Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0010200 (cough)
 23,843 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

In a randomized, parallel, double-blind study, lisinopril (n = 412) reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure more than nifedipine did (n = 416) after ten weeks treatment in patients (40-70 years) with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Lisinopril was tolerated better than nifedipine, with fewer withdrawals. Adverse experiences reported after a general question on discomfort were significantly lower for lisinopril than for nifedipine. Questions referring specifically to symptoms revealed higher frequency of coughing with lisinopril, while flushing, edema, palpitations, dizziness, tiredness and rash were reported more frequently with nifedipine. Quality of life was similarly assessed by both patients and spouses. No significant differences in well-being during treatment were found for either drug, except in the case of the highest dose level of nifedipine, which caused a deterioration of well-being.
 ...
PMID:[Treatment with lisinopril or nifedipine in essential hypertension. A Norwegian multicenter study of the effect, tolerance and quality of life of 828 patients]. 133 84

Cilazapril is a new once-daily angiotensin-converting (ACE) enzyme inhibitor which has been administered to 4,500 patients with mainly mild to moderate essential hypertension in a multinational clinical research program. Sitting diastolic blood pressure was reduced by about 9 mm Hg from baseline (p less than 0.01) after 4 weeks of treatment with cilazapril 1.25-10 mg/day in double-blind placebo-controlled studies. Total responder rates to cilazapril were usually 50-60% compared with 30% to placebo. Adding hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day to cilazapril 5.0 mg/day increased the total responder rate from 52 to 71%. Double-blind dose titration studies for 8 weeks showed that cilazapril 2.5-5 mg/day possessed equivalent efficacy to usual therapeutic regimens of sustained release propranolol, captopril, hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol and enalapril, Cilazapril did not affect heart rate. During long-term open administration for 52 weeks, or longer, cilazapril, either alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide, effectively maintained control of blood pressure. Treatment of patients with severe hypertension with cilazapril plus hydrochlorothiazide achieved a total responder rate of 73%. Adverse events were mostly observed within the first 8-16 weeks of treatment, with headache, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, cough and chest pain being the most frequent. Non-life-threatening angioedema, facial edema and mild hypotension occurred in less than or equal to 0.2% of patients, and orthostatic hypotension was reported in 2%. Abnormal laboratory test values were rarely found with cilazapril treatment. Of the 2.3% of patients with elevated serum creatinine, at any time point during the study and irrespective of outcome on continuation with cilazapril therapy, about two thirds had prior renal impairment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Cilazapril: an overview of its efficacy and safety in hypertension. 153 34

A 3-month double-blind multicenter trial compared the efficacy and safety of perindopril, a new angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, with atenolol in mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. A total of 190 patients, 49 of whom were diabetic, entered the perindopril-atenolol comparison. Of these, 163 had been previously treated and had a 4-week run-in period on placebo; 27 had previously been untreated and received placebo for 2 weeks. At entry, all patients who had a supine diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 95-115 mm Hg were randomized to receive perindopril 2 mg or atenolol 25 mg, once daily. Patients were assessed at 2 weekly intervals for the first month and then monthly for 2 more months. If supine DBP was greater than 90 mm Hg, treatment was increased by stepwise doubling of dose up to 8 mg perindopril or 100 mg atenolol once daily, and later by the addition of hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg, (indapamide 2.5 mg in diabetic patients) once daily. The two groups were homogeneous prior to treatment except for supine and erect heart rate, which were higher in the perindopril group than in the atenolol group (p less than 0.05). Mean supine DBP was 101.1 +/- 0.6 mm Hg in the perindopril group (n = 94) and 99.9 +/- 0.6 mm Hg in the atenolol group (n = 96). After 3 months' active treatment, 74% of patients in the perindopril group achieved a supine DBP of less than or equal to 90 mm Hg and 73% of patients in the atenolol group achieved the same goal. Monotherapy controlled supine DBP in 67% of the perindopril group and 63% of the atenolol group. The decrease in supine DBP was not significantly different between the two groups (-12.9 +/- 0.9 versus -14.7 +/- 0.9 mm Hg) but the decrease in erect DBP was lower in the perindopril group (-10.3 +/- 0.9 versus - 13.4 +/- 1.0 mm Hg, p less than 0.02). Heart rate was reduced in the atenolol group (p less than 0.001). Sixteen patients withdrew from the study; nine were attributed to adverse events, two in the perindopril group and seven, including one death, in the atenolol group. Cough was spontaneously reported by 13% patients of the perindopril group and 1% patients of the atenolol group. In 5% of the perindopril cases this was mild and associated with upper respiratory tract infection. The nature and incidence of other symptoms were similar with both drugs.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of perindopril in mild-to-moderate essential hypertension: results of a double-blind multicenter study versus atenolol. 158 Feb 84

