Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in human hypertension with irbesartan

Exploring Sex Differences of Beta-Blockers in the Treatment of Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIMS

In the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, early recognition and adequate treatment of hypertension are of leading importance. However, the efficacy of antihypertensives may be depending on sex disparities. Our objective was to evaluate and quantify the sex-diverse effects of beta-blockers (BB) on hypertension and cardiac function. We focussed on comparing hypertensive female versus male individuals.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic search was performed for studies on BBs from inception to May 2020. A total of 66 studies were included that contained baseline and follow up measurements on blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and cardiac function. Data also had to be stratified for sex. Mean differences were calculated using a random-effects model. In females as compared to males, BB treatment decreased systolic BP 11.1 mmHg (95% CI, -14.5; -7.8) vs. 11.1 mmHg (95% CI, -14.0; -8.2), diastolic BP 8.0 mmHg (95% CI, -10.6; -5.3) vs. 8.0 mmHg (95% CI, -10.1; -6.0), and HR 10.8 beats per minute (bpm) (95% CI, -17.4; -4.2) vs. 9.8 bpm (95% CI, -11.1; -8.4)), respectively, in both sexes' absolute and relative changes comparably. Left ventricular ejection fraction increased only in males (3.7% (95% CI, 0.6; 6.9)). Changes in left ventricular mass and cardiac output (CO) were only reported in males and changed -20.6 g (95% CI, -56.3; 15.1) and -0.1 L (95% CI, -0.5; 0.2), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BBs comparably lowered BP and HR in both sexes. The lack of change in CO in males suggests that the reduction in BP is primarily due to a decrease in vascular resistance. Furthermore, females were underrepresented compared to males. We recommend that future research should include more females and sex-stratified data when researching the treatment effects of antihypertensives.

Circadian rhythms of risk factors and management in atherosclerotic and hypertensive vascular disease: Modern chronobiological perspectives of an ancient disease

Atherosclerosis, a chronic inflammatory disease of the arteries that appears to have been as prevalent in ancient as in modern civilizations, is predisposing to life-threatening and life-ending cardiac and vascular complications, such as myocardial and cerebral infarctions. The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis involves intima plaque buildup caused by vascular endothelial dysfunction, cholesterol deposition, smooth muscle proliferation, inflammatory cell infiltration and connective tissue accumulation. Hypertension is an independent and controllable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Conversely, atherosclerosis hardens the arterial wall and raises arterial blood pressure. Many CVD patients experience both atherosclerosis and hypertension and are prescribed medications to concurrently mitigate the two disease conditions. A substantial number of publications document that many pathophysiological changes caused by atherosclerosis and hypertension occur in a manner dependent upon circadian clocks or clock gene products. This article reviews progress in the research of circadian regulation of vascular cell function, inflammation, hemostasis and atherothrombosis. In particular, it delineates the relationship of circadian organization with signal transduction and activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system as well as disturbance of the sleep/wake circadian rhythm, as exemplified by shift work, metabolic syndromes and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), as promoters and mechanisms of atherogenesis and risk for non-fatal and fatal CVD outcomes. This article additionally updates advances in the clinical management of key biological processes of atherosclerosis to optimally achieve suppression of atherogenesis through chronotherapeutic control of atherogenic/hypertensive pathological sequelae.

Can patiromer allow for intensified renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade with losartan and spironolactone leading to decreased albuminuria in patients with chronic kidney disease, albuminuria and hyperkalaemia? An open-label randomised controlled trial: MorphCKD

INTRODUCTION

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with significantly increased morbidity and mortality. No specific treatment of the underlying condition is available for the majority of patients, but ACE-inhibitors (ACE-I) and angiotensin II-receptor blockers (ARB) slows progression in albuminuric CKD. Adding a mineralocorticoid receptor-antagonist (MRA) like spironolactone has an additive effect. However, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS)-blockade increases the risk of hyperkalaemia which is exacerbated by the presence of CKD. Thus, hyperkalaemia may prevent optimal use of RAAS-blockade in some patients.This project hypothesises that adding a potassium binder (patiromer) allows for improved RAAS-blockade including the use of MRA, thereby reducing albuminuria in patients with albuminuric CKD where full treatment is limited by hyperkalaemia.If successful, the study may lead to improved treatment of this subgroup of patients with CKD. Furthermore, the study will examine the feasibility of potassium binders in patients with CKD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

