Comparison of enalapril and atenolol in mild to moderate hypertension

Cross-sectional study of the association of 5 single nucleotide polymorphisms with enalapril treatment response among South African adults with hypertension

This study investigates the association of 5 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in selected genes (ABO, VEGFA, BDKRB2, NOS3, and ADRB2) with blood pressure (BP) response to enalapril. The study further assessed genetic interactions that exist within these genes and their implications in enalapril treatment response among South African adults with hypertension.A total of 284 participants belonging to the Nguni tribe of South Africa on continuous treatment for hypertension were recruited. Five SNPs in enalapril pharmacogenes were selected and genotyped using MassArray. Uncontrolled hypertension was defined as BP ≥140/90 mm Hg. The association between genotypes, alleles, and BP response to treatment was determined by fitting multivariate logistic regression model analysis, and genetic interactions between SNPs were assessed by multifactor dimensionality reduction.Majority of the study participants were female (75.00%), Xhosa (78.87%), and had uncontrolled hypertension (69.37%). All 5 SNPs were exclusively detected among Swati and Zulu participants. In the multivariate (adjusted) logistic model analysis, ADRB2 rs1042714 GC (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-5.23; P = .044) and BDKRB2 rs1799722 CT (AOR = 2.74; 95% CI 1.19-6.28; P = .017) were independently associated with controlled hypertension in response to enalapril. While the C allele of VEGFA rs699947 (AOR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.15-0.94; P = .037) was significantly associated with uncontrolled hypertension. A significant interaction between rs699947, rs495828, and rs2070744 (cross-validation consistency = 10/10; P = .0005) in response to enalapril was observed.We confirmed the association of rs1042714 (ADRB2) and rs1799722 (BDKRB2) with controlled hypertension and established an interaction between rs699947 (VEGFA), rs495828 (ABO), and rs2070744 (NOS3) with BP response to enalapril. Our findings have provided substantial evidence for the use of SNPs as predictors for enalapril response among South Africans adults with hypertension.

Blockade of the angiotensin system improves mental health domain of quality of life: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

It is unclear whether blockade of the angiotensin system has effects on mental health. Our objective was to determine the impact of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) blockers on mental health domain of quality of life.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of published literature.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov databases. The last search was conducted in January 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials comparing any angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or AT1R blocker versus placebo or non-angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or non-AT1R blocker were selected. Study participants were adults without any major physical symptoms. We adhered to meta-analysis reporting methods as per PRISMA and the Cochrane Collaboration.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies were included in the analysis. When compared with placebo or other antihypertensive medications, AT1R blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors were associated with improved overall quality of life (standard mean difference = 0.11, 95% confidence interval = [0.08, 0.14], p < 0.0001), positive wellbeing (standard mean difference = 0.11, 95% confidence interval = [0.05, 0.17], p < 0.0001), mental (standard mean difference = 0.15, 95% confidence interval = [0.06, 0.25], p < 0.0001), and anxiety (standard mean difference = 0.08, 95% confidence interval = [0.01, 0.16], p < 0.0001) domains of QoL. No significant difference was found for the depression domain (standard mean difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval = [0.02, 0.12], p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of angiotensin blockers and inhibitors for the treatment of hypertension in otherwise healthy adults is associated with improved mental health domains of quality of life. Mental health quality of life was a secondary outcome in the included studies. Research specifically designed to analyse the usefulness of drugs that block the angiotensin system is necessary to properly evaluate this novel psychiatric target.

Peripheral vasoconstriction induced by β-adrenoceptor blockers: a systematic review and a network meta-analysis

AIM

Peripheral vasoconstriction has long been described as a vascular adverse effect of β-adrenoceptor blockers. Whether β-adrenoceptor blockers should be avoided in patients with peripheral vascular disease depends on pharmacological properties (e.g. preferential binding to β1 -adrenoreceptors or intrinsic sympathomimetic activity). However, this has not been confirmed in experimental studies. We performed a network meta-analysis in order to assess the comparative risk of peripheral vasoconstriction of different β-adrenoceptor blockers.