The acceptability of perindopril in the long-term treatment of patients with mild to severe essential hypertension was assessed in a large European multicenter trial including 856 patients. Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at inclusion was 95-125 mm Hg after 1 month of placebo. Normalization of blood pressure was defined as a DBP less than or equal to 90 mm Hg. Treatment was started with perindopril 4 mg once daily and increased when necessary to 8 mg daily. If DBP was not controlled, a second drug (hydrochlorothiazide) and finally a third drug were added. After 1 year of treatment in all 690 evaluable patients, supine systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased by 29 mm Hg (from 172 +/- 1 to 143 +/- 1 mm Hg, p less than 0.001) and 19 mm Hg (from 105 +/- 1 to 86 +/- 1 mm Hg, p less than 0.001), respectively. Perindopril monotherapy normalized blood pressure in 55% of patients and total percentage of normalization was 78%. The overall incidence of withdrawals for side effects was 6.8%, the most common side effect being cough (2.2%). The most frequent complaints reported were cough (7.0%), headache (5.6%), asthenia (5.1%), mood and/or sleep disturbance (5.1%), and dizziness (3.2%). The small changes observed in hematologic and biochemical parameters were not clinically relevant.
 ...
PMID:Long-term acceptability of perindopril: European multicenter trial on 856 patients. 158 Feb 87

In a randomized, parallel, double-blind study, lisinopril (n = 412; average dose 18.8 mg) reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure (change = 20.2/13.8 mmHg; P less than 0.01/P less than 0.01) more than nifedipine (n = 416; average dose 37.4 mg; change = 13.3/11.2 mmHg) after 10-week treatment in patients, aged 40-70 years, with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Lisinopril was better tolerated than nifedipine. The withdrawals from treatment were fewer in the lisinopril-treated group (11 versus 46; P less than 0.01). The frequency of adverse experiences reported after a general question of discomfort was significantly lower for lisinopril than for nifedipine (P less than 0.01). When questioned on specific symptoms, frequency of coughing was higher with lisinopril (P less than 0.01), while flushing, edema, palpitations, dizziness, tiredness and rash were reported more frequently (P less than 0.01, for all) in the nifedipine-treated group. Quality of life was assessed by both patients and spouses. No significant changes in wellbeing were observed for either drug, except for the highest dose level of nifedipine which caused a deterioration.
 ...
PMID:Lisinopril or nifedipine in essential hypertension? A Norwegian multicenter study on efficacy, tolerability and quality of life in 828 patients. 166 65

Seventeen adult patients with moderate and stable bronchial asthma and established essential hypertension (WHO I or II) were evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study of the effects of captopril (50-100 mg/day) and verapamil (160-240 mg/day) on blood pressure, orthostatic reactions, respiratory function, and asthmatic symptoms. The effect of both drugs on blood pressure was significant. Blood pressure (mean of 161/98 mm Hg initially) decreased to a mean of 147/90 and 160/91 mm Hg on captopril and verapamil, respectively, with normal orthostatic changes. There were no significant differences in forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), maximal expiratory flow at 50% of FVC (MEF50), or peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements at the end of each treatment period. The subjective severity of asthma did not change significantly during the trial. No significant cough symptoms were reported on captopril.
 ...
PMID:Effects of captopril on blood pressure and respiratory function compared to verapamil in patients with hypertension and asthma. 168 83

The subjects, six asthmatic patients with mild essential hypertension, were aged 48 to 63 years and each was being treated with theophylline. Five patients received 10 mg of enalapril daily for two weeks and one received 5 mg for four weeks. Their bronchial responses to inhaled methacholine were measured with a modification of the 3-Hz oscillation method before and after the enalapril treatment. The patients' mean blood pressures decreased significantly from 180.7/100.3 to 152.0/93.3 mmHg after treatment. No treatment-associated changes in the frequency of coughing, the number of asthmatic attacks, or use of antiasthmatic drugs were noted. The results of the bronchial provocation tests revealed no changes in bronchial sensitivity or reactivity during treatment. Serum substance P levels were 61.3 pg/ml before treatment and 60.2 pg/ml after treatment. It is concluded that therapeutic doses of enalapril did not exacerbate asthmatic attacks or increase bronchial hypersensitivity in these asthmatic, hypertensive patients.
 ...
PMID:Bronchial responses to enalapril in asthmatic, hypertensive patients. 169 64

