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)

Endralazine, a novel vasodilator related to hydralazine, exhibits a longer half-life and is only minimally influenced by acetylator status. The antihypertensive action of once daily endralazine has been studied in 17 patients previously controlled with an antihypertensive regimen which included hydralazine and a beta-blocker. Hydralazine was discontinued but other medications were unchanged. Pre-study dosage of hydralazine ranged from 25 mg b.i.d. to 50 mg g.i.d., mean daily dose 126.5 mg. Endralazine was started at a dose of 10 mg o.d. and increased by 10 mg to a maximum of 40 mg o.d. until seated DBP was controlled below 95 mmHg. All 17 patients completed the study. Seated BP significantly decreased from 147.5/99.7 to 133.8/83.9 and standing BP from 145.8/99.2 to 133.6/87.3 mmHg. Ten patients (59%) were successfully controlled with endralazine once daily but 7 patients required twice daily dosage schedules because of lack of BP control at 24 h after dosing or excessive hypotension shortly after dosing. Other adverse effects were headache, palpitations and fatigue. There was a statistically insignificant average weight gain of 1 kg but pedal edema was not observed. Endralazine is an effective antihypertensive agent with adverse symptoms similar to those experienced with hydralazine.
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of once daily endralazine in hypertension. 375 43

116 patients from 4 clinics participated in a double blind study to assess the efficacy of (BAY l 5240), a nifedipine-acebutolol fixed combination (10 mg + 100 mg), as compared to nifedipine 20 mg in essential hypertension. During the 10 week study, the mean recumbent blood pressure decreased 1 to 3 h after treatment from 175.5/105.2 to 148.3/88.0 mmHg in the BAY l 5240 group and from 174.3/102.9 to 150.3/86.5 mmHg in the nifedipine group. The results also showed a comparable decrease in the mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressures before treatment (24 h after last tablet) and after physical exertion before and after either drug given for 4 weeks. Doubling of the dose for 4 additional weeks produced a moderate and similar additional decrease in blood pressure. The results show the possibility of treating essential hypertension with a low dose of a beta-adrenergic blocking agent in combination with 10 mg nifedipine. Both regimens were well tolerated. One patient in the BAY l 5240 group and 2 in the nifedipine group, all treated by the same investigator, were withdrawn from the study because of headache during the nifedipine pre-period.
 ...
PMID:Effects of BAY l 5240, a fixed combination of low dose nifedipine and acebutolol on hypertension: comparison with standard dose nifedipine. 388 99

A controlled multicentre trial was organised to compare the effects of 20 mg Nifedipine tablets (N) and 2,5 mg Indapamide tablets (I) during a 4 months' treatment period after a placebo period, in 59 patients with moderate essential hypertension (n = 59). The results of blood pressure measurements of 18 patients treated by nifedipine (1 tablet twice daily) and 22 patients treated by indapamide (1 tablet every morning) were compared. The systolic blood pressure, after 10 minutes recumbency, fell from 165 +/- 10 mmHg to 148 +/- 13 mmHg (p less than 0.01), and the diastolic pressure from 104 +/- 6 mmHg to 86 +/- 7 mmHg (p less than 0.01) in the patients treated with nifedipine. In the indapamide group, the SBP fell from 164 +/- 13 mmHg to 152 +/- 15 mmHg (p less than 0.01) and the DBP from 100 +/- 4 mmHg to 87 +/- 6 mmHg (p less than 0.01). There were no significant changes of heart rate with either drug; plasma creatinine, potassium and uric acid concentrations were also unchanged. There was a higher incidence of headaches and tiredness in the nifedipine group, whilst patients treated with indapamide complained more often of muscular cramps. Flushing was observed in nearly a quarter of the patients in both groups. These results confirm that both nifedipine and indapamide induce significant and persistant falls in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Although the fall was greater with nifedipine than with indapamide, the difference was not statistically significant. The tolerance was satisfactory in both groups of patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:[Comparative effects of nifedipine and indapamide in the treatment of arterial hypertension]. 393 9