An open-label, randomised controlled trial including 140 patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 25-60 mL/min/1.73 m², a urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) >500 mg/g (or 200 mg/g if diabetes mellitus) and a current or two previous plasma-potassium >4.5 mmol/L. Patients who develop hyperkaliaemia >5.5 mmol/L during a run-in phase, in which RAAS-blockade is intesified with the possible addition of spironolactone, are randomised to 12-month treatment with maximal tolerated ACE-I/ARB and spironolactone with or without patiromer.The primary endpoint is the difference in UACR measured at randomisation and 12 months compared between the two groups. Secondary endpoints include CKD progression, episodes of hyperkalaemia, blood pressure, eGFR, markers of cardiovascular disease, diet and quality of life.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is approved by The Central Denmark Region Committees on Health Research Ethics (REFNO 1-10-72-110-20) and is registered in the EudraCT database (REFNO 2020-001595-15). Results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals, at meetings and at international conferences.

The Impact of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System on Inflammation, Coagulation, and Atherothrombotic Complications, and to Aggravated COVID-19

Atherosclerosis is considered a disease caused by a chronic inflammation, associated with endothelial dysfunction, and several mediators of inflammation are up-regulated in subjects with atherosclerotic disease. Healthy, intact endothelium exhibits an antithrombotic, protective surface between the vascular lumen and vascular smooth muscle cells in the vessel wall. Oxidative stress is an imbalance between anti- and prooxidants, with a subsequent increase of reactive oxygen species, leading to tissue damage. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system is of vital importance in the pathobiology of vascular disease. Convincing data indicate that angiotensin II accelerates hypertension and augments the production of reactive oxygen species. This leads to the generation of a proinflammatory phenotype in human endothelial and vascular smooth muscle cells by the up-regulation of adhesion molecules, chemokines and cytokines. In addition, angiotensin II also seems to increase thrombin generation, possibly via a direct impact on tissue factor. However, the mechanism of cross-talk between inflammation and haemostasis can also contribute to prothrombotic states in inflammatory environments. Thus, blocking of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system might be an approach to reduce both inflammatory and thrombotic complications in high-risk patients. During COVID-19, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system may be activated. The levels of angiotensin II could contribute to the ongoing inflammation, which might result in a cytokine storm, a complication that significantly impairs prognosis. At the outbreak of COVID-19 concerns were raised about the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blocker drugs in patients with COVID-19 and hypertension or other cardiovascular comorbidities. However, the present evidence is in favor of continuing to use of these drugs. Based on experimental evidence, blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system might even exert a potentially protective influence in the setting of COVID-19.

High-sensitivity Troponin T in hemodialysis patients: a randomized placebo-controlled sub-study investigating angiotensin-II-blockade, variation over time and associations with clinical outcome

Background

Troponin T (TnT) is a well-known risk factor for negative outcome in hemodialysis (HD) patients, but little is known about variation over time, and the impact of clinical and dialysis specific factors. This study investigated the effect of angiotensin II receptor blockade (ARB), short and long-term variation in TnT and associations with clinical parameters.

Methods

In this analysis based on the SAFIR-cohort (Clinical Trials ID: NCT00791830) 81 HD patients were randomized double-blind for placebo (n = 40) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) treatment (n = 41) with irbesartan (150–300 mg) and followed for 12 months with six serial measurements of TnT using a high-sensitivity assay.

