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)

Lisinopril, the lysine analogue of enalaprilat, is a long-acting angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor which is administered once daily by mouth. The efficacy of lisinopril in reducing blood pressure is well established in younger populations, and many trials now show it to be effective in lowering blood pressure in elderly patients with hypertension. In comparative and non-comparative clinical trials, 68.2 to 89.1% of elderly patients responded (diastolic pressure < or = 90 mm Hg) to > or = 8 weeks' lisinopril treatment. Age-related differences in antihypertensive efficacy do not appear to be clinically significant, and dosages effective in elderly patients tend to range from 2.5 to 40 mg/day. Dosages usually need to be lower in patients with significant renal impairment. In congestive heart failure, lisinopril 2.5 to 20 mg/day increases exercise duration, improves left ventricular ejection fraction and has no significant effect on ventricular ectopic beats. It is similar in efficacy to enalapril and digoxin and similar or superior to captopril on most end-points. Data from the GISSI-3 post-myocardial infarction trial show that lisinopril reduced mortality and left ventricular dysfunction when given for 42 days starting within 24 hours of the onset of infarction symptoms. Results at 6 weeks and 6 months were similar in elderly and younger patients. Elderly patients, however, among other subgroups, exhibited a strong reduction in risk of low ejection fraction after treatment (-25.5%). Economic studies suggest that lisinopril is cost saving compared with other ACE inhibitors in some markets. When given according to the GISSI-3 protocol, lisinopril appears to be one of the less expensive of the successful ACE inhibitor regimens for acute myocardial infarction. In other trials, patients with diabetic nephropathy and hypertension improved or did not deteriorate during lisinopril treatment. Blood pressure was controlled and reductions or trends towards reductions in albuminuria were observed. These reductions were similar to those in diltiazem, nifedipine and verapamil recipients, and greater than those in patients receiving atenolol. Lisinopril appears to reduce mortality in diabetic patients after myocardial infarction and may also improve neuropathy associated with diabetes. Lisinopril is well tolerated and the profile of adverse events seen is typical of ACE inhibitors as a class. There is a tendency for more elderly than younger patients to discontinue treatment, but this trend is not clearly related to the incidence of adverse events in these age groups. Drug interactions occur with few other agents and are usually clinically significant only between lisinopril and either diuretics or lithium. Lisinopril is, thus, an effective treatment for elderly patients with hypertension, congestive heart failure and acute myocardial infarction and has shown promising benefits in patients with diabetic nephropathy.
...
PMID:Lisinopril. A review of its pharmacology and clinical efficacy in elderly patients. 906 Dec 70

The therapeutic effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, lisinopril, on puromycin aminonucleoside (PAN)-induced nephrosis were investigated using unilaterally nephrectomized rats. Lisinopril showed potent dual effects on PAN nephrosis. Lisinopril treatment (50 mg/l in drinking water) from day 5 or day 9 reduced urinary protein excretion and suppressed the development of glomerular sclerosis at 8 weeks after PAN injection (150 mg/kg, i.p.), indicating a therapeutic effect on the nephrosis. Recovery of decreased anionic charge sites on the glomerular basement membrane was involved, at least in part, in the therapeutic action of lisinopril against proteinuria. On the other hand, oliguria and progressive azotemia derived from continuous deterioration of the renal function was induced if the treatment of lisinopril was started on the same day as PAN injection. The renal dysfunction induced by simultaneous administration of lisinopril with PAN could be abolished by combination dosing with sarcosine, an angiotensin II (AII)-receptor agonist. These results indicate that lisinopril treatment attenuates proteinuria by ameliorating the anionic charge barrier on the glomerular basement membrane and that it also protects against the development of chronic renal disease with segmental glomerular sclerosis, although AII depletion during the acute nephrotic stage exacerbates the renal damage in PAN nephrosis of unilaterally nephrectomized rats.
...
PMID:Dual effects of lisinopril on puromycin aminonucleoside nephrosis in unilaterally nephrectomized rats. 916 71