In this study, we compared the effects of nitrendipine (20-40 mg daily) and enalapril (20-40 mg daily) in 44 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. After a 4-week placebo period, the patients entered a double-blind, crossover study of 16 weeks, divided by a second 4-week placebo period. Sitting and standing blood pressures (standard mercurymeter) were measured every 2 weeks. Ten patients dropped out, so 34 patients were evaluable. Two patients dropped out because of surgery, one patient was withdrawn because of accelerating hypertension, and seven patients discontinued because of side effects (two on placebo, four on enalapril, and one on nitrendipine). Sitting blood pressures decreased from 172 +/- 3/107 +/- 1 to 159 +/- 3/94 +/- 1 mm Hg on nitrendipine (p less than 0.001) and to 157 +/- 4/96 +/- 2 mm Hg on enalapril (p less than 0.001). The heart rate did not change. Both compounds had no significant effect on serum lipids and on renal function. With regard to side effects, flushing occurred in 10 patients on nitrendipine and in 3 on enalapril (p less than 0.05); cough was noted in 3 patients on enalapril. When using a diastolic pressure less than 95 mm Hg as a response, 72% responded on nitrendipine and 64% on enalapril (n.s.). In conclusion, nitrendipine and enalapril, given as monotherapy, were equally effective antihypertensive agents in this group of patients with uncomplicated, moderate, essential hypertension. The use of either of the tested agents seems to be more limited by its specific side effects than the lack of antihypertensive efficacy.
 ...
PMID:A comparative study of the effects of nitrendipine and enalapril in essential hypertension. 172 60

A total of 555 hypertensive patients took part in a 2-year multicenter, open-label study to determine the efficacy, tolerance, and safety of long-term therapy with ramipril. In the beginning, all patients were to receive 5 mg of ramipril/day. The dosage was then adjusted in accordance with response to treatment and ranged from 1.25-20 mg of ramipril daily. Of these patients, 129 also received 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide daily at some point during the trial. To evaluate whether tolerance to ramipril developed during long-term treatment, a subgroup of 202 patients was analyzed for efficacy maintenance. Prior to enrolling in the 2-year study, these patients had received ramipril monotherapy in a short-term, double-blind study and had been classified as responders, i.e., their diastolic blood pressure had been maintained at less than or equal to 90 mm Hg. At the end of 104 weeks of treatment, 45.9% of patients were on 2.5 mg of ramipril alone and 43.6% were on 5 mg of ramipril alone. Only four patients required the addition of 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide. No clinically important changes occurred, and kidney function was well maintained. The most frequently reported adverse events excluding intercurrent illnesses were dizziness/vertigo (6%), asthenia (4%), nausea (3%), headache (2%), and abdominal pain, gastrointestinal disorder, rash, and increased cough (1% each). Ramipril was safe, effective, and well tolerated in the long-term treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive efficacy, tolerance, and safety of long-term treatment with ramipril in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. 172 24

The efficacy and tolerability of a preconstituted formulation combining enalapril (20 mg) and hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg) were evaluated in patients with essential hypertension unresponsive to enalapril monotherapy (20 mg/day). The duration of this open-lable, multicenter, noncomparative trial was 12 weeks: a two-week washout period followed by ten weeks of active treatment. During the active treatment period, patients received enalapril alone (up to 20 mg/day) for six weeks. At the end of week 6, patients with supine diastolic blood pressure greater than 90 mmHg were treated with the enalapril/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy (EN/HCTZ). Of the 147 patients who were entered into the study, 81 were not normalized with enalapril alone. At the end of the study period, blood pressure was normalized (supine diastolic blood pressure less than or equal to 90 mmHg) in 60 (74%) of the 81 patients who had received the EN/HCTZ combination. Overall, 86% of the patients achieved satisfactory blood pressure control with this therapeutic regimen. Adverse reactions were mild and transient. Six patients experienced undesirable effects, the most frequent of which was coughing (2 cases). Neither enalapril (20 mg/day) alone nor the EN/HCTZ combination had any significant influence on any of the metabolic parameters evaluated. No hypokalemia and no significant changes in serum lipids occurred in the course of the study.
 ...
PMID:Efficacy and tolerability of enalapril (20 mg)/hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg) combination therapy in essential hypertension. 179 May 48


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