Results

Fifty-four patients (67%) completed follow-up. Baseline TnT-medians (min-max) were (placebo/ARB): 45(14–295)/46(10–343) ng/L. ARB-treatment did not significantly affect mean TnT-levels over the 12-month study period. Median week-to-week and one-year TnT-variation (5th–95th-percentile range) using all samples regardless of intervention were: 0(− 14–10) ng/L (week-to-week) and 3(− 40–71) ng/L (12 months). Median TnT-amplitude, capturing the change from the lowest to the highest TnT-value observed during the one-year study period was 38% or 20.5 ng/L. Median ratios with 95% limits of agreement were: 1.00(0.73–1.37); P = 0.92 (1 week/baseline; n = 77) and 1.07(0.52–2.25); P = 0.19 (12 months/baseline; n = 54). Baseline TnT was positively correlated with diabetes, ultrafiltration volume, arterial stiffness, change in intradialytic total peripheral resistance and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and negatively correlated with hematocrit, residual renal function and change in intradialytic cardiac output. High baseline TnT was associated with a higher risk of admission and cardiovascular (CV) events during follow-up. Increase in TnT over time (ΔTnT = 12-months-baseline) was significantly associated with increase in left ventricular (LV) mass and NT-proBNP and decrease in LV ejection fraction and late intradialytic stroke volume. ΔTnT was not significantly associated with admissions, CV or intradialytic hypotensive events during follow-up. Admissions were significantly more likely with a high (TnT-amplitude> 20.5 ng/L) than a low TnT-amplitude. Peaks in TnT were less frequent in aspirin-treated patients.

Conclusion

ARB-treatment had no significant effect on TnT-levels. Week-to-week variation was generally low, yet over 12 months individual patients had considerable TnT fluctuations. Rise in TnT over time was significantly correlated with markers of cardiac deterioration.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00791830. Date of registration: November 17, 2008. EudraCT no: 2008–001267-11.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12882-020-02103-1.

Left ventricular hypertrophy and hypertension

Hypertension (HTN) is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. The left ventricle (LV) is a primary target for HTN end-organ damage. In addition to being a marker of HTN, LV geometrical changes: concentric remodeling, concentric or eccentric LV hypertrophy (LVH) are major independent risk factors for not only CVD morbidity and mortality but also for all-cause mortality and neurological pathologies. Blood pressure control with lifestyle changes and antihypertensive agents has been demonstrated to prevent and regress LVH. Herein, we provide a comprehensive review of literature on the relationship between HTN and LV geometry abnormalities with a focus on diagnosis, prognosis, pathophysiological mechanisms, and treatment approaches.

Hypertensive Heart Disease and Obesity: A Review

Metabolic syndrome is an increasingly prevalent constellation of disease processes among the global population. Hypertension and obesity are among the contributing etiologies, and obesity increases the likelihood of hypertensive heart disease by creating a proinflammatory state, as well as increasing sympathetic tone and formation of reactive oxygen species. Hypertensive heart disease is characterized by myocardial fibrosis, which portends higher risk of developing reduced ejection fraction, diastolic dysfunction, ischemia, and arrhythmias, making early diagnosis and treatment essential to the prevention of cardiac events.

First-line drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system versus other first-line antihypertensive drug classes for hypertension

