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)

The present study compares the occurrence of a dry, persistent cough with doses of 80 mg of valsartan, 10 mg of lisinopril, or 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide in patients with a history of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced cough. This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel group, multicenter trial involving 129 adult outpatients with essential hypertension. After confirmation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced cough during a 2 to 4 week challenge with lisinopril (followed by a washout period of 2 weeks), patients were randomized to receive 6 weeks of double-blind treatment once daily with 80 mg valsartan, 10 mg lisinopril, or 25 mg hydrochlorothiazide. Assessments were made at baseline and after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment. Comparability of response to treatment was assessed by mean sitting diastolic and systolic blood pressure at the end of treatment. The occurrence of a dry, persistent cough was significantly less (P < 0.001) at 3 and 6 weeks with valsartan (19.5%) than with lisinopril (68.9%), with no significant difference between valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide (19.0%). There were no statistically significant differences in reduction of blood pressure among the three treatment groups. The overall incidence of adverse experiences, whether or not treatment-related, was highest for lisinopril (86.7%) compared with valsartan (57.1%), and hydrochlorothiazide (61.9%). A dry cough in the lisinopril group accounted for this difference. There were no clinically significant changes in physical signs or in results of clinical laboratory evaluations during double-blind treatment, except for from metabolic changes in 3 patients receiving hydrochlorothiazide. In hypertensive patients with a history of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced cough, a single daily dose of 80 mg of valsartan produced therapeutic efficacy comparable to lisinopril but with significantly less cough.
 ...
PMID:Valsartan, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist: a double-blind study comparing the incidence of cough with lisinopril and hydrochlorothiazide. 905 35

Raised blood pressure in the elderly is not a normal consequences of aging, but is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Cardiac and cerebrovascular disease account for > 50% of deaths among people aged > 65 years. Because the percentage of elderly people in most populations is rising, blood pressure control in this group is becoming increasingly important. Several large intervention studies in the elderly have demonstrated that antihypertensive medication reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In addition, the absolute benefits of blood pressure reduction are higher in elderly compared with younger patients. ACE inhibitors are effective and well tolerated in the treatment of hypertension in the elderly. Their success led to interest in alternative ways of blocking the renin angiotensin system, and the subsequent development of angiotensin II (AII) receptor antagonists. Losartan was the first drug in this class to become commercially available. Since then, valsartan has been launched in some markets and others are likely to be launched in the near future. Losartan is effective in the treatment of essential hypertension and has a low incidence of adverse effects. First-dose hypotension is very uncommon and, at the present time, cough does not appear to be an adverse effect of these drugs, although long term tolerability studies are needed to confirm this. Angioedema, a rare but life-threatening adverse effect of ACE inhibitors, has also been associated with losartan. Current data suggest that All receptor antagonists are effective in elderly hypertensive patients, although further data are needed to confirm these findings. At present, All receptor antagonists are likely to be used in hypertensive patients who are intolerant of ACE inhibitors, although this may change with the availability of long term tolerability and clinical outcomes data.
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Potential in elderly patients with cardiovascular disease. 920 48

Valsartan competitively and selectively inhibits the actions of angiotensin II at the AT1 receptor subtype which is responsible for most of the known effects of angiotensin II. In clinical trials in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension valsartan was as effective as losartan, lisinopril, enalapril, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide. Addition of the latter reduced blood pressure in patients who did not respond sufficiently to valsartan monotherapy. Preliminary data also suggest valsartan may be effective in patients with severe essential hypertension. The drug was as effective as lisinopril as treatment for mild to moderate essential hypertension in patients with renal insufficiency and did not worsen renal function. Headache, dizziness and fatigue were the most common adverse events in placebo-controlled studies; the incidence of these adverse events was not significantly different between placebo and valsartan recipients. Compared with ACE inhibitors, valsartan was associated with a significantly lower incidence of dry cough. Thus, valsartan is an effective treatment for mild to moderate essential hypertension and may be particularly useful in patients who experience persistent cough during ACE inhibitor therapy.
 ...
PMID:Valsartan. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in essential hypertension. 925 84

