Angiotensin II antagonism and plasma radioreceptor-kinetics of candesartan in man

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling of candesartan to predict the exposure in hepatic and renal impairment and elderly populations

Background

Candesartan cilexetil is a widely used angiotensin II receptor blocker with minimal adverse effects and high tolerability for the treatment of hypertension. Candesartan is administered orally as the prodrug candesartan cilexetil, which is wholly and swiftly converted to the active metabolite candesartan by carboxylesterase during absorption in the intestinal tract. In populations with renal or hepatic impairment, candesartan's pharmacokinetic (PK) behavior may be altered, necessitating dosage adjustments.

Objectives

This study was conducted to examine how the physiologically based PK (PBPK) model characterizes the PKs of candesartan in adult and geriatric populations and to predict the PKs of candesartan in elderly populations with renal and hepatic impairment.

Design

After developing PBPK models using the reported physicochemical properties of candesartan and clinical data, these models were validated using data from clinical investigations involving various dose ranges.

Methods

Comparing predicted and observed blood concentration data and PK parameters was used to assess the fit performance of the models.

Results

Doses should be reduced to approximately 94% of Chinese healthy adults for the Chinese healthy elderly population; approximately 92%, 68%, and 64% of that of the Chinese healthy adult dose in elderly populations with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, respectively; and approximately 72%, 71%, and 52% of that of the Chinese healthy adult dose in elderly populations with Child-Pugh-A, Child-Pugh-B, and Child-Pugh-C hepatic impairment, respectively.

Conclusion

The results suggest that the PBPK model of candesartan can be utilized to optimize dosage regimens for special populations.

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling of candesartan related to CYP2C9 genetic polymorphism in adult and pediatric patients

Candesartan cilexetil is an angiotensin II receptor blocker and it is widely used to treat hypertension and heart failure. This drug is a prodrug that rapidly converts to candesartan after oral administration. Candesartan is metabolized by cytochrome P450 2C9 (CYP2C9) enzyme or uridine diphosphate glucurinosyltransferase 1A3, or excreted in an unchanged form through urine, biliary tract and feces. We investigated the effect of genetic polymorphism of CYP2C9 enzyme on drug pharmacokinetics using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. In addition, by introducing the age and ethnicity into the model, we developed a model that can propose an appropriate dosage regimen taking into account the individual characteristics of each patient. To evaluate the suitability of the model, the results of a clinical trial on twenty-two healthy Korean subjects and their CYP2C9 genetic polymorphism data was applied. In this study, PK-Sim® was used to develop the PBPK model of candesartan.

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in animal models of vascular, cardiac, metabolic and renal disease

We have reviewed the effects of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (ARBs) in various animal models of hypertension, atherosclerosis, cardiac function, hypertrophy and fibrosis, glucose and lipid metabolism, and renal function and morphology. Those of azilsartan and telmisartan have been included comprehensively whereas those of other ARBs have been included systematically but without intention of completeness. ARBs as a class lower blood pressure in established hypertension and prevent hypertension development in all applicable animal models except those with a markedly suppressed renin-angiotensin system; blood pressure lowering even persists for a considerable time after discontinuation of treatment. This translates into a reduced mortality, particularly in models exhibiting marked hypertension. The retrieved data on vascular, cardiac and renal function and morphology as well as on glucose and lipid metabolism are discussed to address three main questions: 1. Can ARB effects on blood vessels, heart, kidney and metabolic function be explained by blood pressure lowering alone or are they additionally directly related to blockade of the renin-angiotensin system? 2. Are they shared by other inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system, e.g. angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors? 3. Are some effects specific for one or more compounds within the ARB class? Taken together these data profile ARBs as a drug class with unique properties that have beneficial effects far beyond those on blood pressure reduction and, in some cases distinct from those of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. The clinical relevance of angiotensin receptor-independent effects of some ARBs remains to be determined.