BACKGROUND

This is the first update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015. Renin angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors include angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and renin inhibitors. They are widely prescribed for treatment of hypertension, especially for people with diabetes because of postulated advantages for reducing diabetic nephropathy and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite widespread use for hypertension, the efficacy and safety of RAS inhibitors compared to other antihypertensive drug classes remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of first-line RAS inhibitors compared to other first-line antihypertensive drugs in people with hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Group Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to November 2017: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded studies (RCTs) with at least six months follow-up in people with elevated blood pressure (≥ 130/85 mmHg), which compared first-line RAS inhibitors with other first-line antihypertensive drug classes and reported morbidity and mortality or blood pressure outcomes. We excluded people with proven secondary hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risks of bias and entered the data for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes three new RCTs, totaling 45 in all, involving 66,625 participants, with a mean age of 66 years. Much of the evidence for our key outcomes is dominated by a small number of large RCTs at low risk for most sources of bias. Imbalances in the added second-line antihypertensive drugs in some of the studies were important enough for us to downgrade the quality of the evidence.Primary outcomes were all-cause death, fatal and non-fatal stroke, fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal and non-fatal congestive heart failure (CHF) requiring hospitalizations, total cardiovascular (CV) events (fatal and non-fatal stroke, fatal and non-fatal MI and fatal and non-fatal CHF requiring hospitalization), and end-stage renal failure (ESRF). Secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR).Compared with first-line calcium channel blockers (CCBs), we found moderate-certainty evidence that first-line RAS inhibitors decreased heart failure (HF) (35,143 participants in 5 RCTs, risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.90, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.2%), and that they increased stroke (34,673 participants in 4 RCTs, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32, absolute risk increase (ARI) 0.7%). Moderate-certainty evidence showed that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line CCBs did not differ for all-cause death (35,226 participants in 5 RCTs, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.09); total CV events (35,223 participants in 6 RCTs, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02); and total MI (35,043 participants in 5 RCTs, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.09). Low-certainty evidence suggests they did not differ for ESRF (19,551 participants in 4 RCTs, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05).Compared with first-line thiazides, we found moderate-certainty evidence that first-line RAS inhibitors increased HF (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.31, ARI 1.0%), and increased stroke (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.28, ARI 0.6%). Moderate-certainty evidence showed that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line thiazides did not differ for all-cause death (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07); total CV events (24,379 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11); and total MI (24,379 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01). Low-certainty evidence suggests they did not differ for ESRF (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.37).Compared with first-line beta-blockers, low-certainty evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors decreased total CV events (9239 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98, ARR 1.7%), and decreased stroke (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.88, ARR 1.7% ). Low-certainty evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line beta-blockers did not differ for all-cause death (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01); HF (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18); and total MI (9239 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.27).Blood pressure comparisons between first-line RAS inhibitors and other first-line classes showed either no differences or small differences that did not necessarily correlate with the differences in the morbidity outcomes.There is no information about non-fatal serious adverse events, as none of the trials reported this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All-cause death is similar for first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line CCBs, thiazides and beta-blockers. There are, however, differences for some morbidity outcomes. First-line thiazides caused less HF and stroke than first-line RAS inhibitors. First-line CCBs increased HF but decreased stroke compared to first-line RAS inhibitors. The magnitude of the increase in HF exceeded the decrease in stroke. Low-quality evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors reduced stroke and total CV events compared to first-line beta-blockers. The small differences in effect on blood pressure between the different classes of drugs did not correlate with the differences in the morbidity outcomes.

Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering on Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Patients With Hypertension: SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial)

BACKGROUND

It is currently unknown whether intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering beyond that recommended would lead to more lowering of the risk of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with hypertension and whether reducing the risk of LVH explains the reported cardiovascular disease (CVD) benefits of intensive BP lowering in this population.

METHODS

This analysis included 8164 participants (mean age, 67.9 years; 35.3% women; 31.2% blacks) with hypertension but no diabetes mellitus from the SPRINT trial (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial): 4086 randomly assigned to intensive BP lowering (target SBP <120 mm Hg) and 4078 assigned to standard BP lowering (target SBP <140 mm Hg). Progression and regression of LVH as defined by Cornell voltage criteria derived from standard 12-lead ECGs recorded at baseline and biannually were compared between treatment arms during a median follow-up of 3.81 years. The effect of intensive (versus standard) BP lowering on the SPRINT primary CVD outcome (a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, and CVD death) was compared before and after adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate.

RESULTS

Among SPRINT participants without baseline LVH (n=7559), intensive (versus standard) BP lowering was associated with a 46% lower risk of developing LVH (hazard ratio=0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.68). Similarly, among SPRINT participants with baseline LVH (n=605, 7.4%), those assigned to the intensive (versus standard) BP lowering were 66% more likely to regress/improve their LVH (hazard ratio=1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-2.11). Adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate did not substantially attenuate the effect of intensive BP therapy on CVD events (hazard ratio of intensive versus standard BP lowering on CVD, 0.76 [95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.90] and 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.91] before and after adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with hypertension but no diabetes mellitus, intensive BP lowering (target systolic BP <120 mm Hg) compared with standard BP lowering (target systolic BP <140 mm Hg) resulted in lower rates of developing new LVH in those without LVH and higher rates of regression of LVH in those with existing LVH. This favorable effect on LVH did not explain most of the reduction in CVD events associated with intensive BP lowering in the SPRINT trial.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy by a candesartan-based regimen in clinical practice The VIPE study