METHOD

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including β-adrenoceptor blockers that were published in core clinical journals in the Pubmed database. All RCTs reporting peripheral vasoconstriction as an adverse effect of β-adrenoceptor blockers and controls were included. Sensitivity analyses were conducted including possibly confounding covariates (latitude, properties of the β-adrenoceptor blockers, e.g. intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, vasodilation, drug indication, drug doses). The protocol and the detailed search strategy are available online (PROSPERO registry CRD42014014374).

RESULTS

Among 2238 records screened, 38 studies including 57 026 patients were selected. Overall, peripheral vasoconstriction was reported in 7% of patients with β-adrenoceptor blockers and 4.6% in the control groups (P < 0.001), with heterogeneity among drugs. Atenolol and propranolol had a significantly higher risk than placebo, whereas pindolol, acebutolol and oxprenolol had not.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that β-adrenoceptor blockers have variable propensity to enhance peripheral vasoconstriction and that it is not related to preferential binding to β1 -adrenoceptors. These findings challenge FDA and European recommendations regarding precautions and contra-indications of use of β-adrenoceptor blockers and suggest that β-adrenoceptor blockers with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity could be safely used in patients with peripheral vascular disease.

The Effects of Oral Atenolol or Enalapril Premedication on Blood Loss and Hypotensive Anesthesia in Orthognathic Surgery

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of premedication with oral atenolol or enalapril, in combination with remifentanil under sevoflurane anesthesia, on intraoperative blood loss by achieving adequate deliberate hypotension (DH) during orthognathic surgery. Furthermore, we investigated the impact thereof on the amount of nitroglycerin (NTG) administered as an adjuvant agent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-three patients undergoing orthognathic surgery were randomly allocated into one of three groups: an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor group (Group A, n=24) with enalapril 10 mg, a β blocker group (Group B, n=24) with atenolol 25 mg, or a control group (Group C, n=25) with placebo. All patients were premedicated orally 1 h before the induction of anesthesia. NTG was the only adjuvant agent used to achieve DH when mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was not controlled, despite the administration of the maximum remifentanil dose (0.3 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹) with sevoflurane.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients completed the study. Blood loss was significantly reduced in Group A, compared to Group C (adjusted p=0.045). Over the target range of MAP percentage during DH was significantly higher in Group C than in Groups A and B (adjusted p-values=0.007 and 0.006, respectively). The total amount of NTG administered was significantly less in Group A than Group C (adjusted p=0.015).

CONCLUSION

Premedication with enalapril (10 mg) combined with remifentanil under sevoflurane anesthesia attenuated blood loss and achieved satisfactory DH during orthognathic surgery. Furthermore, the amount of NTG was reduced during the surgery.

Clinical efficacy and safety of telmisartan 80 mg once daily vs. atenolol 50 mg once daily in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension

The objective of this open-label, parallel-group comparative study was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of once-daily treatment for 8 weeks with telmisartan 80 mg in comparison with atenolol 50 mg on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (morning supine SBP 141-199 mmHg, DBP 95-114 mmHg). A total of 58 patients were enrolled. The comparability of the two treatment groups was statistically documented at the beginning of the study. Telmisartan was more effective than atenolol, with a decrease in SBP of 21.7 mmHg vs. 11.8 mmHg (p = 0.03) and a non-significant decrease in DBP of 14.7 mmHg vs. 10.1 mmHg. The safety profiles of both drugs were very similar; both drugs were well tolerated. In conclusion, once-daily telmisartan 80 mg is more effective than once-daily atenolol 50 mg in lowering SBP with no negative chronotropism. Furthermore, telmisartan was as well tolerated as atenolol in the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension in adults.

Comparison of quality of life and cough on eprosartan and enalapril in people with moderate hypertension

The objective of this study was to compare quality of life and incidence of dry persistent cough among patients treated with eprosartan and enalapril for mild-moderate hypertension. This was a randomised 26-week double-blind controlled trial carried out in clinics in nine countries of North America, Europe and South Africa. A total of 529 patients aged 18 and over with diastolic blood pressure between 95 mm Hg and 114 mm Hg were studied. Treatment comprised of eprosartan or enalapril monotherapy for 12 weeks with the option of hydrochlorothiazide addition for the remaining 14 weeks. The primary outcome measures were cough and the Psychological General Wellbeing Index (PGWB) total and subscales (anxiety, self-control, depression, general health, positive wellbeing and vitality). The results were that 17.8% of enalapril patients and 13.2% of eprosartan patients withdrew from randomised treatment. Those on enalapril were twice as likely to have gained a definite or possible cough by study end point as those on eprosartan (7.6% vs 3.2%) P = 0.099. At monotherapy end point the differences were greater (9.9% vs 2.1%) and of statistical significance, P = 0.001. Patients treated with enalapril, however, had small but significant improvements in measures of self-control and total PGWB compared with those on eprosartan. The effect sizes of 0.2 or less indicated that there were small differences. In conclusion eprosartan was associated with fewer coughs than enalapril but it performed less well on some aspects of quality of life.

