Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0018681 (headache)
 56,091 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

The long acting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril was compared with the calcium channel blocker nifedipine as sustained-release formulation in 136 patients with mild to moderate hypertension. This multicentre study was carried out in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion by 28 cardiologists in private practice. After a 2-week placebo period, patients were randomly allocated to 2 treatment groups; the first group received enalapril 20 mg daily (n = 68), and the second group received sustained-release nifedipine 20 mg twice daily (n = 68). The duration of treatment was 12 weeks. In both groups, hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg was added at week 4 if diastolic blood pressure remained greater than 90 mm Hg. At week 8, if the target diastolic pressure of less than 90 mm Hg was not achieved, the dosage of hydrochlorothiazide was increased to 50mg. The clinical characteristics of the patients in each group were comparable. After 4 weeks of treatment, the reduction in supine diastolic blood pressure was similar in both groups (12.1 mm Hg in the enalapril group vs 10.3 mm Hg in the nifedipine group). Moreover, although the difference between the groups was more noticeable after 12 weeks of treatment (16.3 vs 13.9 mm Hg, respectively), it did not reach significance. The number of patients experiencing clinical adverse effects was significantly greater in the nifedipine group than in the enalapril group [33 (48.5%) vs 18 (26.5%), respectively]. The most common complaints of patients administered nifedipine included swollen ankles, flushing and headaches, whereas complaints in the enalapril group included cough, asthenia, and epigastralgia. Three patients were withdrawn from the study because of side effects in the enalapril group and 10 were withdrawn from the nifedipine group. These results indicate that enalapril and sustained-release nifedipine are equally effective in controlling mild to moderate hypertension. However, enalapril was much better tolerated in this study.
 ...
PMID:Comparative efficacy and safety of enalapril and sustained-release nifedipine in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. The Enalapril vs Nifedipine French Study Group. 218 26

A 45-year-old woman was admitted suffering from headache, weight loss, asthenia, pedal edema, and amenorrhea. Morphological and functional studies revealed an intrasellar mass causing hypopituitarism without diabetes insipidus. Histological examination of the tissue obtained at transsphenoidal surgery was compatible with a diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The clinical and histological features, together with the presence of cutaneous anergy and ocular lesions, led to the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The presentation of sarcoidosis in this patient was very unusual because it was not accompanied by characteristic intrathoracic findings or by diabetes insipidus.
 ...
PMID:Intrasellar mass with hypopituitarism as a manifestation of sarcoidosis. Case report. 236 86

Nicardipine, a new calcium antagonist, was tested in a 14-week double-blind trial including 15 outpatients with uncomplicated essential hypertension. They were randomly assigned to nicardipine (20-30 mg three times daily) or placebo as first-step treatment. When necessary but always after a minimum of 4 weeks, pindolol (15 mg/day) was combined with nicardipine or placebo. At the end of step 1 (85 +/- 6 days with nicardipine vs. 58 +/- 6 days with placebo, p less than 0.01), nicardipine induced larger drops in supine systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) than the placebo (21 +/- 2.5 vs 1.4 +/- 3 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, and 13 +/- 2 vs. 3.5 +/- 1.5 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, respectively). In the nicardipine group (n = 57), 53% of patients had controlled blood pressure (SBP less than 160 mm Hg and DBP less than 95 mm Hg) versus 17% in the placebo group (n = 47), p less than 0.001. There was no significant correlation between the decrease in blood pressure and the age of patients. The most common side effects in the nicardipine group were flushes (12%), headache (8%), ankle edema (5%), and asthenia (4%). When blood pressure was not brought under control and pindolol was prescribed as the second-step treatment, the nicardipine group (n = 52) displayed larger drops in SBP and DBP than the placebo group (n = 40) (27 +/- 5 vs. 15 +/- 3 mm Hg, p less than 0.01, and 18 +/- 1 vs. 9 +/- 2 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, respectively). These results show that a calcium antagonist is useful for first-step treatment of hypertension.
 ...
PMID:First-step treatment of mild to moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension by a new calcium antagonist: nicardipine. 241 2