Binding kinetics differentiates functional antagonism of orexin-2 receptor ligands

Orexin receptor antagonism represents a novel approach for the treatment of insomnia that directly targets sleep/wake regulation. Several such compounds have entered into clinical development, including the dual orexin receptor antagonists, suvorexant and almorexant. In this study, we have used equilibrium and kinetic binding studies with the orexin-2 (OX₂) selective antagonist radioligand, [³H]-EMPA, to profile several orexin receptor antagonists. Furthermore, selected compounds were studied in cell-based assays of inositol phosphate accumulation and ERK-1/2 phosphorylation in CHO cells stably expressing the OX2 receptor that employ different agonist incubation times (30 and 5 min, respectively). EMPA, suvorexant, almorexant and TCS-OX-29 all bind to the OX₂ receptor with moderate to high affinity (pk(I) values ≥ 7.5), whereas the primarily OX1 selective antagonists SB-334867 and SB-408124 displayed low affinity (pK(I) values ca. 6). Competition kinetic analysis showed that the compounds displayed a range of dissociation rates from very fast (TCS-OX2-29, k(off) = 0.22 min⁻¹) to very slow (almorexant, k(off) = 0.005 min⁻¹). Notably, there was a clear correlation between association rate and affinity. In the cell-based assays, fast-offset antagonists EMPA and TCS-OX2-29 displayed surmountable antagonism of orexin-A agonist activity. However, both suvorexant and particularly almorexant cause concentration-dependent depression in the maximal orexin-A response, a profile that is more evident with a shorter agonist incubation time. Analysis according to a hemi-equilibrium model suggests that antagonist dissociation is slower in a cellular system than in membrane binding; under these conditions, almorexant effectively acts as a pseudo-irreversible antagonist.

Understanding the hysteresis loop conundrum in pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships

Hysteresis loops are phenomena that sometimes are encountered in the analysis of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships spanning from pre-clinical to clinical studies. When hysteresis occurs it provides insight into the complexity of drug action and disposition that can be encountered. Hysteresis loops suggest that the relationship between drug concentration and the effect being measured is not a simple direct relationship, but may have an inherent time delay and disequilibrium, which may be the result of metabolites, the consequence of changes in pharmacodynamics or the use of a non-specific assay or may involve an indirect relationship. Counter-clockwise hysteresis has been generally defined as the process in which effect can increase with time for a given drug concentration, while in the case of clockwise hysteresis the measured effect decreases with time for a given drug concentration. Hysteresis loops can occur as a consequence of a number of different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic mechanisms including tolerance, distributional delay, feedback regulation, input and output rate changes, agonistic or antagonistic active metabolites, uptake into active site, slow receptor kinetics, delayed or modified activity, time-dependent protein binding and the use of racemic drugs among other factors. In this review, each of these various causes of hysteresis loops are discussed, with incorporation of relevant examples of drugs demonstrating these relationships for illustrative purposes. Furthermore, the effect that pharmaceutical formulation has on the occurrence and potential change in direction of the hysteresis loop, and the major pharmacokinetic / pharmacodynamic modeling approaches utilized to collapse and model hysteresis are detailed.

A systematic comparison of the properties of clinically used angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (ARBs) have become an important drug class in the treatment of hypertension and heart failure and the protection from diabetic nephropathy. Eight ARBs are clinically available [azilsartan, candesartan, eprosartan, irbesartan, losartan, olmesartan, telmisartan, valsartan]. Azilsartan (in some countries), candesartan, and olmesartan are orally administered as prodrugs, whereas the blocking action of some is mediated through active metabolites. On the basis of their chemical structures, ARBs use different binding pockets in the receptor, which are associated with differences in dissociation times and, in most cases, apparently insurmountable antagonism. The physicochemical differences between ARBs also manifest in different tissue penetration, including passage through the blood-brain barrier. Differences in binding mode and tissue penetration are also associated with differences in pharmacokinetic profile, particularly duration of action. Although generally highly specific for angiotensin II type 1 receptors, some ARBs, particularly telmisartan, are partial agonists at peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ. All of these properties are comprehensively reviewed in this article. Although there is general consensus that a continuous receptor blockade over a 24-hour period is desirable, the clinical relevance of other pharmacological differences between individual ARBs remains to be assessed.