Health-related quality-of-life measurement in hypertension. A review of randomised controlled drug trials

In hypertension, tolerability of drug treatment is important because individuals may see the use of antihypertensive medications as more troubling than their seemingly symptomless disease. This may result in noncompliance and ineffectual long term treatment. In the past 15 years, new antihypertensive medications have been marketed on the basis of the advantages they offer with regard to adverse effects and the unavoidable impact of such adverse effects on a person's quality of life. When related to health, quality of life refers to the physical, psychological and social dimensions of health that are influenced by a person's experiences, beliefs, expectations and perceptions. To measure this concept, many instruments, either generic or specific, may be used. The purpose of this study is to describe, by way of a critical review of the literature, the instruments that are most often used in the measurement of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in people using antihypertensive drug treatments. We carried out a search of the literature published in English in the period January 1966 to July 2000, looking for randomised controlled trials of antihypertensive drugs. Using the Medline database, we included 77 papers in our review. Our main finding suggests that HR-QOL changes associated with antihypertensive treatment are measured with many different instruments. In almost all studies, at least 1 instrument specific to a health dimension was used, whereas not many used a generic instrument only. The most commonly measured HR-QOL dimensions were cognitive function, symptomatic well-being, sexual function, psychological well-being, sleep dysfunction, social participation and general health perception. Since the choice of dimensions to measure depends not only on the disease but also on the drug, this review adds further evidence that a generic instrument as well as a preference measurement should be added to a specific instrument.

Integrated approaches to management of hypertension: promoting treatment acceptance

Overwhelming trial evidence indicates that the treatment of hypertension is beneficial, but in practice, less than 50% of treated hypertensive subjects have blood pressure well controlled. The success of treatment relies on acceptance by the patient. Treatment acceptance may be affected by the efficacy and tolerability of drug therapy, its effects on quality of life, and other important but less well-recognized influences such as the expectations and preconceived ideas of the physician and the patient. This report briefly reviews the factors affecting patient concordance with antihypertensive treatment and the role these factors play in the development of an integrated treatment plan. Nonconcordance with drug therapy is common: Only one third of patients always take treatment, one third take it sometimes, and one third never take their prescribed medication. With poor concordance, control of blood pressure and the consequent benefits are less likely to be realized. The factors that influence concordance are ill understood. Although drug side effects and convenience of dosing regimens are contributors, the attitudes of patients, physicians, and their interactions are likely to be of considerable importance. Concordance may be improved by involving the patient in the treatment plan, setting explicit targets, following a clear treatment plan, motivating the patient to comply with treatment, paying attention to the concerns and particular needs of the individual patient, and by ensuring frequent contacts between patients and health care professions. Successful integrated approaches to the management of hypertension must address all the factors that affect treatment acceptance.

Comparison of effects of quinapril and metoprolol on glycaemic control, serum lipids, blood pressure, albuminuria and quality of life in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus patients with hypertension. Swedish Quinapril Group

OBJECTIVE

To compare the long-term effects of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor quinapril and the cardioselective beta-adrenergic blocking agent metoprolol on glycaemic control, with glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) as the principal variable, in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) patients with hypertension.

DESIGN

A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre study during 6 months preceded by a 4 week wash-out and a 3 week run-in placebo period. Quinapril (20 mg) and metoprolol (100 mg, conventional tablets) were given once daily. No change was made in the treatment of diabetes (diet and hypoglycaemic agents).

SUBJECTS

Seventy-two patients fulfilling the criteria were randomized and entered the double-blind period. Twelve patients did not complete the study. Sixty patients, 26 on quinapril and 34 on metoprolol, were available for the final analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The effect was assessed by changes in HbA1c, the fasting serum glucose and the post-load serum glucose, C-peptide and insulin levels during the oral glucose tolerance test.