A double-blind controlled, randomized, parallel, multicenter 12-week study was conducted to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of lisinopril with that of metoprolol in treatment of moderate to severe hypertension. Initially, 118 patients were recruited on lisinopril and 61 on metoprolol; and for the purpose of efficacy analysis at week 8, 115 patients on lisinopril and 60 on metoprolol were included. The doses of lisinopril or metoprolol were 40-80 mg/day and 100-200 mg/day, respectively. At week 4, the pretreatment diastolic blood pressure of 111 mm Hg was decreased to 97 mm Hg (p less than 0.01) with lisinopril: metoprolol decreased the diastolic blood pressure from 110 to 99 mm Hg (p less than 0.01). Similar decreases were noted at week 8; however, the drop in blood pressure with lisinopril was not significantly different from that with metoprolol. Systolic blood pressure also demonstrated a decrease of about 18 mm Hg with lisinopril and 12 mm Hg with metoprolol (p less than 0.01). This larger decrease in systolic blood pressure with lisinopril was statistically significant at week 4 (p less than 0.05). These decreases in systolic blood pressures were maintained at week 8, again with statistical significance (p less than 0.01). Of the 118 lisinopril-treated patients, four were discontinued from lisinopril therapy because of headache, dizziness, rash, flushing, or lymphadenopathy. Four patients out of 61 (9.8%) were discontinued from metoprolol therapy because of fatigue, somnolence, asthenia, weight gain, flatulence, tremor, or bronchospasm. In conclusion, lisinopril 40-80 mg once daily is as effective as metoprolol 100-200 mg once daily in reducing diastolic blood pressure in patients with moderate to severe hypertension.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of antihypertensive efficacy of lisinopril compared to metoprolol in moderate to severe hypertension. 244 53

Three hundred thirty-one patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension, 182 males and 149 females with a mean age of 54 (range, 17-87 years), were studied for 1 year in a clinical trial with ramipril, an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. The patients included had completed double-blind trials with ramipril vs. captopril, HCT, atenolol and ramipril plus piretanide. All cases were treated first with 5 mg ramipril and, where appropriate, also with 25 mg HCT. Adjustment of the dose in the range 1.25-20 mg ramipril was left to the investigator. Overall, a consistent reduction in blood pressure was achieved. Only small changes in mean blood pressure were noted during the 12 months (mean diastolic blood pressure 84.3-86.9 mm Hg, mean systolic blood pressure 145.6-148.2 mm Hg). Two hundred sixty-two (82%) of the 331 patients had diastolic values consistently equal to or lower than 95 mm Hg. There was a downward shift in the dosages upon which the investigators finally settled during the 12-month period in the patients receiving ramipril monotherapy. In patients also receiving HCT the initial dose was increased in most cases. Adverse events were observed in 6.7% of patients taking ramipril alone. The most frequent symptoms were dizziness, asthenia, pain in the upper abdomen and headache. Adverse effects occurred more frequently under continuous additional treatment with HCT, the same symptoms being reported. The clinical trial was prematurely terminated in six patients, in only two cases for medical reasons. The analysis of the laboratory findings revealed no general deterioration.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:An open multicenter study to assess the long-term efficacy, tolerance, and safety of the oral angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. 247 9

A multicentre open study to which 229 investigators participated was carried out to demonstrate the safety of cicletanine, a new therapeutic agent, in routine clinical use. Cicletanine was administered alone for three months and normalized blood pressure (less than 160/95 mmHg) in 63 p. 100 of the 1,238 hypertensive patients who entered the study. There was a significant fall of systolic arterial pressure from 178.4 +/- 14.8 to 151.8 +/- 14.2 mmHg and a similar fall of diastolic arterial pressure from 104.0 +/- 6.7 to 86.3 +/- 6.2 mmHg. The reduction of BP values was accompanied by a significant decrease of differential BP (SBP-DBP) from 72.5 to 65.8 mmHg. The initial dosage (50 mg/day) was doubled in only one-third of the patients. The mean daily dose was 66 mg. This antihypertensive effect was paralleled by a significant and major improvement of signs (dyspnoea, oedema of the lower limbs) and symptoms (mainly dizziness, headache, visual and auditory disorders, asthenia) which existed at inclusion. A modest, but significant, reduction of heart rate from 76.7 to 73.9 beats/mn was also noted. Cicletanine produced no toxic or severe adverse events. Clinical side-effects consisted of pruritus, fatigue, headache, vertigo, lower limb oedema and gastrointestinal disorders. These effects were mild and non-specific (doubtful drug imputability); each of them occurred with an incidence ranging from 4.0 to 1.0 p. 100. They were responsible for the withdrawal of about 30 patients (2.4 p. 100). No significant alteration of biochemical or haematological values was recorded.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:[Antihypertensive effectiveness and tolerance of cicletanine. Results obtained with monotherapy in a large population]. 251 75