Candesartan for the management of heart failure: more than an alternative

Candesartan is a long-acting angiotensin receptor antagonist that is well absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, with insurmountable receptor binding abilities. Recent studies have shown candesartan to be an effective therapy for heart failure patients, producing a significant reduction in mortality and morbidity. Importantly, studies have demonstrated that candesartan is effective in heart failure patients who are intolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, in patients already receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and for heart failure patients with preserved systolic function. The primary end point in the latter group failed to achieve statistical significance due to the small number of events. This paper will review the data supporting the use of candesartan to treat all heart failure patients, regardless of their ejection fraction.

Current and future uses of candesartan in the treatment of heart failure

Candesartan is an angiotensin receptor antagonist that is long acting, well absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract and demonstrates an insurmountable receptor antagonism. It is an effective once-daily antihypertensive therapy that maintains good control of blood pressure for over 24 h. More recently, candesartan was shown to be an effective therapy for heart failure patients, producing a significant reduction in mortality and morbidity. Importantly, the studies have demonstrated that candesartan is effective in heart failure patients intolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), as well as in addition to ACE-I. This paper reviews the data supporting the use of candesartan to treat patients with clinical heart failure.

Integrating Drug Pharmacokinetics for Phenotyping Individual Renin Response to Angiotensin II Blockade in Humans

Renin release into plasma has been used to investigate the drug dose-dependence of renin-angiotensin system inhibition because it is proportional to the interruption of the permanent negative feedback loop of angiotensin II on renin secretion. We investigated the 24-hour between-subject differences in renin profiles by analyzing the time-dependence of individual renin responses in 16 mildly sodium-depleted normotensive subjects exposed in a 4-period crossover study to single oral doses of 8- and 16-mg (C8 and C16) candesartan cilexetil and 80- and 160-mg (V80 and V160) valsartan. C8 had a similar effect to V160 in terms of the increase in active renin concentration and decrease in blood pressure. C16 had the strongest effect and V80 the weakest effect on renin release. Within- and between-subject variability was more marked for valsartan pharmacokinetics than for candesartan pharmacokinetics and influenced variability in renin response. To eliminate some of the variability caused by the pharmacokinetics of each drug, we corrected the area under time curve of plasma renin levels by that of plasma drug levels to obtain an individual normalized index of renin release or “renin/pharmacokinetic index”. In these experimental conditions, this index was found to be a reproducible individual characteristic affecting renin response, in addition to the pharmacokinetics and pharmacological properties of angiotensin II type-1 receptor antagonists. The pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic model of renin release described here could be of value for the identification and investigation of renin release abnormalities in patients with hypertension and for the comparison of renin-angiotensin system blockers.

Angiotensin II dose-effect curves and Schild regression plots for characterization of different angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonists in clinical pharmacology

The 'Schild regression' method is based on the principle of assessing the rightward shift of agonist dose-effect curves in the presence of different doses/concentrations of the respective receptor antagonist and presenting their relationship in a double log plot (i.e. the 'Schild plot'). The original method was developed to quantitatively characterize antagonistic drugs in experimental pharmacology. The method was adopted for evaluation of various AT1 antagonists in humans utilizing (human) angiotensin II as the agonist. Angiotensin II (Ang II) in continuous intravenous dose-incremental administration resulted in a clearly dose-dependent increase in blood pressure. All AT1 antagonists tested after oral administration yielded concentration-dependent rightward shifts of those Ang II dose-effect curves that were quantified as dose ratio (DR). DR minus 1 (DR-1) enabled the assessment of antagonist time kinetics in humans and a quantitatively precise determination of the half-life of antagonism in vivo. Schild plots allowed for assessment of apparent Ki doses indicative of a twofold rightward shift of the Ang II effect, thus providing the means for a rational comparison of the pharmacological potency of many of these compounds, where the Ki doses obtained at 24 h after administration were in the range of 'therapeutic' doses. Schild plots of a variety of substances showed linear relations independent of whether the blockade was deemed surmountable or not. It is therefore assumed that this property does not play a role at clinical doses/concentrations. Slopes slightly below 1 in the Schild plots of all tested antagonists point to a second 'counterregulatory' vasodilatory mechanism of action of Ang II which becomes apparent with AT1 blockade in conditions of high doses/concentrations of Ang II. Concentration vs. effect relationships indicate that if assessed at the same degree of direct vascular antagonism, other effects, such as increase in plasma renin activity, may be present to a varying degree with different antagonists. Thus for irbesartan, the potency to stimulate renin release was found to be at least twice that of candesartan. These observations should stimulate further research into the relevance of these dynamic differences between the various compounds. Thus, methodologies relying on fundamental principles of experimental pharmacology can provide the clinical pharmacologist with powerful tools to measure accurately degree of antagonism and time kinetics and to investigate the nature of receptor antagonism in humans.

Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of angiotensin receptor blockade in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE

To compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of angiotensin II receptor antagonists as a therapeutic class.

DESIGN

Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling study.

METHODS

The data of 14 phase I studies with 10 different drugs were analysed. A common population pharmacokinetic model (two compartments, mixed zero- and first-order absorption, two metabolite compartments) was applied to the 2685 drug and 900 metabolite concentration measurements. A standard nonlinear mixed effect modelling approach was used to estimate the drug-specific parameters and their variabilities. Similarly, a pharmacodynamic model was applied to the 7360 effect measurements, i.e. the decrease of peak blood pressure response to intravenous angiotensin challenge recorded by finger photoplethysmography. The concentration of drug and metabolite in an effect compartment was assumed to translate into receptor blockade [maximum effect (Emax) model with first-order link].

RESULTS

A general pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model for angiotensin antagonism in healthy individuals was successfully built up for the 10 drugs studied. Representatives of this class share different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Their effects on blood pressure are dose-dependent, but the time course of the effect varies between the drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

The characterisation of PK-PD relationships for these drugs gives the opportunity to optimise therapeutic regimens and to suggest dosage adjustments in specific conditions. Such a model can be used to further refine the use of this class of drugs.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of candesartan

Candesartan cilexetil is the prodrug of candesartan, an angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonist. Absorbed candesartan cilexetil is completely metabolised to candesartan. Oral bioavailability is low (about 40%) because of incomplete absorption. Plasma protein binding in humans is more than 99%. The volume of distribution in healthy individuals is 0.13 L/kg. CV-15959 is the inactive metabolite of candesartan. Candesartan that reaches the systemic circulation is mainly cleared by the kidneys, and to a smaller extent by the biliary or intestinal route. The apparent oral clearance of candesartan is 0.25 L/h/kg after a single dose in healthy individuals. Oral clearance (3.4 to 28.4 L/h) is highly variable among patients. No relevant pharmacokinetic drug-food or drug-drug interactions are known. The terminal elimination half-life remains unclear, but appears to be longer than the currently used range of 4 to 9 hours. Non-compartmental models do not appear to be appropriate for the analysis of candesartan pharmacokinetic data. A 2-compartment analysis revealed a much longer half-life of 29 hours using data from patients with hypertension. However, a further indepth analysis has never been performed. The concentration-effect relationship is unaffected by age. No gender or race differences have been shown in the effect or pharmacokinetics of candesartan. Renal function affects the pharmacokinetic profile of candesartan. For patients with creatinine clearances of >60 ml/min x 1.73m(2), 30 to 60 ml/min x 1.73m(2) and 15 to 30 ml/min x 1.73m(2), the elimination half-life is 7.1, 10.0 and 15.7 hours, respectively, at a dose of 8 mg/day. However, at 12 mg/day an accumulation factor of 1.71 was found. Thus, a maximum daily dose of up to 8mg appears suitable in patients with severe renal dysfunction. No significant elimination of candesartan occurs with haemodialysis. In patients with mild to moderate hepatic impairment, no relevant pharmacokinetic alterations have been observed. Dosages of up to 12 mg/day do not require precautions in patients with mild to moderate liver disease. Clinically effective dosages range between 8 and 32 mg/day. The response rate of monotherapy with candesartan in patients with hypertension increases with dosage, but never exceeds 60% at a daily dosage of 16mg of candesartan. Dosages up to 32 mg/day do not increase this response rate.