RESULTS

In the quinapril group, the fasting serum glucose, oral glucose tolerance and the C-peptide and insulin responses, determined as the incremental area under the curves (AUC), showed no change, but the mean HbA1c level increased from 6.2 +/- 1.1% to 6.5 +/- 1.3% (P < 0.05). In the metoprolol group, the rise in the mean level of HbA1c, from 6.3 +/- 1.0% to 6.8 +/- 1.3% (P < 0.01), tended to be more marked than after quinapril, although there was no significant difference between the increments. The mean fasting serum glucose showed an increase from 9.1 +/- 1.9 mM to 10.1 +/- 2.8 mM (P < 0.01) which correlated significantly with the duration of diabetes (P < 0.01) and the increase in fasting serum triglycerides (P < 0.001). Moreover, in the metoprolol group we found significant decreases in the oral glucose tolerance as well as C-peptide and insulin responses to the glucose load.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with quinapril for 6 months appears to have advantages over metoprolol in NIDDM patients with hypertension. Although treatment with quinapril or metoprolol over 6 months was concomitant with a rise in the HbA1c, increased fasting blood glucose, decreased oral glucose tolerance and decreased C-peptide and insulin responses to a glucose challenge were observed only in patients treated with metoprolol.

Does lowering the blood pressure improve the mood? Quality-of-life results from the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) study

Nine-hundred-and-twenty-two hypertensive patients were included in a substudy to the Hypertension Optimal Treatment study, which aimed to investigate the impact on quality of life of lowering the pressure and of intensified therapy. Seven-hundred-and-eighty-one patients completed both baseline and follow-up questionnaires (intention-to-treat population), while 610 patients were included in a per protocol analysis. Patients were randomized to three diastolic BP levels (DBPs), i.e. < or =90 mmHg, < or =85 mmHg and < or =80 mmHg. Two self-administered validated questionnaires, the Psychological General Well-Being index and the Subjective Symptoms Assessment Profile (SSA-P) were completed at baseline and after 6 months. The lower the DBP achieved, the greater the improvement in well-being (p < 0.05). The increase in well-being from baseline to 6 months was significant in target groups < or =80 mmHg (p < 0.01) and < or =85 mmHg (p < 0.05). The SSA-P domains, cardiac symptoms and dizziness improved in all groups but the sex life score deteriorated in the < or =80 and < or =85 mmHg groups in male patients. In all target groups, headaches were reduced (p < 0.001), while swollen ankles (p < 0.001) and dry cough in the < or =80 mmHg group (p < 0.001) increased. Although more intensive antihypertensive therapy is associated with a slight increase in subjective symptoms, it is nonetheless still associated with improvements in patients' well-being.

Quality of life claims in trials of anti-hypertensive therapy

The increasing use of so-called quality of life assessments in clinical trials can be seen as a laudable attempt to gather information about the impact of treatment on patients which goes beyond the purely clinical. However, there is a growing tendency for pharmaceutical companies to use quality of life claims in marketing strategies. The varying protocols and study populations, together with multicentre and multicountry trials and the variety of implied definitions of quality of life raise serious issues concerning the scientific credibility of conclusions about quality of life as an endpoint. This paper reviews reports of randomized controlled trials of anti-hypertensive therapy which used 'quality of life', assessed by patient-completed questionnaires, as one of the outcome variables. Criteria referring to definitions of quality of life, the validity and reliability of the measures used, administration procedures, treatment of data, adequacy of discussion of alternative explanations of the findings and the legitimacy of the findings are spelled out. It is concluded that none of the studies reviewed were justified in the claims made concerning differential effects of therapies on 'quality of life'.