The VIPE study was a prospective, non-comparative, open-label clinical evaluation of 97 hypertensive patients (69.1% female; 68.9±9.5 years; mean blood pressure (BP) 160±12/90±9 mmHg) with echocardiographic evidence of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Patients were treated for six months with a candesartan-based regimen (8 mg/16 mg + HCTZ 12.5 mg + additional drugs to lower BP < 140/90 mmHg). After six months, systolic/diastolic BP was decreased by 19.3±8/9.4±5 mmHg (p<0.001 for both), and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) decreased 17.01 g/m2 (95%CI: -13.2 to -20.99; p<0.001). During treatment with the candesartan-based regimen all echocardiographic parameters related to LVMI were significantly reduced and 28% achieved a target LVMI [< 134 g/m2 (men) and < 110 g/m2 (women) ]. No significant changes were observed in ejection fraction, shortening fraction or LV diastolic function. Univariate analysis showed that both age (p=0.03) and diabetes (p=0.029) were predictive of LVH regression.

Thus, a candesartan-based regimen for six months significantly reduced echocardiographic LVH in hypertensive patients in general practice. The drug was very well tolerated and no serious adverse events were reported.

Review: From Hypertension to Heart Failure — Are There Better Primary Prevention Strategies?

Although in the developed world the incidence of and mortality from coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke have been declining over the last 15 years, heart failure is increasing in incidence, prevalence and overall mortality, despite advances in the diagnosis and management of the condition. Hypertension, alone or in combination with CHD, precedes the development of heart failure in the majority of both men and women. Whilst there have been improvements in the overall management of hypertension, as reflected in rates of diagnosis, awareness, treatment and control of blood pressure (BP), there are still many patients with hypertension who remain undiagnosed or untreated and of those who do receive treatment many fail to achieve current targets for BP control. Placebo controlled trials in hypertension, largely based on diuretic and beta-blocker-based regimens, have unequivocally demonstrated that the treatment of hypertension can significantly reduce the incidence of heart failure. Newer treatment strategies offer theoretical and proven practical advantages over established antihypertensive therapy. In particular, AT1-receptor blockers appear to provide benefits beyond BP control and are effective in the treatment of both hypertension and heart failure. Thus, the primary prevention of heart failure in hypertensive patients should be based upon strategies that provide tight and sustained BP control necessitating the use of multiple drugs. However, there is now compelling evidence to suggest that this therapy should include an antihypertensive agent that inhibits the reninangiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS).

Left Ventricular Hypertrophy – the Problem and Possible Solutions

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), which describes pathological changes in cardiac structure, is a powerful and reversible predictor of cardiovascular risk. There is a continuous relationship between left ventricular mass (LVM) and the likelihood of cardiovascular events, with no cut-off between the absence of such events and heightened risk. A correlation between LVH and blood pressure is well established. There is a paradox, however, that the structural changes to the heart as a result of increased workload due to high blood pressure appear to promote cardiovascular disease. This may be partially explained by the fact that ambulatory blood pressure measurements correlate more closely with LVH than resting blood pressure. Blood pressure variation throughout the day is also emerging as an important correlate of LVH, and a strong association has been identified between an early morning rise in blood pressure and increased LVM. Use of anti-hypertensive agents not only lowers blood pressure, but can also bring about LVH regression. The pathological role of angiotensin II in LVH and target-organ damage within the cardiovascular continuum suggest that agents targeting the renin – angiotensin - aldosterone system (RAAS), such as the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers, may prove particularly effective and may confer beneficial effects in addition to the lowering of blood pressure. The angiotensin II receptor blockers may be very appropriate treatment options because of their placebo-like tolerability and the possibility of more complete blockade of the RAAS. Within this class of anti-hypertensive agents, pharmacological differences may mean that some agents afford greater cardioprotection than others.

Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering on Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure Trial

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is a common complication of hypertension. Regression of LVH is achievable by sustained lowering of systolic blood pressure (BP). However, it is unknown whether a strategy aimed at lowering BP beyond that recommended would lower the risk of LVH. We examined the effect of intensive (systolic BP<120 mm Hg), compared with standard (systolic BP<140 mm Hg), BP lowering on the risk of LVH in 4331 patients with diabetes mellitus from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) BP trial, a randomized controlled trial. The outcome measures were electrocardiographic LVH defined by Cornell voltage (binary variable) and mean Cornell index (continuous variable). The baseline prevalence of LVH (5.3% versus 5.4%; P=0.91) and the mean Cornell index (1456 versus 1470 µV; P=0.45) were similar in the intensive (n=2154) and standard (n=2177) BP-lowering arms, respectively. However, after median follow-up of 4.4 years, intensive, compared with standard, BP lowering was associated with a 39% lower risk of LVH (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.61[0.43, 0.88]; P=0.008) and a significantly lower adjusted mean Cornell index (1352 versus 1447 µV; P<0.001). The lower risk of LVH associated with intensive BP lowering during follow-up was because of more regression of baseline LVH and lower rate of developing new LVH, compared with standard BP lowering. No interactions by age, sex, or race were observed. These results provide evidence that targeting a systolic BP of <120 mm Hg when compared with <140 mm Hg in patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus produces a greater reduction in LVH.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000620.