Lisinopril, like other ACE inhibitors, lowers blood pressure and preserves renal function in hypertensive patients with non-insulin-dependent or insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM or IDDM) and early or overt nephropathy, without adversely affecting glycaemic control or lipid profiles. On available evidence, renoprotective effects appear to be greater with lisinopril than with comparator calcium channel blockers, diuretics and beta-blockers, despite similar antihypertensive efficacy. As shown by the EUCLID (EUrodiab Controlled trial of Lisinopril in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes) trial, lisinopril is also renoprotective in normotensive patients with IDDM and microalbuminuria. The effect in normotensive patients with normoalbuminuria was smaller than in those with microalbuminuria, and no conclusions can yet be made about its use in patients with normoalbuminuria. In complications other than nephropathy, lisinopril has shown some benefit. Progression to retinopathy was slowed during 2 years' lisinopril therapy in the EUCLID study. Although not yet fully published, these results provide the most convincing evidence to date for an effect of an ACE inhibitor in retinopathy. The drug may also improve neurological function, but this finding is preliminary. Lastly, post hoc analysis of the GISSI-3 trial indicates that lisinopril reduces 6-week mortality rates in diabetic patients when begun as early treatment after an acute myocardial infarction. The tolerability profile of lisinopril is typical of ACE inhibitors and appears to be similar in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals. Hypoglycaemia has occurred at a similar frequency with lisinopril and placebo, as shown in the EUCLID trial. In addition, the GISSI-3 study indicates that the incidence of persistent hypotension and renal dysfunction is increased with lisinopril in general, but the presence of diabetes does not appear to confer additional risk of these events in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction receiving lisinopril. In summary, lisinopril lowers blood pressure and produces a renoprotective effect in patients with IDDM and NIDDM without detriment to glycaemic control or lipid profiles. Like other ACE inhibitors, lisinopril should thus be viewed as a first-line agent for reducing blood pressure and preventing or attenuating nephropathy in hypertensive diabetic patients with IDDM or NIDDM and microalbuminuria or overt renal disease. The EUCLID study, using lisinopril, provides new data supporting an additional place in managing normotensive patients with microalbuminuria and IDDM. These findings, together with some evidence for an effect of lisinopril in delaying progression of retinopathy and in reducing mortality, suggest a broader role for the drug in managing diabetic vascular complications.
...
PMID:Lisinopril. A review of its pharmacology and use in the management of the complications of diabetes mellitus. 917 32

Arterial hypertension may be associated with altered left ventricular filling dynamics. The specific goal of this study was to evaluate whether short-term administration of the ACE inhibitor lisinopril in hypertensive patients with an altered diastolic pattern induced an improvement of left ventricular dynamics, assessed by the echocardio-Doppler technique, independently of effects on left ventricular mass. In a double-blind cross-over study 39 essential hypertensive patients with a ratio of peak early to peak atrial velocity (E/A) < 1 were randomized, after a run-in period of 2 weeks without any antihypertensive treatment, to receive lisinopril (20 mg once a day) and placebo for 4 weeks, respectively. At the end of both the run-in and the treatment periods, blood pressure and heart rate were measured and an echocardio-Doppler examination was carried out. The echocardio-Doppler evaluation was performed both at rest and at the peak of a hand-grip test (3 min at 30% of maximal strength). Left ventricular dimensions were obtained from two-dimensionally guided M-mode tracings using the criteria of the American Society of Echocardiography. Left ventricular peak filling rates and filling rate integrals were measured by a pulsed Doppler technique. Lisinopril caused a significant reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure at rest (-13/-9 mmHg vs baseline values, p < 0.05; -6/-4 mmHg vs placebo values, p < 0.05) and during isometric exercise (-17/-9 mmHg vs baseline period, p < 0.05; -6/-5 mmHg vs placebo, p < 0.05). Lisinopril did not induce any significant change in left ventricular structure and systolic function. All the left ventricular filling parameters considered (E velocity, A velocity, E/A ratio) both at rest and during isometric exercise did not significantly differ after lisinopril treatment when compared to those obtained in basal conditions and after placebo administration. This double-blind cross-over study demonstrates that short-term afterload reduction induced by lisinopril does not modify altered diastolic dynamics in hypertensive patients. Diastolic dysfunction of the left ventricle is a complex process influenced by a number of functional and structural factors and apparently cannot be significantly improved by short-term blood pressure reduction by antihypertensive therapy.
...
PMID:Lack of effect of short-term lisinopril administration on left ventricular filling dynamics in hypertensive patients with diastolic dysfunction. 936 2