Quality-of-life measures in the evaluation of antihypertensive drug therapy: reliability, validity, and quality-of-life domains

Health care policy decision makers and clinicians have come to realize that drug therapy should offer more than just efficacy and safety, which are determined in controlled clinical trials. During the last decade, quality of life (QOL) has become one of the most important variables in selecting which drug therapy should be used in a particular patient population. This is especially the case with antihypertensive drug therapy in which clinicians and patients have to make trade-offs between the increased health risk of hypertension and the common side effects of antihypertensive therapy. Maintenance therapy is the key to successful control of high blood pressure; however, the side effects of drug therapy may lead to a decrease in patient compliance, a decrease in treatment success, and a reduction in a patient's QOL. In the assessment of QOL, the use of reliable and valid instruments to measure the appropriate domains is crucial. We reviewed 76 clinical trials involving antihypertensive drugs in which the QOL of patients as one of the outcome measures was evaluated. The problem of inadequate information on the psychometric properties of the instruments used to measure QOL was found to be most serious when the instruments were created specifically for individual studies. Of the clinical trials involving the use of these self-created instruments, only 4% provided any kind of reliability, and only 13% provided any kind of validity information. The most commonly measured QOL domains in these clinical trials were symptomatic well-being/side-effect profile, psychological well-being, sleep, sexual function, and positive well-being and social participation. The reliability and validity data were generally available for the instruments measuring psychological well-being. More work is needed to establish the validity of the instruments measuring positive well-being and social participation, sleep, and sexual function. Clinical studies on the QOL of patients receiving antihypertensive therapy should use instruments with established reliability and validity data, which measure the QOL domains relevant to the patient and to the intervention being evaluated.

Quality of life in cardiac patient research: a meta-analysis

This article reports a meta-analysis of 84 studies of quality of life (QOL) in cardiac patient populations published in the 5-year period 1987-1991. Selected methodologies and substantive characteristics of the studies are described. An overall effect size of .31 indicated a small but significant positive effect of pharmacologic, mechanical, surgical, nursing, or other treatment on QOL. No negative effect of treatment was found for any cardiovascular diagnostic category. Homogeneity analysis revealed eight potential moderators of the overall effect size: quality of study, gender of sample, time dimension, sampling method, intervention, marital status of subjects, quality-of-life dimension measured, and sample size.

Neuropsychological consequences of antihypertensive medication use

A growing proportion of the general population is being prescribed antihypertensive medications for the long-term treatment of essential hypertension. Untreated hypertensive individuals exhibit some neuropsychological performance decrements, and numerous researchers have sought to determine whether drug therapy for hypertension worsens, improves, or leaves unaltered objectively measured cognitive skills. These issues may be especially important in the elderly, among whom both high blood pressure and compromised cognitive function are common. In this review, we collate the findings of more than 50 clinical studies according to class of antihypertensive medication studied and domains of neuropsychological performance assessed. Special attention is given to investigations of elderly subjects, and a critical summary is provided.

Quality of life and cost-effectiveness in the treatment of hypertension

By and large, the results of the different studies on quality of life in hypertension suggest that among beta-blockers only the nonselective beta-blocker propranolol has a negative effect on well-being, being associated with depression and side-effects. The findings on diuretics are comparatively few, and mainly observed as an adverse impact on sexual function. If one broadens the treatment scenario to include mortality and morbidity, evidence of a beneficial impact has only been proven for beta-blockers and diuretics. With the primary aim of antihypertensive drug therapy given as a reduction in cardiovascular risk factors, the aim with regard to quality of life is that quality of life be maintained. The new guidelines on the management of mild hypertension issued in the United States highlight the danger of relaxing the concern for risk reduction and costs in favour of surrogate end-points, even though these may carry great significance in the individual patient.

Enalapril versus atenolol in the treatment of hypertensive smokers

A randomised crossover study has been done to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of enalapril and atenolol in 45 smoking, hypertensive men. Treatment was started with enalapril 20 mg/d or atenolol 50 mg/d and, if necessary, the doses were doubled after 4 weeks to achieve a sitting diastolic blood pressure < or = 95 mm Hg, after which hydrochlorothiazide was added, if necessary. Both drugs lowered blood pressure significantly. However, enalapril was more efficient in lowering both systolic and diastolic blood pressure; the mean difference was significant after both 4 and 8 weeks in the sitting systolic (11.6 mm Hg and 7.9 mm Hg) and diastolic (3.3 mm Hg and 3.0 mm Hg) pressures and in the erect systolic pressures (8.2 mm Hg and 7.2 mm Hg), and after 8 weeks in the supine systolic pressure, too (8.9 mm Hg). The effect on enalapril was especially marked in moderate (< 20 cigarettes/day) smokers. The need for diuretics was also significantly less in the enalapril group. It appears that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors may be superior to beta-adrenoceptor blockers in the treatment of hypertensive smoking patients.

