Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0043352 (xerostomia)
 4,250 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

This double-blind study, which is still in progress, aims to compare ketanserin (K) and propranolol (P) during long-term treatment of hypertensive patients in general practice. After a run-in period on placebo, active treatment was initiated with 20 mg K or 40 mg P, b.i.d., during a 2-week period, whereafter the daily dose of either drug was doubled. Presently, 331 patients have been randomized, two-thirds to the K group (n = 221) and one-third to the P group (n = 110). Both groups were similar at randomization, with blood pressure (BP) averaging 171/105 mm Hg. The presently available data concerning the initial 3 months of the trial show that up to the 2nd month after randomization, systolic BP was significantly (p less than 0.05) higher in the K than in the P group, whereas the differences in diastolic BP were mostly not significant. The change in BP after 3 months on K treatment was positively and independently related to both the initial BP and the concurrent changes in body weight. Heart rate was lower (p less than 0.001) during P, whereas body weight was not statistically different between both groups. Differences in complaints between the K and P group were small. However, in the K group dry mouth was transiently more frequently reported at 1 month (p = 0.02) and multiple complaints at 3 months (p = 0.03).
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1985
PMID:Double-blind comparison of ketanserin with propranolol in hypertensive patients: interim report. 241 37

The clinical experience of 763 medical practitioners who treated 3,708 hypertensive patients (51% men) with indoramin, administered alone or in combination with diuretics and/or beta-adrenergic antagonists, is reported. All patients had baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 95 mm Hg or greater, even though most of the patients (62%) already were receiving optimum doses of diuretics (20%), beta-adrenergic antagonists (15%), or diuretics and beta-adrenergic antagonists (27%). After 6 to 10 weeks of indoramin therapy, the DBP of 70% of the patients was 90 mm Hg or lower; another 17% had treated DBP between 91 and 95 mm Hg. Response rates were similar among patients treated with indoramin alone and those who received concomitant antihypertensive treatment. Indoramin doses of 50 mg/day or less (dose range, 12.5 to 125 mg/day) were required in approximately 70% of the patients. Weight gain and reflex tachycardia were not observed. The most frequently reported side effects were drowsiness/tiredness, dizziness, and dry mouth. Only 6% of the patients discontinued indoramin treatment because of side effects. The results of this study indicate that indoramin, administered alone or in combination with diuretics and/or beta-adrenergic antagonists, is a safe and effective antihypertensive agent when used in relatively low doses in clinical practice.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1986
PMID:Antihypertensive therapy in the Federal Republic of Germany: clinical practice experience with indoramin (Wydora). 242 96

The safety and efficacy of indoramin and prazosin added to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were compared in a double-blind trial involving 209 patients with mild to moderately severe essential hypertension. Patients whose supine diastolic blood pressure (SDBP) did not decrease to less than or equal to 90 mm Hg after 6 weeks of HCTZ therapy had indoramin or prazosin added to their regimen. Mean SDBP during 6 months of combination therapy with either regimen decreased by approximately 10 mm Hg from that at the final evaluation during HCTZ therapy (p less than 0.001); differences between the groups were not statistically significant. Mean heart rate was unchanged, whereas mean weight increased (p less than 0.001) above final HCTZ values by approximately 2 kg in both groups. Mean weight increased significantly (p less than 0.01) from baseline values, however, only in the prazosin/HCTZ group. Approximately 95% of the patients in each group had clinically significant decreases in SDBP. Fatigue or tiredness and dizziness were the most commonly reported adverse effects, and their frequencies were not significantly different in the two groups. Cardiac arrhythmias occurred only in patients in the prazosin/HCTZ group and were significantly (p less than 0.05) more frequent than among patients in the indoramin/HCTZ group; less severe adverse experiences, i.e., dry mouth, ejaculatory problems, drowsiness, and sedation, were significantly (p less than 0.05) more frequent in the indoramin/HCTZ group. When added to HCTZ, indoramin and prazosin are equally safe and effective in the treatment of hypertension.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1986
PMID:Antihypertensive effects of indoramin and prazosin in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. 242 99