The cardiac hemodynamic effects of bimakalim, a new potassium channel opener, were evaluated in 12 normal volunteers by echocardiography (ECHO)/Doppler in a placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind, cross-over, dose-ranging study. A single oral dose (0.25-1 mg) was given at weekly intervals. Hemodynamic measurements were made at 0, 90, 120, and 240 min after drug intake and ECHO/Doppler was performed at 0 and 90 min. Reproducibility of the ECHO/Doppler study was assessed by comparing predose baseline values of the four different phases of treatment (placebo and 0.25, 0.5, and 1 mg) by analysis of variance (ANOVA), which showed no significant differences for left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Doppler-derived stroke volume (SV), total peripheral resistance (TPR), and peak mitral early to late velocity ratio (PEV/PAV). ANOVA showed significant increases in LVEF (p = 0.0003) and SV (p = 0.03), however, and decreases in TPR (p = 0.002) and PEV/PAV (p = 0.005) after bimakalim treatment. Heart rate (HR) showed a dose-dependent increase, but systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP) did not change with bimakalim. Despite vasodilatory headaches, none of the volunteers discontinued the study. Bimakalim appears to be a potent vasodilating drug that may have an important role in management of patients with compromised LV function.
 ...
PMID:Potent hemodynamic effects of bimakalim, a new potassium channel opener, in humans. 750 24

Pranidipine (OPC-13340), a new dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, was given to 9 elderly hypertensive inpatients aged 64-79 years. Once-daily administration of pranidipine (1-2 mg) for 1-2 weeks decreased the 24-h average BP significantly from 167/92 mmHg to 150/83 mmHg without any change in pulse rate (PR) or the variabilities of BP and PR. The reduction of BP was observed exclusively during daytime (171/95 mmHg to 153/86 mmHg, p < 0.01 for SBP, p < 0.05 for DBP), while BP reduction during nighttime was significant only for DBP (157/84 mmHg to 146/79 mmHg, p > 0.05 for SBP, p < 0.05 for DBP). The analysis of the circadian rhythm by the cosinor method revealed that the acrophases of BP and PR were not changed significantly by the treatment with pranidipine. No adverse effects such as flushing and headache developed during the treatment. These results suggest that once-daily treatment with pranidipine is safe and exerts a sufficient antihypertensive effect during daytime with mild reduction of nighttime BP in elderly hypertensives. Furthermore, it does not alter the circadian patterns or variabilities of BP and PR. Thus, pranidipine may be useful as a monotherapy for elderly hypertensives.
 ...
PMID:Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in elderly hypertensives treated with the new calcium antagonist, pranidipine (OPC-13340). 765 66

This controlled, double-blind, completely randomized study assessed the efficacy and safety of nicardipine and nifedipine, both in slow-release formulations, in patients with unstable angina. Thirty patients (28 M, 2F) were included in the final analysis, mean age 56.5 +/- 9.1 years (SD), mean weight 73.5 +/- 9.2 kg, mean height 171.5 +/- 6.5 cm, all with unstable angina. Nicardipine was given at a daily dosage of 80-120 mg, and nifedipine 40-60 mg, for up to one month. At the end of treatment with nicardipine supine systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) dropped respectively 7.7% and 5.5% at 8 am and 8.6% and 7.1% at 8 pm. Nifedipine reduced SBP and DBP by respectively 6.5% and 13.1% at 8 am and 5.3% and 9.4% at 8 pm. There was no clinical or statistical difference between the treatments. Heart rate did not change appreciably during either treatment. On completion of nicardipine treatment, 87.5% of patients had suffered no angina attacks, compared with 66.7% for nifedipine. The remaining 12.5% of patients treated with nicardipine presented only one mild angina attack per day, while the other 33.3% of the nifedipine patients had one moderate angina attack per day. No untoward effects were reported with nicardipine; one patient receiving nifedipine presented cardiopalmus and another complained of headache. These results indicate that nicardipine is at least as safe and effective as nifedipine in the treatment of unstable angina.
 ...
PMID:[The efficacy and safety of slow-release nicardipine vs nifedipine in angina]. 775 27

This is the first report of long-term use (one year) of isradipine, a new dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker, in the treatment of elderly patients with essential hypertension. Patients completing a three month, double-blind, multicentre study comparing isradipine to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were eligible to enroll in this open-label, continuation study. At initial baseline, patients were at least 60 years of age and had DBP from 95 mmHg to 120 mmHg. Patients were titrated when necessary every two weeks with isradipine, 5 mg to 15 mg once daily or 2.5 mg to 10 mg twice daily, to maintain sitting DBP < or = 90 mmHg. HCTZ, 12.5 mg to 50 mg once daily, could be added for better BP control. A total of 136 patients completed the one year, open-label phase. One hundred and fourteen patients (84%) received isradipine as monotherapy (mean dose, 9.7 mg/day); 22 received concomitant HCTZ therapy at one year. Reduction in DBP was significant and similar among all age groups and races (mean change of -19 mmHg). Reduction in SBP was similar among all age groups. Ninety-four per cent of those receiving isradipine monotherapy achieved BP control during the last four months of treatment. Twenty-six patients (16%) withdrew from the study: 11 (7%) had adverse reactions (one with headache, two with pedal oedema, eight with other problems); 11 (7%) had nondrug-related problems; and in four (2%), the drugs were ineffective. Based on these observations, isradipine is a well-tolerated, safe and effective agent for long-term BP control in elderly patients with essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:One year experience of elderly hypertensive patients with isradipine therapy. 788 90