ARBs and target organ protection

Recognition of the role of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in initiating and maintaining hypertension prompted the development of drugs that disrupt the RAAS, notably the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and, more recently, the angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). This article focuses on the use of ARBs in hypertension management and reviews evidence emerging from clinical trials that ARBs offer target organ protection over and above their antihypertensive activity.

The cost-effectiveness of irbesartan for hypertension

High blood pressure is a very common problem in the adult and elderly population, both in developed and developing countries. A relatively large number of drug classes are available to treat this condition and prevent its complications, which are not only more frequent in the aforementioned patients but also those affected by metabolic syndrome and/or Type 2 diabetes. Irbesartan is an angiotensin-receptor blocker class drug with good antihypertensive efficacy and specific pharmacological characteristics, whose efficacy has been more deeply evaluated in metabolically complex hypertensive patients. In this review, the authors will analyze its effectiveness in preventing or delaying organ damage in hypertensive patients, with a closer look at the economic implications of treating hypertension with irbesartan in the context of available antihypertensive drugs.

Markers of inflammation, endothelial activation, and arterial stiffness in hypertensive heart disease and the effects of treatment: results from the SILVHIA study

We assessed the contribution of blood pressure (BP), inflammation, and endothelial activation to the development of structural vascular and cardiac changes in hypertension. Furthermore, the effects of antihypertensive therapy were studied. We studied 114 patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy and 38 matched hypertensive subjects without cardiac hypertrophy and 38 normotensive subjects. The group with hypertension and cardiac hypertrophy were randomized to treatment with an angiotensin receptor blocker (irbesartan) or a beta-adrenergic receptor blocker (atenolol) for 48 weeks. Markers of inflammation (high-sensitive C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, leukocyte counts), vascular function (ambulatory aortic stiffness index, arterial compliance, and pulse pressure), and endothelial activation (E-selectin, intracellular adhesion molecule-1, vascular adhesion molecule-1) were assessed. Markers of inflammation and arterial stiffness were lowest in the normotensive group and highest in patients with hypertensive heart disease; endothelial markers were similar between groups. Inflammation was independently related to BP. Markers of arterial stiffness were independently related to BP and to a lesser extent to left ventricular mass. Antihypertensive treatment improved arterial compliance; inflammatory and endothelial markers remained unchanged. In conclusion, markers of inflammation and arterial stiffness are independently related to BP. Antihypertensive therapy seems to improve arterial stiffness, but effects on markers of inflammation and endothelial activation are small.

Antihypertensive strategy based on angiotensin II receptor blockers: a new gateway to reduce risk in hypertension

Effective treatment of high blood pressure levels represents a key strategy for reducing global cardiovascular risk. Other factors, beyond blood pressure control, however, appear to be of potential relevance in reducing the risk related to hypertension. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated that those pharmacological agents that counteract the renin-angiotensin system may confer additional clinical benefits across the spectrum of cardiovascular disease, beyond their blood pressure-lowering properties. These studies are largely based on the use of an antihypertensive strategy, based on the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and low-dose thiazide diuretics or calcium channel blockers. Over the last few decades, clinical trials have also tested the potential effects of combination therapy based on the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or ARBs and other renin-angiotensin system-blocking agents, including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and, more recently, renin inhibitors. This review highlights the evidence derived from recent clinical trials, supporting a role for pharmacological strategies based on ARBs in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and renal disease.

AT1receptor antagonism in hypertension: what has been learned with irbesartan?