Quality of life with three antihypertensive treatments. Cilazapril, atenolol, nifedipine

A multicenter, randomized double-blind study of 6 months' duration was performed in 540 patients (average age 54 years, 57% male) with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension to determine the relative effects on quality of life of cilazapril, atenolol, and nifedipine retard. Quality of life was assessed by using both a self-administered and an interviewer-administered questionnaire; the assessment included a complaint score (symptoms checklist), Health Status Index, assessment of work satisfaction, Psychological General Well-being Index, Profile of Mood States subscales, and life satisfaction assessment. Psychomotor function was measured by the Reitan Trail Making test B. At the end of the trial, diastolic blood pressure had fallen by an average of 15 mm Hg in all three groups, but significantly (p = 0.01) more patients taking cilazapril required the addition of a diuretic (36%) compared with those taking atenolol (25%) or nifedipine retard (24%). No significant differences in quality of life were observed between cilazapril and atenolol during the trial. Symptomatic complaints increased on nifedipine retard (p = 0.02) and contributed to a higher discontinuation rate (21% discontinued treatment compared with 13% and 14% taking atenolol and cilazapril, respectively, p = 0.04). However, a possible improvement in the fatigue subscale (p = 0.04) was also observed on nifedipine retard. The 95% confidence intervals showed that none of the drugs in this trial produced an effect equivalent to that previously reported between captopril and methyldopa in the Psychological General Well Being Index or between captopril and methyldopa or propranolol in Trail Making test B.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Dose-dependent effects of betaxolol in hypertension: a double-blind, multicenter study

This study determined the dose-response relationship among three doses of betaxolol compared with placebo in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 317 hypertensive patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or betaxolol 5, 10, or 20 mg once daily for 4 weeks. A significant (P less than .05) decrease in supine diastolic blood pressure (BP) compared with concurrent placebo was evident with all three doses of betaxolol after 1 week of active treatment. Each dose of betaxolol maintained a significant reduction in diastolic and systolic BP and heart rate responses throughout the 4-week treatment period. At the fourth week (final treatment evaluation), BP and heart rate were significantly (P less than .05) reduced by all three doses of betaxolol compared with placebo. For supine systolic and diastolic BP, the decreases with betaxolol 20 mg were significantly (P less than .05) greater than with the 5 mg dose, but there was no statistically significant difference between the 10-mg and either the 5- or 20-mg doses. For standing diastolic BP, the effect of betaxolol 5 mg once daily was significantly (P less than .05) less than that of 10 and 20 mg. The overall supine diastolic BP response to betaxolol was dose dependent, and more patients responded to the 10- and 20-mg doses of betaxolol (66% and 76%, respectively) than to the 5-mg dose (59%). For each efficacy variable, the absolute magnitude of the reduction was greater with increasing dose. In subgroup analyses, BP responses were analyzed by race, age, baseline BP, and age combined with baseline BP.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Enalapril. A reappraisal of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in hypertension

Enalapril, an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor usually administered orally once daily, decreases blood pressure by lowering peripheral vascular resistance without increasing heart rate or output. It is effective in lowering blood pressure in all grades of essential and renovascular hypertension. Patients not responding adequately to enalapril monotherapy usually respond with the addition of a thiazide diuretic (or a calcium antagonist or beta-blocker), and rarely require a third antihypertensive agent. Enalapril is at least as effective as other established and newer ACE inhibitors, and members of other antihypertensive drug classes including diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium antagonists and alpha-blockers, but therapy with enalapril may be less frequently limited by serious adverse effects or treatment contraindications than with other drug classes. The most frequent adverse effect limiting all ACE inhibitor therapy in clinical practice is cough. This favourable profile of efficacy and tolerability, and the substantial weight of clinical experience, explain the increasing acceptance of enalapril as a major antihypertensive treatment and supports its use as logical first-line therapeutic option.

