Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0020538 (hypertension)
 170,190 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Poor compliance is a principal cause of treatment failure in hypertensive patients. Once-daily dosing improves compliance, but 24-h antihypertensive activity should be provided. The compliance, efficacy, and safety of amlodipine and nifedipine slow-release (SR) were compared in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension recruited among 24 centers in France. After a 2-week washout period, 103 patients were randomized to 12 weeks of 5 to 10 amlodipine mg once daily (n = 55) or 20 mg nifedipine SR twice daily (n = 48). Compliance was calculated by electronic drug monitoring. Efficacy was measured by ambulatory and casual BP recordings. Patients receiving amlodipine demonstrated better compliance than patients receiving nifedipine SR with respect to compliance index (the total number of doses taken divided by the total number of doses prescribed, expressed as a percentage; 98.3% v 87%; P < .0001), days on which the correct number of doses were taken (92.5% v 74.8%; P < .0001), and prescribed doses taken on schedule (88.7% v 71.6%; P < .0001). Absolute and relative therapeutic coverage were higher in patients receiving amlodipine than nifedipine SR (P < .0001). Mean SBP and DBP decreased equally in both groups, although amlodipine offered better BP control compared with nifedipine SR at specific times of day. Fewer patients had high nocturnal SBP with amlodipine (39.3%) than nifedipine SR (71.4%; P = .042). Adverse events and treatment withdrawals occurred less frequently in amlodipine-treated patients than in nifedipine SR-treated patients. Amlodipine (5 to 10 mg) once daily provides improved compliance, better 24-h BP control, and fewer adverse events than 20 mg nifedipine SR twice daily in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Compliance and antihypertensive efficacy of amlodipine compared with nifedipine slow-release. 960 87

We investigated the ability of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor imidapril hydrochloride, and of the calcium channel blocker amlodipine besilate, to prevent nephrosclerosis and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in rats with hypertension induced by chronic inhibition of nitric oxide (NO). Male Wistar rats were given distilled water (control), NG-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) 500 mg/L, L-NAME plus imidapril 10 mg/L or 100 mg/L, or L-NAME plus amlodipine 50 mg/L or 100 mg/L in the drinking water (n = 10-12). We then collected 24-h urine samples at 2, 4, and 6 weeks, obtained blood samples at 6 weeks, and histologically examined the kidney and heart. L-NAME markedly reduced the levels of NO metabolites in serum and urine while increasing the tail-cuff blood pressure, the urinary albumin level (1.90 +/- 0.65 v 0.05 +/- 0.02 mg/day/100 g in control), and the area of the left ventricular wall (83.3 +/- 3.0 v 69.8 +/- 1.8 mm2 in control). Nephrosclerosis and myocardial interstitial fibrosis were documented histologically. The plasma renin activity was significantly higher in rats treated with L-NAME than in the control rats. The concomitant administration of imidapril (10 mg/L) with L-NAME completely normalized the tail-cuff pressure, the LVH (70.8 +/- 1.8 mm2), the albuminuria (0.05 +/- 0.01 mg/day/100 g), and the histologic changes. Amlodipine (50 mg/L) also ameliorated the L-NAME-induced effects, but to a lesser extent. Thus, the chronic inhibition of NO synthesis in rats produced nephrosclerosis and LVH that were effectively prevented by giving imidapril at a dose lower than that of amlodipine. We conclude that ACE inhibitors can prevent nephrosclerosis and LVH even in the presence of a reduction in NO production, implying that in rats the inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system is more effective than the blockade of calcium channels in preventing hypertensive tissue injury.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive agents prevent nephrosclerosis and left ventricular hypertrophy induced in rats by prolonged inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis. 965 29

Recent trials in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes reveal important differences in the risk for major cardiovascular events when individual agents are compared. In the Fosinopril Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Trial (FACET), 380 patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes were randomized to fosinopril or amlodipine and followed for up to 3.5 years to assess effects on serum lipids. Although both agents effectively controlled blood pressure, amlodipine caused a significantly greater decrease in systolic pressure. At the end of the trial, serum cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, HbA1c, serum glucose, plasma insulin, serum creatinine, and microalbuminuria were similar in both groups. The patients randomized to fosinopril were significantly less likely to experience the prospectively defined combined outcome of acute myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalized angina, or stroke compared to those randomized to amlodipine (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.26-0.95). In the Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes (ABCD) trial, 470 patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes who were randomized to long-acting nisoldipine had an adjusted sevenfold increased risk for acute MI compared to those randomized to enalapril (RR 7.0; 95% CI 2.3-21.4). In the Multicenter Isradipine Diuretic Atherosclerosis Study (MIDAS) trial, the patients with hypertension and above the median of HbA1c (> or =6.7%) randomized to isradipine had a threefold increased risk for major cardiovascular events compared to those randomized to hydrochlorothiazide (RR 2.81; 95% CI 1.09-7.26). These findings are supported by several observational studies. Therefore, evidence is emerging that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and low-dose diuretics may be more effective than calcium antagonists for prevention of cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients with diabetes or impaired glucose control.
 ...
PMID:New evidence on the prevention of cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes. 973 37