Pharmacodynamic studies on the angiotensin II type 1 antagonists irbesartan and candesartan based on angiotensin II dose response in humans

The in vivo effects of two unsurmountable angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) antagonists, irbesartan (150 mg) and candesartan (8 mg), were studied in a double-blind, randomized, crossover study in 18 healthy men. The drugs' direct vascular effects were assessed as the rightward shift (dose ratio - 1) of angiotensin dose-effect curves on diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Renal and adrenal effects were assessed by plasma renin activity (PRA), aldosterone concentrations, and antagonistic concentration equivalents (n x Ki) in a radioligand rat lung receptor assay. Both drugs exerted similar substantial (> 30-fold) and long-lasting (> 2-fold 47 h after dosing) rightward shifts of the angiotensin II dose effect declining with half-lives of 15 h irbesartan and 12 h candesartan, respectively. Dose ratio - 1 versus n x Ki showed a linear relationship in Schild regression plots; both drugs increased PRA, decreased DBP, and suppressed aldosterone. The slopes of linear relationship between angiotensin antagonism (dose ratio - 1) and PRA increase were almost threefold steeper (p = 0.005) following irbesartan as compared with candesartan. The findings suggest that for the same degree of angiotensin II antagonism, irbesartan produces a greater increase in PRA than candesartan. These pharmacodynamic differences warrant further investigation and clarification.

Pharmacological differences among angiotensin II receptor antagonists

Angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonists (AIIRAs) have demonstrated efficacy similar to other classes of antihypertensive agents as well as "placebo-level" tolerability at all doses. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies provide a framework for understanding important intra-class dissimilarities. Disparity in antagonistic effects may be determined by in vivo responses to challenges of exogenous angiotensin II (Ang II) and by ex vivo/in vitro responses to a drug's biological activity by radioligand receptor assay (RRA). Two independent studies have been conducted in which irbesartan exhibited a more pronounced and longer-lasting antagonism to the effects of exogenous Ang II than losartan and valsartan. Comparative trials have indicated that both irbesartan and candesartan show greater clinical efficacy in lowering blood pressure than losartan. Recently, we have compared the Ang II antagonistic properties of irbesartan 150 mg/day and candesartan 8 mg/day. Both drugs block AT1 receptors with "insurmountable" antagonism and demonstrate a long duration of action. While both irbesartan and candesartan showed a similar degree of antagonistic activity in vivo, distinctly higher antagonistic activity in plasma was found for irbesartan by RRA at all time-points. Furthermore, plasma renin activity during periods with high antagonistic activity was significantly higher, and aldosterone levels following Ang II stimulation were blunted to a greater extent, following administration of irbesartan. In summary, in the doses tested, irbesartan exhibits the strongest antagonism when compared with losartan, valsartan and candesartan. This finding may have clinical implications.

Inhibitory effect of telmisartan on the blood pressure response to angiotensin II challenge

Telmisartan is a new angiotensin receptor antagonist possessing potent, selective, and insurmountable inhibitory activity specific to the angiotensin II type 1 (AT 1 ) receptor. The current study was performed to determine the inhibition of the angiotensin II pressor response by telmisartan in 48 healthy volunteers challenged with hypertension-inducing doses of i.v. angiotensin II. Subjects were challenged with this dose of angiotensin II at intervals between 0.25 and 48 h after double-blind single-dose oral administration of telmisartan 20 mg (n = 12), 40 mg (n = 12), or 80 mg (n = 12) or placebo (n = 12) in parallel groups. Diastolic and systolic blood pressure and pulse rate were recorded continuously using a servophotoplethysmograph. Urine samples were collected during the study for urinalysis. Tolerability of telmisartan, in comparison with placebo, was also monitored throughout the study. Telmisartan 20-80 mg dose dependently inhibited the increase in diastolic and systolic blood pressure induced by angiotensin II. Telmisartan 40 mg produced 80.1% maximum inhibition, and with 80 mg 89.6% maximum inhibition of diastolic blood pressure was achieved. Inhibition was apparent after 0.3-1.1 h and was still observed 48 h after administration for all telmisartan doses. The inhibitory effect of telmisartan 20, 40, and 80 mg, 48 h after dosing was significantly greater than that of placebo. A > 25% inhibition of the angiotensin II response on diastolic blood pressure was detected until 26.9, 35.4, and 40.5 h, respectively, after telmisartan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg. Anti-clockwise hysteresis was observed, indicating a delay and longer persistence of effect than to be expected from the plasma concentration-time course. The slow dissociation of telmisartan from the receptor probably contributed to this hysteresis. The incidence of adverse events was comparable in telmisartan-and placebo-treated subjects and was not dose dependent. In conclusion, telmisartan 40 mg provides rapid-onset, well-tolerated, and near-maximal inhibition of angiotensin II-induced hypertension, with maintenance of the inhibitory effect for 48 h.