Reducing the risk for coronary heart disease and stroke in hypertensives--comments on mechanisms for coronary protection and quality of life

The four most popular classes of antihypertensive drugs may all be considered suitable choices when initiating treatment for hypertension. The practitioner must decide which agent is appropriate for each individual patient. The main goal of treatment should be to prevent coronary events and stroke, while preserving quality of life. A 40% reduction in stroke can probably be achieved with any antihypertensive treatment, a reduction in coronary events is much harder to achieve. Available evidence from studies in men, summarized in this review, indicates that beta-blockade is superior to thiazide diuretics for the prevention of coronary events. Clinical trials have not yet produced long-term prognostic data on the effects of ACE-inhibitors or calcium antagonists on coronary events in hypertensive patients. A recent review on calcium antagonists in post-MI patients concluded that the results were disappointing, as pooled data actually showed a trend towards increased mortality with calcium antagonists as compared with placebo. Because of the large number of hypertensive patients at increased risk for coronary events in the community, the difference observed in coronary events between beta-blockade and other first-line drugs in hypertension (24%) may have important implications for clinical practice. This overall conclusion, however, has to be accepted with some reservations in view of the following observations. Firstly, no reduction in sudden death has been observed with the hydrophilic beta-blockers. Secondly, no reduction in coronary mortality in the smoking subgroup has been observed with the non-selective beta-blockers. Thus, it seems that the prevention of coronary events is more likely to be observed in patients given beta-blockers with certain pharmacological characteristics: relative lipophilicity, which enables passage of the beta-blocker through the blood-brain barrier to exert effects on pertinent central nervous beta 1-receptors. This is potentially useful in reducing the risk of sudden death. The addition of beta 1-selectivity is important for the risk reduction in smokers. Cardioselectivity is also an advantage in relation to side-effects and quality of life. The reduced risk for coronary events with certain beta-blockers is probably independent of the reduction in blood pressure: possible mechanisms studied are cardiac anti-ischaemic effects, antifibrillatory effects, antiatherosclerotic and anti-thrombotic effects.

The effects of captopril vs atenolol on memory, information processing and mood: a double-blind crossover study

1. Measures of memory, information processing ability, mood states and trait anxiety were estimated in a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised cross-over trial which compared the effects of atenolol (50 or 100 mg once daily) and captopril (25 or 50 mg twice daily), each taken for 6 weeks. Eighteen patients with mild to moderately severe hypertension were included. 2. There were no significant differences in systolic or diastolic blood pressure reduction between the two drugs. Pulse rate was slower after atenolol treatment (P less than 0.05). 3. Patients undertook practice on the psychological test battery prior to the treatment phases of the study in order to minimise practice effects. 4. There were no significant differences between the treatments on any of the measures of memory or information processing. 5. Patients reported feeling less anxious during treatment with atenolol (P = 0.02). 6. There were no differences between the drugs in their cognitive effects. The present study has the advantages of using an extensive battery of standard tests in a group of well-practised patients. The decreased anxiety reported with atenolol treatment may have clinical value and probably reflects the well-known effect of beta-adrenoceptor antagonist drugs on the somatic symptoms of situational anxiety.

Newer beta blockers and the treatment of hypertension

Beta-adrenoceptor blocking agents are established as one of the principal classes of antihypertensive agents. Despite progressive refinements over the years, they still possess some unwanted effects, which limit their considerable value. In recent years a wide range of variations upon the beta-blocker theme has been developed. The full clinical advantages of the newer agents remain to be defined.

Comparison of lisinopril versus atenolol for mild to moderate essential hypertension

The antihypertensive effects and safety profiles of lisinopril (10 to 40 mg) and atenolol (50 to 100 mg) were compared in a randomized, double-blind, parallel group trial in 144 patients with essential hypertension. After 8 weeks of therapy, seated blood pressure (BP) decreased by 26/15 mm Hg with lisinopril and by 19/14 mm Hg with atenolol. Lisinopril produced a greater reduction (p less than 0.05) in sitting systolic BP than did atenolol. Standing BP decreased by 25/15 mm Hg with lisinopril and by 19/14 mm Hg with atenolol. No important changes in hematologic and biochemical profiles were seen with either drug. Eleven patients, 7 receiving lisinopril and 4 receiving atenolol, were withdrawn because of adverse experiences; another 3 patients defaulted during treatment, 1 in the lisinopril group and 2 in the atenolol group. Both drugs were well-tolerated and are therefore suitable for first-line therapy in essential hypertension.