Serious complications of treatment in hypertensive crises have been reported for nearly all drugs, so that testing of further antihypertensive drugs in the management of hypertensive emergencies is desirable. In the present study, the clinical efficacy and effects on cardiac function of intravenously infused clonidine were tested in 20 hypertensives with severely elevated blood pressure (diastolic blood pressure over 130 mm Hg). In all patients, the normalization of blood pressure was achieved together with a reduction in total and peripheral vascular resistance. Heart rate showed a slight and brief decrease. Cardiac performance (determined by radionuclide angiocardiography) was improved as indicated by the significant increase in ejection fraction and decrease in both end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes. The dosage of clonidine was progressively increased until a normal blood pressure (mean blood pressure less than or equal to 105 mm Hg) was obtained. The total mean dose required for control of blood pressure was 403 +/- 97.8 micrograms, administered over a mean period of 32 +/- 5.9 min. Side effects, represented by dry mouth and drowsiness, were well tolerated and of short duration. It is concluded that clonidine is an effective and safe alternative in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1986
PMID:Treatment of hypertensive emergencies: classic and newer approaches. 242 13

In the Swiss Ketanserin Study the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of ketanserin (given in 20 or 40 mg doses twice daily) was investigated, after a placebo run-in phase, as monotherapy (n = 68) as well as in combination with either atenolol (100 mg/day) (n = 30) or the potassium-sparing diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (50 mg/day) and amiloride (5 mg/day) (n = 26) in 124 patients with essential hypertension, aged 41 to 82 years. With the addition of ketanserin, diastolic blood pressure fell by 8 +/- 8, 8 +/- 8, and 7 +/- 9 (+/- SD) mm Hg, respectively (p less than 0.05 for all) in the three treatment groups; heart rate remained unchanged or fell slightly. Ketanserin had no effect on body weight, or biochemical variables, including total serum cholesterol and triglycerides, with the exception of a minor increase in apolipoprotein B. Using a patient self-assessment questionnaire (30 items), the addition of ketanserin was associated with a reduction of most of the symptoms encountered in the placebo phase, including sleep disturbances, general feeling of weakness, headaches, nervousness, and fatigue, but there was a tendency toward increases in stuffy nose and dry mouth. In patients older than 60 years, the antihypertensive efficacy of ketanserin was greater, with 59% achieving a diastolic pressure less than or equal to 95 mm Hg versus 45% in the younger patients. This age trend also emerged when ketanserin was combined with either atenolol or the diuretic.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987
PMID:Antihypertensive efficacy of ketanserin alone or in combination with a beta-blocker or a diuretic: the Swiss Ketanserin Study. 244 58

Central and peripheral alpha-adrenoceptors play an important role in cardiovascular regulation, and selective alpha 1-adrenoceptor antagonists and alpha 2-adrenoceptor agonists have an established place in the therapy of hypertension. Prazosin is a selective alpha 1-antagonist that is both effective in lowering blood pressure and well tolerated. However, the more recently developed alpha 1-antagonists doxazosin and terazosin offer the advantage of having longer half-lives, allowing once daily administration. Clonidine is a centrally acting alpha 2-agonist whose clinical use has often been limited by the dose dependent side effects of dry mouth and sedation, and the belief that it should be given three times per day. However, recent studies have shown that it has substantial antihypertensive efficacy with minimal side effects at low doses, and that half-life is long enough to allow twice daily administration. An improved understanding of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of drugs acting on alpha-adrenoceptors allows a more rational approach to their clinical application.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987
PMID:Comparison of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of adrenoceptor agonists and antagonists as antihypertensive agents. 245 58

We have treated 128 patients aged 40 +/- 9 years (60 males and 68 females), all with essential hypertension (W.H.O. I and II), over a period of 10 yr. The treatment was performed with clonidine at a dose that ranged from 0.150 to 1,200 mg (twice daily). Forty-two patients also received a diuretic (HCTZ 25 mg daily). Mean blood pressure decreased significantly from 169 +/- 10 mm Hg systolic, 107 +/- 3 diastolic to 145 +/- 6 mm Hg (p less than 0.001) 90 +/- 3 mm Hg diastolic (p less than 0.001). Side effects occurred during the first month. These were drowsiness 28%, dry mouth 35%, constipation 13%, dizziness 9%, postural hypotension 2%, and male impotence 3.3% (2/60). Side effects still present after 120 months of treatment were drowsiness 11.7%, dry mouth 26.6%, constipation 14.1%, dizziness 4.7%, and male impotence 1.7% (1/59). The number of patients who discontinued treatment resulting from side effects were 3.34%, all of them within the first 6 months. There were no changes in renal or liver function or in serum electrolytes or lipids. Retinopathy improved in most patients. Electrocardiogram (ECG) improved in 45 patients with LVH. It is concluded that clonidine provided sustained blood pressure control with minimum side effects during 10-year therapy for hypertension.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987
PMID:Safety aspects of long-term antihypertensive therapy (10 years) with clonidine. 245 59