Macrovascular disease is the major cause of mortality in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypertension is an important factor contributing to this high prevalence. High blood pressure is about twice as common in persons with diabetes mellitus as in those without. Up to 75% of diabetes-related cardiovascular complications are attributed to hypertension. These observations are part of the rationale for recommendations for more aggressive lowering of blood pressure (to < 130/85 mm Hg) in persons with coexistent diabetes and hypertension. This may require therapy with a combination of antihypertensive agents. The Fosinopril versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Trial (FACET), discussed herein, supports the case for combination therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a calcium antagonist in diabetic patients with hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Comorbidity of hypertension and diabetes: the fosinopril versus amlodipine cardiovascular events trial (FACET) 1008 Apr 55

Calcium antagonists comprise the most popular drug class for treatment of hypertension in Japan. More than half of Japanese clinicians use calcium antagonists as initial drug treatment for mild-to-moderate hypertension and, despite recent controversies, their use continues to increase. Nearly a fourth of clinicians use angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and 9% use beta-receptor blockers. There are 12 dihydropyridine calcium antagonists and 1 benzothiazepine agent in clinical use. Amlodipine is the most widely used agent in the class. Efonidipine and cilnidipine, recently developed in Japan, both have a slow onset of action and long-lasting hypertensive effect and possess characteristics unique to the class. Efonidipine dilates the efferent as well as the afferent arterioles of the glomerulus; therefore, it appears to have a more pronounced renoprotective effect than other calcium antagonists. Cilnidipine is a dual-channel antagonist, acting on both the peripheral neuronal N-type and vascular L-type calcium channels. It depresses the pressor response to acute cold stress but does not induce tachycardia by hypotensive baroreflex.
 ...
PMID:Current status of calcium antagonists in Japan. 982 42

The results of 2 recently published studies have been interpreted as suggesting that calcium antagonists are unsafe for the management of hypertension in patients with diabetes. These 2 studies, the Fosinopril versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial (FACET) and Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in Diabetes (ABCD), showed that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors may be preferable to calcium antagonists for managing hypertension in diabetic patients; they do not, however, show any harm attributable to calcium antagonists. Indeed, results of the FACET study suggest that the combination of an ACE inhibitor and a calcium antagonist is effective antihypertensive therapy. This suggestion is supported by findings in the Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Study, which revealed outstanding benefits of either a calcium antagonist alone or a calcium antagonist combined with an ACE inhibitor among diabetic patients with hypertension. The premature termination of the hypertensive arm of the ABCD study was puzzling because, although 2 of 13 subgroups of 1 of the 5 possible secondary endpoints in this part of the trial were apparently favorably affected by the use of the ACE inhibitor rather than the calcium antagonist, such a finding was compatible with chance alone. If the results of the FACET and ABCD studies are considered in the context of the best available data arising from large randomized controlled trials, one may conclude that calcium antagonists are not harmful or contraindicated in hypertensive patients with diabetes and that the combination of an ACE inhibitor and a calcium antagonist is effective for the management of hypertension in diabetic patients.
 ...
PMID:Calcium antagonists and the diabetic patient: a response to recent controversies. 982 44

Recent trials have linked calcium antagonists with adverse cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients with diabetes. A closer examination of these trials (in particular the Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in Diabetes [ABCD] trial and the Fosinopril Versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Trial [FACET]) reveals a lack of data from which to draw conclusions of harm. In fact, based on the results of these trials and the recent Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) Trial, one may conclude that the combination of a calcium antagonist with an ACE inhibitor is a rational therapeutic choice in patients with coexisting hypertension and diabetes.
 ...
PMID:Calcium antagonists and cardiovascular risk in diabetes. 982 45