In this study, we determined the fractional clearance of neutral polydisperse dextrans (theta D) and monodisperse dextran sulfate (theta DS) to describe glomerular size and charge selectivity in 25 renal transplant recipients with proteinuria. Thirteen were treated with low dose lisinopril for six months (group 1) and 12 patients without ACE inhibitor therapy formed group 2. Mean arterial blood pressure was stable (group 1, 112 +/- 4; group 2, 109 +/- 2 mm Hg at baseline and after 6 months) whereas creatinine clearance, glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow decreased nonsignificantly but were comparable at any time. Lisinopril treatment lowered filtration fraction (22 +/- 2 vs. 19 +/- 2%, P = 0.07) whereas no change was seen in group 2 (20 +/- 2%). The fractional protein excretion (mg urinary protein per day/ml creatinine clearance per day) was stable in group 1, but significantly increased in group 2. The same pattern was found for theta D larger than 56 A. theta DS was stable and consistently elevated in both groups at any time. We conclude that low dose ACE inhibitor treatment in proteinuric renal transplant recipients stabilizes glomerular size selectivity independently of its systemic hemodynamic effects.
...
PMID:Low dose angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition and glomerular permselectivity in renal transplant recipients. 940 9

The present study was designed to investigate the effect of captopril, a sulfhydryl (-SH) containing ACE inhibitor and lisinopril, a non-SH containing ACE inhibitor, on ischaemia-reperfusion-induced renal injury in rats and to study the involvement of the free radical scavenging property of captopril in its renoprotective effect. Bilateral renal artery occlusion was induced for 30 min followed by reperfusion for 24 h. Blood samples were taken from retro orbital sinus before surgery and at 24 h after reperfusion for blood urea and blood creatinine estimation. After completion of 24 h of renal reperfusion the carotid artery was cannulated and the mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) was recorded. The left kidney was used for histological examination. The right kidney was utilised for estimation of mitochondrial thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS). Renal ischaemia, followed by reperfusion, significantly increased blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and blood creatinine. However, creatinine clearance decreased markedly. Captopril administered before renal artery occlusion or immediately after reperfusion and lisinopril pre-treatment significantly attenuated the increase in BUN and blood creatinine. Creatinine clearance was markedly better in captopril-treated animals as compared to lisinopril-treated rats. Captopril significantly decreased the degree of tubular necrosis, haemorrhagic streaks and urinary casts. Lisinopril treatment decreased tubular necrosis and urinary casts but no marked effect on haemorrhagic streaks was noted. Administration of captopril before ischaemia or just after reperfusion significantly reduced the elevated concentration of mitochondrial TBARS but no such decrease was noted in lisinopril-treated rats. Based on these results it may be concluded that captopril and lisinopril markedly protected against ischaemia-reperfusion-induced renal injury and any additional renoprotective effect of captopril may be ascribed to its free radical scavenging properties.
...
PMID:Effect of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors on ischaemia-reperfusion-induced renal injury in rats. 950 76

Chronic nephropathies are associated with enhanced renal synthesis of endothelin (ET)-1. A recent study demonstrated that an ET(A) receptor antagonist given to diabetic rats at the moment of disease induction prevented the development of renal injury. Here we investigated whether an unselective ET(A)/ET(B) receptor antagonist, PD 142,893, was renoprotective when given to streptozotocin diabetic rats when animals were already proteinuric. The effect of PD 142,893 was compared with that of an ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, known to retard progressive renal disease in experimental and human diabetes. PD 142,893 normalized systemic blood pressure, reduced urinary protein and albumin excretion, and ameliorated renal blood flow in diabetic rats, but it did not affect such parameters in control rats. Lisinopril had a renoprotective effect comparable to PD 142,893, although lisinopril controlled systemic blood pressure better. Northern blot analysis of ET-1 mRNA revealed upregulation of ET-1 gene in the diabetic kidney. Similar results were obtained by in situ hybridization in glomeruli and tubuli of diabetic rats. Both treatments remarkably attenuated exaggerated renal ET-1 gene expression. These data suggest that ET-1 is a contributory mediator of kidney damage in diabetes and indicate that ET receptor antagonists may represent a new therapeutic mean for treatment of progressive diabetic nephropathy.
...
PMID:Unselective inhibition of endothelin receptors reduces renal dysfunction in experimental diabetes. 951 53