Do saw palmetto extracts block human alpha1-adrenoceptor subtypes in vivo?

BACKGROUND

To test whether saw palmetto extracts, which act as alpha1-adrenoceptor antagonists in vitro, also do so in vivo in man.

METHODS

In a placebo-controlled, double-blind, four-way cross-over study 12 healthy young men were treated with three different saw palmetto extract preparations (320 mg o.d.) for 8 days each. On the last day, before and 2, 4 and 6 hr after drug intake blood pressure and heart rate were determined and blood samples obtained, which were used in an ex vivo radioreceptor assay with cloned human alpha1-adrenoceptor subtypes.

RESULTS

Saw palmetto extract treatment did not result in alpha1-adrenoceptor subtype occupancy in the radioreceptor assay. Although the saw palmetto extracts caused minor reductions of supine blood pressure, they did not affect blood pressure during orthostatic stress testing and did not alter heart rate under either condition. Moreover, plasma catecholamines remained largely unaltered.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their alpha1-adrenoceptor antagonist effects in vitro, therapeutically used doses of saw palmetto extracts do not cause alpha1-adrenoceptor antagonism in man in vivo.

The pharmacological potency of various AT(1) antagonists assessed by Schild regression technique in man

RATIONALE

A quantitative technique was used to compare the pharmacological potency in healthy volunteers of angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AIIA): candesartan cilexetil, losartan, irbesartan, valsartan, and telmisartan.

METHODS

In a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group (4x12 subjects) study, single oral doses of candesartan cilexetil 4, 8 and 16 mg, losartan potassium 25, 50 and 100 mg, valsartan 40, 80 and 160 mg, and irbesartan 75, 150 and 300 mg were administered on three consecutive days. Telmisartan 20, 40 and 80 mg was similarly evaluated in 12 volunteers in an open amendment. Angiotensin II (Ang II) antagonistic effects were determined in vivo from rightward shifts in Ang II dose-response curves for diastolic blood pressure (BP) and dose ratios were calculated. Apparent K(i)-doses, i.e. doses (in mg) required to induce a two-fold shift in Ang II dose-response curves (equivalent to approx. 50% blockade of receptors) were determined, using Schild regression analysis.

RESULTS

All treatments dose-dependently attenuated increases in diastolic BP induced by infusion of exogenous Ang II. Candesartan cilexetil appeared to have a more pronounced increase in effect following cumulative dosing. At 24 hours, apparent K(i)-doses were: candesartan cilexetil 6 mg, irbesartan 123 mg, valsartan 93.5 mg, and telmisartan 54 mg. It was not possible to determine an apparent K(i)-dose for losartan at 24 hours.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with results from experimental pharmacology, candesartan cilexetil displayed the highest pharmacological potency (i.e. antagonistic activity per mg substance) of the AIIAs tested. Apparent K(i)-doses at 24 hours were within the dose range recommended for clinical use in patients with hypertension.

Comparative pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of candesartan and losartan in man