In this double-blind study in general practice, 444 patients were randomized to ketanserin (K, 40 mg b.i.d.) and 229 patients were randomized to propranolol (P, 80 mg b.i.d.). After 3 months, more patients on K (15%) than on P (9%) had been withdrawn (p less than 0.02). Although at 3 months the falls in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were similar in both groups, the reduction in SBP was slower on K, and up to 2 months SBP was higher on K than on P (p less than 0.04 or less). At randomization and after 3 months, average weights were similar in both groups. However, during the first month of the study, patients on K gained weight, and this change in weight differed (p less than 0.02) from the unchanged weight on P. On K, BP lowering was greater when weight gain was less. Multiple regression analysis showed that after adjusting for BP at randomization and subsequent weight changes, DBP at 1 month on K was lower with advancing age, whereas SBP and DBP at 1 and 3 months on P were higher with age. Severe adverse effects were absent. However, dry mouth, edema, fatigue, and dizziness occurred more frequently with K (p less than 0.04 or less).
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1988 Dec
PMID:Double-blind comparison of ketanserin and propranolol in hypertensive patients. 246 91

Nitrendipine is a new calcium antagonist of the 1,4-dihydropyridine group with strong vasodilating properties. In a randomized trial involving 45 patients, whose mean blood pressure was 236 +/- 24/129 +/- 21 mm Hg, 5 mg nitrendipine (given sublingually via a phiole) was compared with 20 mg nifedipine (given sublingually via two pierced 10-mg capsules) and 0.15 mg clonidine (given intravenously). Blood pressure and heart rate were assessed for 8 h after intake of the antihypertensive agents. Within 60 min, nitrendipine reduced blood pressure by an average of 78 +/- 17 mm Hg for the systolic and 42 +/- 12 mm Hg for the diastolic. Heart rate fell significantly from 106 +/- 17 to 87 +/- 11 beats/min. Nifedipine produced equivalent falls in systolic (-72 +/- 15 mm Hg) and diastolic (-41 +/- 11 mm Hg) blood pressure, but increased heart rate from 89 +/- 13 to 103 +/- 14 beats/min within 1 h. Intravenous administration of clonidine lowers systolic (-84 +/- 13 mm Hg) and diastolic (-35 +/- 10 mm Hg) blood pressure within 60 min. Heart rate decreased from 96 +/- 15 to 84 +/- 9 beats/min. The antihypertensive effect of each drug was maintained until 8 h after medication. Main side effects were observed in the nifedipine group (flush and reflex tachycardia) and in the clonidine group (dry mouth and drowsiness). In conclusion, nitrendipine, nifedipine, and clonidine show similar efficacy in the treatment of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies. However, sublingual application of the calcium antagonists is simple and safe; moreover, nitrendipine is better tolerated than nifedipine and clonidine.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1988
PMID:Treatment of hypertensive urgencies and emergencies with nitrendipine, nifedipine, and clonidine: effect on blood pressure and heart rate. 246 62

Centrally acting agents and the beta-adrenergic antagonists represent two classes of antihypertensive agents recommended for initial monotherapy. Comparisons of the efficacy and safety of the centrally acting agent, guanabenz, with those of propranolol and pindolol in patients with mild to moderately severe hypertension, are reported. In the guanabenz versus propranolol study, mean supine blood pressure decreased by 19/15 mm Hg for 44 guanabenz-treated patients and by 17/15 mm Hg for 52 propranolol-treated patients who completed 6 months of therapy. In the guanabenz versus pindolol study, the mean decrease in supine blood pressure was 17/14 mm Hg for the 12 patients treated with guanabenz and 21/15 mm Hg for the 13 patients who received pindolol and completed 2 months of therapy. If the patients who discontinued therapy for drug-related reasons are considered, the percentages of patients with clinically satisfactory blood pressure reductions were 59% for the guanabenz group versus 62% for the propranolol group and 79% for guanabenz-treated patients versus 64% for pindolol-treated patients. Although adverse effects, including dry mouth, drowsiness, and weakness, were more common among guanabenz-treated patients, these effects generally were mild and became less frequent with continued therapy. The therapeutic efficacy and safety of guanabenz were similar to those of the two beta-adrenergic blocking drugs, propranolol and pindolol. Guanabenz therapy decreased serum total cholesterol (p less than 0.05), whereas propranolol therapy decreased HDL cholesterol (p less than 0.05). Thus, guanabenz did not produce serum lipid abnormalities that may be associated with increased cardiovascular risk.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1984
PMID:Comparison of a centrally acting antihypertensive agent and beta-adrenergic blocking agents for the treatment of hypertension. 608 30


1 2 3 Next >>