The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of moexipril, a new angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide in patients with hypertension. The patient population consisted of 281 hypertensive men and women, 30-84 years old, with seated diastolic BP between 95 and 114 mmHg. The study was a two year multicenter (22 centers), open-label protocol of moexipril monotherapy or combination therapy (with hydrochlorothiazide). Blood pressure, pulse rate, weight, adverse side-effects and laboratory studies were assessed following moexipril dosing at 7.5, 15 or 30 mg once daily or 15-30 mg daily in combination with 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide if the DBP was > or = 90 mmHg. The primary measure of efficacy was change from baseline in seated DBP. Secondary outcome measures included changes in seated SBP, heart rate, laboratory parameters and subjective complaints. Following one year of therapy in 183 patients, the BP fell 13/14 mmHg among patients receiving moexipril monotherapy and 18/15 mmHg those receiving combined therapy compared with baseline (P < 0.001 for both). After two years of treatment, reductions were similar in 161 patients. Forty-four (16%) patients were prematurely withdrawn from the study because of inadequate therapeutic response and 34 (12%) secondary to adverse experiences. There were no changes in pulse rate or postural BP reductions. Four adverse side-effects occurred at a frequency exceeding 2% that were possibly or probably attributable to moexipril: fatigue (3%), headache (2%), dizziness (3%) and increased cough (5%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Long-term efficacy and safety of moexipril in the treatment of hypertension. 788 91

The efficacy and safety profiles of amlodipine (5-10 mg once daily) and nifedipine retard (20-40 mg twice daily) were compared in 111 hypertensive patients (sitting DBP in 95-115 mmHg) during eight weeks of treatment in a randomised double-blind parallel group study. BP was measured 22-24 hours after the daily dose of amlodipine and 10-12 hours after a dose of nifedipine retard. Baseline sitting BPs of 175/105 mmHg and 168/104 mmHg were significantly reduced (P < 0.05) to 157/93 mmHg and 151/92 mmHg at the end of treatment in response to mean daily doses of amlodipine 7.3 mg and nifedipine retard 58.9 mg. There were no clinically significant changes in heart rate with either treatment. Three patients in the amlodipine group and five patients in the nifedipine retard group could not be considered in analysis. The total numbers of adverse events (considered related or possibly related to treatment) (42 vs. 36) as well as the numbers of patients experiencing such events (22 vs. 22) were similar in the amlodipine and nifedipine retard treated groups, respectively, but with a greater incidence of headaches in response to nifedipine retard and of oedema in response to amlodipine. Five patients in each treatment group discontinued therapy due to such events. Overall the results showed once daily amlodipine as equivalent to twice daily nifedipine retard in the management of mild to moderate hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Double-blind comparison of amlodipine and nifedipine retard in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. 815 9

The aim of this study was to compare the tolerability and efficacy of isradipine and felodipine in the treatment of mild-moderate hypertension. After a 4 week placebo period, 143 patients entered a randomized, double-blind, multicentre study of 12 weeks duration. Patients received either isradipine (n = 72) or felodipine (n = 71) 2.5 mg twice daily. Doubling of this dose and the addition of enalapril (2.5 mg once daily) was permitted if DBP was > 90 mmHg at weeks 4 and 8, respectively. Isradipine monotherapy reduced BP from 165/104 +/- 13/6 mmHg at baseline to 149/91 +/- 14/10 mmHg at week 8 (p < 0.001), while felodipine alone reduced BP from 171/104 +/- 17/6 at baseline to 151/92 +/- 19/9 (p < 0.001). Following the addition of enalapril to 35% of patients in the isradipine group BP was further reduced to 144/88 +/- 13/8 mmHg at week 12 (p < 0.001). The addition of enalapril to 24% of the felodipine group further reduced BP to 150/92 +/- 19/9 mmHg at week 12 (p < 0.001). No differences in BP were found between the 2 groups while on monotherapy. However, the isradipine group had a significantly lower DBP than the felodipine group at the conclusion of the study (p = 0.008; 95% CI 0.7 to 6.9 mmHg). Similar incidences of headache, flushing, dizziness and tachycardia were reported in both groups. However, the incidence of ankle oedema was significantly lower in the isradipine group (p = 0.028). Overall, ankle oedema was reported more often by female patients and was not associated with an increase in weight.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:A comparison of isradipine and felodipine in Australian patients with hypertension: focus on ankle oedema. The Physician's Study Group. 820 14


<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>