Short-acting calcium antagonists exert a sympathoexcitation that in heart failure further enhances an already elevated sympathetic activity. Whether this is also the case for long-acting formulations is not yet established, despite the prognostic importance of sympathetic activation in heart failure. It is also undetermined whether in this condition long-acting calcium antagonists favorably affect a mechanism potentially responsible for the sympathetic activation, ie, the baroreflex impairment. In 28 heart failure patients (NYHA functional class II) under conventional treatment we measured plasma norepinephrine and efferent postganglionic muscle sympathetic nerve activity (microneurography) at rest and during arterial baroreceptor stimulation and deactivation induced by stepwise intravenous infusions of phenylephrine and nitroprusside, respectively. Measurements were performed at baseline and after 8 weeks of daily oral amlodipine administration (10 mg/d, 14 patients) or before and after an 8-week period without calcium antagonist administration (14 patients). Amlodipine caused a small and insignificant blood pressure reduction. Heart rate, left ventricular ejection fraction, and plasma renin and aldosterone concentrations were not affected. This was the case also for plasma norepinephrine (from 2.43+/-0.41 to 2.50+/-0.34 nmol/L, mean+/-SEM), muscle sympathetic nerve activity (from 54.4+/-5.9 to 51.0+/-4.3 bursts/min), and arterial baroreflex responses. No change in the above-mentioned variables was seen in the control group. Thus, in mild heart failure amlodipine treatment does not adversely affect sympathetic activity and baroreflex control of the heart and sympathetic tone. This implies that in this condition long-acting calcium antagonists can be administered without untoward neurohumoral effects anytime conventional treatment needs to be complemented by drugs causing additional vasodilatation.
Hypertension 1999 Feb
PMID:Effects of amlodipine on sympathetic nerve traffic and baroreflex control of circulation in heart failure. 1002 25

Renal effects of amlodipine in normotensive renal transplant recipients. The use of cyclosporin A (CsA) has improved the success of renal transplantation, but is associated with hypertension and significant renal toxicity. Previous reports suggest that calcium channel blockers may be useful in opposing the adverse effects of CsA. We have evaluated the effects of amlodipine (5 mg, once daily for 8 weeks) on renal function in 27 normotensive renal transplant recipients with stable renal function, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, cross over study. Amlodipine significantly reduced serum creatinine concentration relative to placebo (mean+/-SD: 168+/-65 vs 177+/-66 micromol/l; P=0.002) and there was a strong trend towards an increase in effective renal plasma flow on amlodipine relative to placebo (238+/-92 vs 217+/-87 ml/min; P=0.055). Glomerular filtration rate and lithium clearance were unaffected. Trough CsA blood concentration was unaffected. Amlodipine was well tolerated, with a low incidence of adverse events, and did not affect blood pressure or heart rate. In conclusion, amlodipine reduced serum creatinine in normotensive renal transplant recipients after only 8 weeks treatment, and was well tolerated in concomitant administration with CsA.
 ...
PMID:Renal effects of amlodipine in normotensive renal transplant recipients. 1006 93

This study compares the effects of a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine) and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (enalapril) on in vivo insulin sensitivity in patients with essential hypertension. Forty-six patients with mild and moderate hypertension were studied. After a 2-week single-blind placebo phase, they were randomly assigned to double-blind therapy with either amlodipine (2.5 to 10 mg/day) or enalapril (5 to 40 mg/day) for 16 weeks. Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic characteristics, degree of obesity, metabolic parameters, and arterial blood pressure. Insulin sensitivity was measured at baseline and at week 16 during the active phase using euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamps. Arterial blood pressure decreased similarly in both groups. Whole body glucose uptake (M-value) increased with amlodipine from 3.63 +/- 0.32 (mean +/- SEM) to 3.97 +/- 0.31 mg/kg/min (P = .02). A similar tendency was observed with enalapril: from 3.59 +/- 0.32 to 3.94 +/- 0.30 mg/kg/min (P = .09). A trend to lower steady-state insulin level during the second clamp (compared to baseline) was observed in both groups. The clamp-derived insulin sensitivity index (that corrects for steady-state insulin levels and glucose levels during the clamp) increased similarly in both groups: from 1.15 +/- 0.11 to 1.39 +/- 0.13 with amlodipine (P = .03) and from 1.25 +/- 0.13 to 1.49 +/- 0.16 with enalapril (P = .01). LDL cholesterol decreased with amlodipine (mean change, -11.3 mg/dL, P = .004). Amlodipine and enalapril were associated with increments in insulin sensitivity. Amlodipine provided an additional benefit with decreased low density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.
 ...
PMID:A double blind comparison of the effects of amlodipine and enalapril on insulin sensitivity in hypertensive patients. 1019 33


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