. Guanadrel, an adrenergic neuron blocking drug, also requires a dosage reduction in patients with impaired renal function. In addition to the pharmacokinetic changes that occur in the elderly patient, pharmacodynamic changes may also be anticipated due to receptor modifications. Older patients have a decrease in beta-receptor sensitivity, while alpha-receptor sensitivity does not change. When designing the dosage regimen for a senior patient with hypertension, the combination of all these variables must be considered.
...
PMID:Antihypertensive therapy in the aged patient. Clinical pharmacokinetic considerations. 168 70

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition in heart, kidney, and serum were studied ex vivo after oral administration of lisinopril (10 mg/kg), zofenopril (10 mg/kg), and captopril (30 mg/kg) to rats to study the time course, degree, and sites of inhibition of ACE by a quantitative in vitro autoradiography and enzymatic assay. ACE activity in all regions of the heart, kidney, and serum was markedly reduced 4 h after administration of lisinopril and zofenopril and only partially recovered toward control levels at 24 h. After captopril treatment, ACE activity was partially inhibited in heart, kidney, and serum at 1 h and fully recovered toward control levels in most regions at 24 h. These results suggest that these inhibitors reduce ACE in all regions of the heart and kidney without regional selective inhibition. Lisinopril and zofenopril at these doses produced longer-lasting ACE inhibition than captopril. ACE recovery after ACE inhibitor treatment in serum was faster than in heart or kidney.
...
PMID:Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition in heart, kidney, and serum studied ex vivo after administration of zofenopril, captopril, and lisinopril. 172 23

The safety and efficacy of lisinopril in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension was evaluated by Belgian general practitioners in patients whose hypertensive condition remained uncontrolled by previous treatment and/or in whom the prior drug regimen was not tolerated. In this 8-week study, 3060 eligible patients were initially treated with 20 mg lisinopril once daily; this dose was increased to 40 mg if diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was greater than 90 mm Hg after 4 weeks. Lisinopril monotherapy in the 1902 patients completing the trial resulted in marked reductions of systolic (SBP) and DBP from 172.5/102.4 mm Hg at baseline to 147.4/86.6 mm Hg by week 8. More than 90% of patients achieved a DBP less than 95 mm Hg. The decrease in blood pressure was similar in patients older and younger than 65 year of age. Only about 20% of patients required an increase in their daily intake of lisinopril to 40 mg. Treatment was well tolerated and the profile of adverse events was similar to the pattern found with other nonsulfydryl angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Tolerance in the elderly was similar to that experience by hypertensives under 65 years of age. Thus, lisinopril at 20 or 40 mg once daily proved both well tolerated and effective in reducing blood pressure in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.
...
PMID:The antihypertensive effect and safety of lisinopril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. A Belgian multicenter study. 217 13

The orally active angiotensin-converting inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) such as captopril and enalapril represent a significant therapeutic advance in the treatment of hypertension and congestive heart failure. Enalapril differs from captopril in several respects. It is a prodrug converted by hepatic esterolysis to the active (but more poorly absorbed) diacid, enalaprilat. Enalaprilat is more potent than captopril, more slowly eliminated and does not possess a sulfhydryl (SH) group. Enalapril was rapidly followed by a number of newer ACE inhibitors, the majority of which are similar to enalapril in that they are prodrugs, converted by hepatic esterolysis to a major active but poorly absorbed diacid metabolite. In one case (delapril) there are 2 active metabolites; in another (alacepril) the prodrug is converted in vivo to captopril. Lisinopril is an exception in that it is an enalaprilat-like diacid but with acceptable oral bioavailability, so that the prodrug route is not employed. The newer ACE inhibitors are at widely different stages of development, and it is not yet clear how many will reach regular clinical use. Of these newer drugs, lisinopril is the longest established and is the subject of the widest published literature. For a number there is as yet little published pharmacokinetic information. A variety of assay methods have been employed to characterise the pharmacokinetics of the ACE inhibitors, including enzymatic techniques, radioimmunoassay and chromatography. The peak plasma concentrations of the prodrugs are generally observed at around 1 hour and those of the diacid metabolites at about 2 to 4 hours. However, there is considerable variation within and between drugs, with benazepril and benazeprilat reaching peak concentrations early and enalapril and enalaprilat typical of later times to peak. Absorption of the active diacids is generally poor, and moderate (typically 30 to 70%) for the prodrugs. The bioavailability of lisinopril is about 25%. It is difficult to talk meaningfully about half-lives of the active drugs. The declines in their plasma concentrations are polyphasic and, if analytical sensitivity allows, active drug may be found at 48 hours or more following administration. This may reflect binding to ACE in plasma. Half-lives of accumulation are of the order of 12 hours; protein binding varies from little (lisinopril) to 90% (benazeprilat). Elimination is mostly renal but there may be biliary elimination for some, such as benazeprilat and fosinopril. The half-lives of the prodrugs are short. Impaired renal function decreases the elimination rate of the diacids.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
...
PMID:Clinical pharmacokinetics of the newer ACE inhibitors. A review. 220 79

Lisinopril, a long-acting angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, and the calcium channel blocker nifedipine in its retard formulation, were compared as monotherapy in a group of 45 patients with essential hypertension. Lisinopril in single daily doses (range 20-80 mg, median dose 40 mg) and nifedipine retard in twice daily doses (total daily dose range 40-80 mg, median dose 60 mg) were equally effective in controlling hypertension. The lisinopril group (n = 30), at baseline supine blood pressure 178/109 +/- 23/9 mm Hg (mean +/- 1 SD), after 12 weeks' therapy measured 148/88 +/- 27/14 mm Hg; the nifedipine group (n = 15), at baseline 185/110 +/- 23/11 mm Hg, after 12 weeks' therapy measured 151/89 +/- 14/10 mm Hg. The number of patients who experienced clinical adverse effects was significantly greater in the nifedipine group: 8 of 15 (53%) compared to 4 of 30 (13%) in the lisinopril group. The commonest adverse effects of patients on nifedipine were swollen ankles, flushing, and headache. Two patients on nifedipine were withdrawn from the study because of their adverse experiences. Of the patients on lisinopril there were single reports of flushing, ankle swelling, tiredness, and chest pain. No patient withdrew from lisinopril because of an adverse experience. No adverse laboratory experiences were recorded in either group. In conclusion, lisinopril and nifedipine retard were equally effective in controlling essential hypertension. Lisinopril was, however, better tolerated during this study.
...
PMID:Comparative efficacy of lisinopril and nifedipine retard in essential hypertension: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. 245 54


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>

---