The angiotensin II antagonistic effects of candesartan and losartan were compared in-vivo after single and repeated doses. Effects were related to antagonistic activity in plasma. In this double-blind, crossover study, 12 healthy male volunteers received, in random order, daily oral doses of 8 mg candesartan cilexetil or 50 mg losartan for seven days. On day 1 and day 8, dynamics and kinetics were assessed up to 48 h after dosing. Antagonistic effect was determined from the antagonist-induced rightward shifts of the diastolic blood pressure response curves to exogenously administered angiotensin II measured as the dose ratio (DR). The antagonistic activity in plasma was measured using an ex-vivo/in-vitro radioreceptor assay. Specific high-performance liquid chromatography assays determined plasma concentrations of candesartan, losartan and its active metabolite EXP-3174. The pharmacokinetic properties of candesartan and losartan were comparable and antagonistic activity in plasma almost identical (ratio candesartan: losartan = 0.97 and 1-2 after single and multiple doses, respectively). However, the antagonistic effects of candesartan and losartan in-vivo were quite different. Twenty-four hours after single dosing with candesartan a clinically relevant rightward shift in the angiotensin II dose-response curve (DR= 3.2) occurred that was more pronounced than that following losartan administration (DR=2.1, ratio candesartan: losartan= 1.65). Twenty-four hours after multiple doses of candesartan or losartan, the values of the DR were 4.8 and 2.3, respectively (ratio candesartan: losartan = 1.94). The values of DR for candesartan were significantly higher compared with losartan between 6 and 36h after a single dose and between 3 and 24 h post-dose following multiple dose administration. A counter-clockwise hysteresis was apparent between antagonistic activity in plasma and antagonistic effect. Despite equivalent angiotensin II antagonistic activity in plasma, the pharmacodynamic effect of candesartan cilexetil was greater than that of losartan. Candesartan appeared to have a slower off-rate from the angiotensin AT1-receptor compared with losartan, nevertheless differences in distributional phenomena or the extent of insurmountable antagonistic activity cannot be ruled out.

Candesartan cilexetil: an angiotensin II receptor blocker

OBJECTIVE

To summarize and critique the medical literature on candesartan cilexetil, an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE searches (January 1966-January 1999) and manufacturer prescribing literature were used to identify articles on candesartan cilexetil. Bibliographies were also reviewed for germane articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Study and review articles describing the chemistry, human pharmacology, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, placebo-controlled trials, comparative trials, and clinical application of candesartan cilexetil based on the published literature and premarketing clinical trials were reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

All literature on the use of candesartan cilexetil for treating hypertension and congestive heart failure were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

ARBs are a new class of drugs with increasing use in treating hypertension. Studies are ongoing to determine the role of these agents in preventing remodeling after myocardial infarction and in patients with congestive heart failure. Candesartan cilexetil is among the newest drugs in the class that includes losartan, irbesartan, and valsartan. Candesartan cilexetil has more than 1000 times more affinity for the angiotensin II, type AT1 receptor ARBs, and the binding affinity and competitive angiotensin II receptor antagonism is stronger than that of losartan. Clinical studies in patients with hypertension have demonstrated that candesartan cilexetil, in doses of 4-16 mg, is more effective in reducing sitting diastolic blood pressure than are placebo and losartan 50 mg. Candesartan cilexetil has demonstrated reductions in blood pressure comparable to those of enalapril, with the rate of adverse events greater in the enalapril group. Dosage adjustments are not necessary in elderly patients or in patients with mild hepatic or renal dysfunction. In diabetic patients, blood glucose, hemoglobinA1c, and serum lipids are not affected. The clinical studies demonstrated that the adverse effect profile of candesartan cilexetil was similar to that of placebo and there were no dose-dependent adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Candesartan cilexetil provides an alternative antihypertensive therapy that is well tolerated and effective in reducing blood pressure in a wide range of patients. Due to its greater binding affinity to the angiotensin II receptor, candesartan cilexetil appears to have a longer antihypertensive effect than losartan. This may be advantageous in decreasing morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension, although further studies are required to validate this potential advantage.

Mechanistic differences of various AT1-receptor blockers in isolated vessels of different origin