Nonpeptide angiotensin II type 1-receptor antagonists, AT1 receptor antagonists are newly developed and useful drugs for hypertension and congestive heart failure. In Japan, the efficacy and safety of losartan and candesartan cilexetil in patients with essential hypertension have been evaluated by the double-blind, parallel group-comparison study using enalapril as control drug. Both trials revealed that these drugs showed a hypotensive effect comparable to that of enalapril with a high safety since the adverse drug reaction of cough was recognized in very few patients. Furthermore, a recent randomised trial of losartan versus captopril in patients over 65 with heart failure, evaluation of losartan in the elderly study (ELITE), showed that losartan was associated with a lower mortality than that found with captopril. Further studies will clarify differences in protection of cardiovascular system with a long-term treatment between AT1, receptor antagonists and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.
 ...
PMID:[Angiotensin receptor antagonist for therapy of patients with hypertension]. 928 26

Losartan is a novel orally active nonpeptidal antihypertensive agent that specifically blocks the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. This paper compares the short- and long-term safety and tolerability of losartan with those of placebo. Approximately 3800 patients with mild-to-severe essential hypertension were enrolled in 16 double-masked and 4 open clinical trials worldwide. Of these, approximately 2900 were treated with losartan either alone or in combination with other antihypertensive drugs. These trials included patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 133). An additional 5 trials enrolled hypertensive patients with compromised renal function (n = 115) or heart failure (n = 220). Losartan dosages primarily ranged from 10 to 150 mg once daily, with most patients receiving 50 to 100 mg per day. Hypertension trials generally lasted 12 weeks. The most frequently reported adverse events were headache, upper respiratory tract infection, dizziness, and asthenia/fatigue, but only dizziness occurred more frequently (> or = 1%) in the losartan-treated groups. Cough occurred in 3.1% of patients treated with losartan and 2.6% of patients treated with placebo. The overall incidence of clinical and laboratory adverse events in the losartan- and placebo-treated groups was similar among patients with hypertension and either diabetes mellitus, renal impairment, or heart failure. The data suggest that losartan can be safely administered in hypertensive patients with concomitant illnesses. It can be considered for first-line therapy and is suitable as an alternative therapy in patients already experiencing side effects with other agents.
 ...
PMID:Clinical safety and tolerability of losartan. 937 6

A total of 501 elderly patients with essential hypertension were randomized to receive valsartan or lisinopril in this one year multi-center, double-blind, parallel group trial. Patients received valsartan 40 mg (n = 334) or lisinopril 2.5 mg (n = 167) daily for 2 weeks with subsequent titration (alone or in combination with hydroclorothiazide), depending on response to treatment. The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of patients with a response, defined as sitting diastolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or drop of > or = 10 mmHg from baseline. A high percentage of patients responded to treatment in both valsartan and lisinopril groups: 80% for both groups at 12 weeks and 81% and 87%, respectively, at 52 weeks with no statistically significant difference between treatments (12 weeks, p = 0.925; 52 weeks, p = 0.148). More patients on lisinopril experienced drug-related cough (7.5% on valsartan, 17.4% on lisinopril). In 5.4% of lisinopril treated patients, cough led to discontinuation of therapy compared to 0.6% on valsartan. Valsartan 80 mg daily provides comparable short and long-term antihypertensive efficacy to lisinopril in elderly patients with a lower incidence of drug-related cough.
 ...
PMID:Valsartan: long-term efficacy and tolerability compared to lisinopril in elderly patients with essential hypertension. 938 75

The efficacy and acceptability of nebivolol 5 mg and enalapril 10 mg, each given once daily, were compared in essential hypertension in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial over 3 months. For the index pre-declared variable, sitting diastolic pressure at trough drug level, nebivolol achieved greater falls in pressure (-12.3 vs -9.9 mmHg; P = 0.009) and a higher response rate (70% vs 55%; P = 0.002). The trough-to-peak sitting diastolic ratios also favoured nebivolol (84% vs 60%, P = 0.002). Nebivolol, but not enalapril, slightly but significantly lowered heart rate. Both drugs were well-tolerated, although enalapril was accompanied by a significantly higher incidence of coughing.
 ...
PMID:Nebivolol vs enalapril in the treatment of essential hypertension: a double-blind randomised trial. 946 9