Selective alpha 1 adrenergic receptor blocking agents lower blood pressure by reducing the increased peripheral vascular resistance that characterizes essential hypertension. Prazosin and terazosin have been shown to be well tolerated in clinical practice and seldom cause impotence or metabolic abnormalities. The most common adverse effects--dizziness, headache, and asthenia--are generally well tolerated and infrequently lead to discontinuation of therapy. First-dose syncope can usually be avoided by initiating therapy with low doses administered at bedtime. Finally, the alpha 1 receptor antagonists do not adversely affect such cardiovascular risk factors as hypokalemia, serum lipid profile, and left ventricular hypertrophy. In fact, alpha 1 antagonists reduce total cholesterol and low-density-lipoprotein plus very-low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and thus may contribute to the overall management of cardiovascular risk by blood pressure reduction and improvement of the serum lipid profile. Since the goal of treating chronic essential hypertension is to improve morbidity and mortality, the choice of therapy should be influenced by the agent's ability to modify as many risk factors as possible. Alpha 1 adrenoreceptor antagonists beneficially impact several cardiovascular risk factors and thus merit consideration as first-line antihypertensive therapy.
 ...
PMID:New perspectives on selective alpha 1 blockade. 257 43

In a multicentre open trial involving 229 investigators, cicletanine, a new antihypertensive agent, was administered orally in doses of 50 to 100 mg/day either alone (1,238 patients) or combined with another drug (430 patients). In this second group of patients with essential hypertension whose BP had not been normalized by a beta-blocker (n = 157), a calcium inhibitor (n = 67), an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (n = 134) or an alpha-blocker (n = 7), cicletanine normalized BP (less than 160/95 mmHg) in 48.8% of the patients and significantly lowered BP values which fell from 177.7 +/- 15.9/103.3 +/- 6.3 mmHg to 157.2 +/- 17.6/88.8 +/- 8.7 mmHg. The addition of cicletanine to treatments with beta-blockers, calcium inhibitors and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors normalized BP in 48%, 52% and 47% of patients respectively. A significant reduction of symptoms was noted, notably as regards headache, dizziness, palpitations, lower limb oedema, asthenia, auditory disorders and dyspnoea. The side-effects reported (headache, dizziness, gastralgia, nausea, pruritus) were minor and non-specific; they accounted for the withdrawal of only 8 patients. The only significant, though moderate, biochemical variations observed were decreases in natremia and cholesterolaemia unconfirmed by qualitative analysis. Altogether, cicletanine proved to be effective and well tolerated when administered in combination with other antihypertensive drugs belonging to three main therapeutic classes.
 ...
PMID:[Antihypertensive effectiveness and tolerance of cicletanine. Results obtained with bitherapy]. 257 67

During and after a Rift Valley fever (RVF) epidemic in Southern Mauritania we collected 600 clinical observations. 348 were confirmed to be RVF cases. We described 5 major clinical aspects: mild, icteric, icterohemorrhagic, hemorrhagic and neurological forms. The first one is the most frequently seen with 42.8% of the cases at admission. Fever was associated with various pains (cephalalgia, myalgia, arthralgia) and an important asthenia. Inconsistently this syndrome was accompanied by epistaxis and conjunctival hyperemia. The icteric form, never described before, is an icterus occurring during evolution of a mild form. It represents 28.5% of total cases at admission. The great number of theses mild forms implies that they could be used as excellent markers for an epidemic emergence.
 ...
PMID:[Mild clinical forms of Rift Valley fever during the epidemic in Mauritania]. 263 71

In order to evaluate the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of a new nicardipine formulation, 26 mild-to-moderate essential hypertensive patients were given slow-release nicardipine, 40 mg, twice daily for 6 weeks. Systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure were measured after a 1 week single-blind placebo run-in period and after 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks of active treatment, just before the morning administration. After 1 week, nicardipine induced a significant blood pressure reduction (p less than 0.01), with a decrease in mean SBP/DBP values of -15/-11 mmHg (from baseline values of 165/104 to 150/93 mmHg) in supine and of -16/-12 mmHg (from 158/110 to 142/98 mmHg) in standing position. After 6 weeks the decrease was of -15/-12 mmHg in supine and of -15/-14 mmHg in standing position. The responder rate (DBP decrease of at least 10 mmHg) was 62% (16/26). Normalization rate (DBP less than 95 mmHg with a concomitant decrease of at least 10 mmHg) was 54% (14/26). Eleven patients reported adverse events (headache, peripheral oedema, palpitations, nausea, constipation, flush, dizziness and asthenia). Due to an improved pharmacokinetic profile, the slow-release formulation prolongs to 12 hours the antihypertensive effect of nicardipine, thus facilitating patient's compliance.
 ...
PMID:[Antihypertensive effect and tolerability of slow-release nicardipine]. 266 Sep 93


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