The functional inhibitory characteristics of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARB) candesartan; irbesartan; and losartan and its active metabolite EXP 3174 (EXP) were studied in rabbit aortic strips and rat portal vein preparations in vitro. Moreover, plasma-protein binding was determined, and the binding was high (>98. 5%) for all ARBs. These values were needed to relate the concentrations of the ARBs used in vitro to the nonprotein bound concentrations in clinical use. In both vascular preparations, candesartan caused a marked decrease in the maximal contractile response of the angiotensin II (Ang II) concentration-response curve. Losartan, EXP, and irbesartan caused a rightward parallel shift without any major effects on the maximal response to Ang II. The inhibitory effect of candesartan developed slowly (maximal effect after >30 minutes) and lasted >2 hours despite repeated washing of the vessels. The effect of losartan, irbesartan, and EXP had a faster onset, and most of the inhibitory effect disappeared after washing. The duration of the inhibitory effects of the ARBs were not related to lipophilicity of the compounds. Cooling of the rat portal vein preparations to 4 degrees C before administration of candesartan prevented the persistent inhibition of Ang II response seen at 37 degrees C. For the other ARBs studied, the magnitude of inhibition and the speed of recovery of the Ang II response were independent of the incubation temperature before washing. In addition, when candesartan was given to conscious rats, the inhibitory effect on Ang II-induced blood pressure responses persisted during the 24-hour period despite nondetectable plasma concentrations of candesartan at 24 hours. It is concluded that functional inhibitory characteristics of candesartan differ from those of the other ARBs tested. At clinically relevant concentrations, candesartan is an insurmountable and long-lasting antagonist of the vascular contractile responses to Ang II.

Angiotensin II receptor blockade in normotensive subjects: A direct comparison of three AT1 receptor antagonists

Use of angiotensin (Ang) II AT1 receptor antagonists for treatment of hypertension is rapidly increasing, yet direct comparisons of the relative efficacy of antagonists to block the renin-angiotensin system in humans are lacking. In this study, the Ang II receptor blockade induced by the recommended starting dose of 3 antagonists was evaluated in normotensive subjects in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 4-way crossover study. At 1-week intervals, 12 subjects received a single dose of losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg), irbesartan (150 mg), or placebo. Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system was assessed before and 4, 24, and 30 hours after drug intake by 3 independent methods: inhibition of the blood pressure response to exogenous Ang II, in vitro Ang II receptor assay, and reactive changes in plasma Ang II levels. At 4 hours, losartan blocked 43% of the Ang II-induced systolic blood pressure increase; valsartan, 51%; and irbesartan, 88% (P<0.01 between drugs). The effect of each drug declined with time. At 24 hours, a residual effect was found with all 3 drugs, but at 30 hours, only irbesartan induced a marked, significant blockade versus placebo. Similar results were obtained when Ang II receptor blockade was assessed with an in vitro receptor assay and by the reactive rise in plasma Ang II levels. This study thus demonstrates that the first administration of the recommended starting dose of irbesartan induces a greater and longer lasting Ang II receptor blockade than that of valsartan and losartan in normotensive subjects.

Candesartan cilexetil: comparison of once-daily versus twice-daily administration for systemic hypertension. Candesartan Cilexetil Study Investigators

This randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, forced-titration, parallel-arm study was designed to compare the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of candesartan cilexetil, a potent antagonist of the angiotensin II receptor subtype AT1, administered once daily with that of the same agent administered twice daily at the same total daily dose of 16 mg. After a 4- to 5-week placebo run-in period, 277 patients with a sitting diastolic BP of 95 to 109 mm Hg were randomly allocated to receive placebo (n = 92) or candesartan cilexetil 8 mg once daily for 4 weeks, followed by forced titration to either 16 mg once daily (n = 91) or 8 mg twice daily (n = 94) for 4 weeks. At 8 weeks, mean reductions in trough sitting diastolic BP were similar for the once- and twice-daily treatment groups (9.4 and 10.3 mm Hg, respectively). After 8 weeks of treatment, no statistically significant differences were observed in diastolic or systolic BP, peak or trough BP, or sitting or standing BP between the 2 active-treatment groups. The rates of positive responses (defined as a trough sitting diastolic BP of <90 mm Hg or a decrease in BP of > or =10 mm Hg) were also similar (approximately 60%) in the once- and twice-daily candesartan cilexetil groups. Furthermore, placebo-corrected trough-to-peak ratios for sitting diastolic BP exceeded 75% for both candesartan cilexetil regimens, indicating a persistent 24-hour duration of drug effect. Ambulatory BP monitoring performed in a subset of patients (n = 44) confirmed the consistent 24-hour BP-lowering effect and preservation of diurnal variation with once-daily dosing. No significant between-group differences were observed in the incidence or severity of clinical or laboratory adverse events. The results of this study suggest that identical daily doses of candesartan cilexetil administered once or twice daily have comparable efficacy and tolerability and that no additional clinical benefit is derived from twice-daily administration.