LVH AND RISK: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, independent from blood pressure and other cardiovascular risk factors. Available data indicate that patients who fail to achieve a reduction in LVH are much more likely to suffer cardiovascular events than those in whom LVH is reduced or even normalized using antihypertensive treatment. Reversal of LVH, therefore, represents a major goal in the treatment of hypertensive patients. REGRESSION OF LVH: Since obesity and dietary sodium intake may modulate the degree of LVH, non-pharmacological intervention has achieved a successful reduction in left ventricular mass (LVM). LVM is more closely related to 24-h blood pressure values than to clinical blood pressure values. Recent evidence from the Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation has shown that the regression of cardiac hypertrophy is predicted to a greater degree by the effect of antihypertensive treatment on 24-h average blood pressure than by that on clinic or home blood pressure. The increase in blood pressure variability may also be an independent determinant of cardiovascular target-organ damage, particularly of cardiac hypertrophy. However, the effects of antihypertensive drugs on blood pressure variability can be difficult to determine, mainly because a correct measurement of variability requires a beat-to-beat measurement of ambulatory blood pressure; several measures have been proposed to evaluate the smoothness of blood pressure control during antihypertensive treatment. Other important determinants of LVH reduction are represented by baseline values of LVM, extent of blood pressure reduction and duration of treatment. Furthermore, the degree of cardiac hypertrophy reduction is not the same for the different classes of antihypertensive drugs because, beyond the control of blood pressure, they may interfere differently with several non-haemodynamic stimuli, including the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and the adrenergic systems or other growth factors. A more pronounced reduction in LVM with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium antagonists has been demonstrated in several recent meta-analyses. The results of further multicenter on-going trials are awaited to evaluate definitely whether various antihypertensive strategies differ in their ability to reverse LVH and to adequately assess the relationship between changes in LVM and subsequent prognosis, with serial control of blood pressure values measured in the clinic and by ambulatory monitoring.
...
PMID:Left ventricular hypertrophy: how to influence an important risk factor in hypertension. 953 98

The mechanism of captopril, an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor with sulfhydryl group (SH) in its structure, to produce an endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation was studied. In rabbit aorta with intact endothelium and precontracted with phenylephrine, captopril and superoxide dismutase (SOD) produced dose-dependent relaxation. Lisinopril, an ACE inhibitor without a -SH group in its structure, did not produce endothelium-dependent relaxation. It was observed that captopril, like SOD, produced the relaxation by protecting the EDRF from getting inactivated by superoxide anions as pyrogallol and methylene blue inhibited both the captopril and SOD-mediated relaxation. The free radical scavenging action of captopril is further substantiated by the observation that captopril, but not lisinopril, inhibited FeCl3/ascorbic acid-induced lipid peroxidation in whole tissue homogenates of rabbit aorta to a level comparable to that of SOD. These results suggest that endothelium-dependent vasodilation produced by captopril may be due to its ability to scavenge superoxide anion and this property may be ascribed to the -SH group present in its structure.
...
PMID:Possible mechanism of captopril induced endothelium-dependent relaxation in isolated rabbit aorta. 965 79

We examined whether the ACE gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism modulates renal disease progression in IDDM and how ACE inhibitors influence this relationship. The EURODIAB Controlled Trial of Lisinopril in IDDM is a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial in 530 nonhypertensive, mainly normoalbuminuric IDDM patients aged 20-59 years. Albumin excretion rate (AER) was measured every 6 months for 2 years. Genotype distribution was 15% II, 58% ID, and 27% DD. Between genotypes, there were no differences in baseline characteristics or in changes in blood pressure and glycemic control throughout the trial. There was a significant interaction between the II and DD genotype groups and treatment on change in AER (P = 0.05). Patients with the II genotype showed the fastest rate of AER progression on placebo but had an enhanced response to lisinopril. AER at 2 years (adjusted for baseline AER) was 51.3% lower on lisinopril than placebo in the II genotype patients (95% CI, 15.7 to 71.8; P = 0.01), 14.8% in the ID group (-7.8 to 32.7; P = 0.2), and 7.7% in the DD group (-36.6 to 37.6; P = 0.7). Absolute differences in AER between placebo and lisinopril at 2 years were 8.1, 1.7, and 0.8 microg/min in the II, ID, and DD groups, respectively. The significant beneficial effect of lisinopril on AER in the II group persisted when adjusted for center, blood pressure, and glycemic control, and also for diastolic blood pressure at 1 month into the study. Progression from normoalbuminuria to microalbuminuria (lisinopril versus placebo) was 0.27 (0.03-2.26; P = 0.2) in the II group, and 1.30 (0.33-5.17; P = 0.7) in the DD group (P = 0.6 for interaction). Knowledge of ACE genotype may be of value in determining the likely impact of ACE inhibitor treatment.
...
PMID:Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene polymorphism on progression of renal disease and the influence of ACE inhibition in IDDM patients: findings from the EUCLID Randomized Controlled Trial. EURODIAB Controlled Trial of Lisinopril in IDDM. 972 42


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

---