Fifty-one native Nigerian patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension received Lisinopril ('Zestril') in doses of 10 mg to 40 mg once daily. All patients received an initial dose of 10 mg, which was titrated up to a maximum of 40 mg if normotensive diastolic blood pressure had not been achieved. Reduction in mean diastolic blood pressure, when compared with baseline data, was significant (p < 0.001) following 16 weeks of treatment. Of the 46 evaluable patients, 32 (70%) had their blood pressure controlled (i.e. diastolic blood pressure < or = 90 Hg). Lisinopril ('Zestril') was well tolerated, with 27% of patients reporting adverse reactions of which cough was the most common. In conclusion, this study shows that Lisinopril ('Zestril"), when administered to Nigerian patients, is a clinically effective and well-tolerated for mild to Customer to supply Mss.
 ...
PMID:An open trial of lisinopril ('ZESTRIL') in mild to moderate hypertension in Nigeria. 947 56

For the treatment of hypertension, the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a thiazide diuretic is supported by multiple lines of evidence, because these drugs have synergistic action and are expected to cancel out each other's adverse side effects. However, the long-term outcome of this combination antihypertensive therapy is not entirely clear. In the present multicenter open trial, we investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of combined antihypertensive therapy with an ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, and a thiazide diuretic, trichlormethiazide. A total of 466 patients with essential hypertension were treated with lisinopril alone (monotherapy group, n = 360) or with a combination of lisinopril with trichlormethiazide (combination therapy group, n = 106) for 1 year. The average blood pressure was effectively lowered to below 150/90 mmHg in both the monotherapy and the combination therapy groups throughout the study period. The average maintenance dose of lisinopril was lower when combined with thiazide than when given alone (9.8 vs. 11.5 mg/day, p < 0.001). Dry cough was the major side effect of lisinopril; no severe adverse effects were observed. The incidence of cough was not significantly different between the monotherapy group (13.1%) and the combination therapy group (11.3%). The increase in serum potassium observed in the monotherapy group was reversed by the concurrent use of the thiazide diuretic in the combination therapy group. Fasting blood glucose was significantly reduced in the monotherapy group; the reduction observed in the combination therapy group was not significant. Thus, the present results provide useful information as to the effectiveness and safety of combined antihypertensive therapy with lisinopril and a thiazide in comparison with monotherapy with lisinopril.
 ...
PMID:Long-term evaluation of combined antihypertensive therapy with lisinopril and a thiazide diuretic in patients with essential hypertension. 948 36

The pathogenetic mechanisms of the blunted nocturnal fall in blood pressure, frequently observed in elderly patients with essential hypertension, are unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the autonomic nervous system in elderly dipper and non-dipper hypertensive subjects. The study group consisted of twelve non-dipper and twelve dipper hypertensive patients (mean age 77.7 and 73.8 years, respectively). Non-dippers were defined as subjects whose nocturnal fall in systolic blood pressure (SBP), evaluated by means of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring, was less than 10% of diurnal SBP. All the patients underwent the following cardiovascular tests to explore autonomic function: Tilt Table, Valsalva Maneuver, Deep Breathing, Cough. The tests were performed under standard conditions, and heart rate and blood pressure were continuously recorded. Valsalva ratio (VR), Expiration/Inspiration Ratio (E/IR) and Cough Test Ratio (CTR) were calculated. Mann Whitney's and chi 2 tests were used for comparison between groups. Relationships were assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Non-dipper hypertensive subjects showed significantly lower scores in VR (11.1 +/- 0.08 vs 1.28 +/- 0.14), E/IR (1.11 +/- 0.07 vs 1.21 +/- 0.10), and CTR (1.07 +/- 0.02 vs 1.15 +/- 0.07). During the tilt test, a significant decrease in SBP and a late increase in heart rate were observed in non-dippers. The day-night difference in SBP was significantly related to VR, CTR and maximal SBP drop during tilting. The findings confirm that non-dippers show an impairment in autonomic nervous drive, which is characterized mainly by decreased parasympathetic activity. These observations may explain the increase in cardiovascular risk in non-dippers.
 ...
PMID:Autonomic nervous activity in elderly dipper and non-dipper patients with essential hypertension. 955 19


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