Irbesartan is a long-acting angiotensin II antagonist acting specifically at the level of the Type 1-receptor subtype (AT1-receptor). This compound lowers blood pressure dose-dependently in hypertensive patients and has a placebo-like tolerability. The antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan is greatly enhanced by the coadministration of a diuretic, and fixed-dose combinations of irbesartan and hydrochlorothiazide are now available. Irbesartan-based treatment appears especially effective for high-risk patients, such as those with diabetes, renal disease and cardiac hypertrophy. In patients with Type 2 diabetes, irbesartan delays the development of nephropathy as well as the progression of renal failure. Irbesartan may have antiatherosclerotic properties beyond those expected from blood pressure lowering per se: this AT1-blocker decreases the vascular oxidative stress and prevents the procoagulant as well as the pro-inflammatory effects of angiotensin II. Irbesartan given alone or in combination with a diuretic therefore represents a rational approach to treat hypertensive patients.

Comprehensive overview: efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of irbesartan

Background

Hypertension represents a major health problem, affecting more than one billion adults worldwide. Irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, is considered to be a highly effective treatment in the management of hypertension. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability profile , and cost-effectiveness of treatment with irbesartan in hypertension.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted using the electronic PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and the Health Economic Evaluations Database of search terms relating to irbesartan efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness, and the results were utilized.

Results

Findings from the present analysis show that irbesartan either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents can achieve significant reductions in blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic, compared with alternative treatment options. Irbesartan was also found to have a renoprotective effect independent of its blood pressure-lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Furthermore, irbesartan demonstrated an excellent safety and tolerability profile , with either lower or equal adverse events compared with placebo and other alternative treatments. In terms of economic analyses, compared with other antihypertensive therapy alternatives, irbesartan was found to be a preferred option, that is less costly and more effective.

Conclusion

The evidence indicates that treating patients with hypertension alone or with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy using irbesartan can control hypertension, prolong life, and reduce costs in relation to existing alternatives.

Lack of reduction of left ventricular mass in treated hypertension: the strong heart study

Background

Hypertensive left ventricular mass (LVM) is expected to decrease during antihypertensive therapy, based on results of clinical trials.

Methods and Results

We assessed 4‐year change of echocardiographic LVM in 851 hypertensive free‐living participants of the Strong Heart Study (57% women, 81% treated). Variations of 5% or more of the initial systolic blood pressure (SBP) and LVM were categorized for analysis. At baseline, 23% of men and 36% of women exhibited LV hypertrophy (LVH, P<0.0001). At the follow‐up, 3% of men and 10% of women had regression of LVH (P<0.0001 between genders); 14% of men and 15% of women, free of baseline LVH, developed LVH. There was an increase in LVM over time, more in men than in women (P<0.001). Participants whose LVM did not decrease had similar baseline SBP and diastolic BP, but higher body mass index (BMI), waist/hip ratio, heart rate (all P<0.008), and urinary albumin/creatinine excretion (P<0.001) than those whose LVM decreased. After adjusting for field center, initial LVM index, target BP, and kinship degree, lack of decrease in LVM was predicted by higher baseline BMI and urinary albumin/creatinine excretion, independently of classes of antihypertensive medications, and significant effects of older age, male gender, and percentage increase in BP over time. Similar findings were obtained in the subpopulation (n=526) with normal BP at follow‐up.

Conclusions

In a free‐living population, higher BMI is associated with less reduction of hypertensive LVH; lack of reduction of LVM is independent of BP control and of types of antihypertensive treatment, but is associated with renal damage.

Angiotensin receptor blockers reduce left ventricular hypertrophy in dialysis patients: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is a major cardiovascular complication and an important predictor of mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease. Angiotensin II blockades have been widely used in the treatment of hypertension; however, the influence of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on LVH in dialysis patients has not been thoroughly studied. In this meta-analysis, the authors analyzed the effect of ARBs on LVH and left ventricular function in patients on maintenance dialysis.

METHODS

The authors did systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, until November 2010. Data extracted from the literature were analyzed with the Review Manager.

RESULTS

The results of 6 randomized controlled trials (207 participants) reveal that ARB group had a greater regression of left ventricular mass index (LVMi) when compared with non-ARB group (P = 0.002) in dialysis patients while no significant difference for left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; P = 0.30). The ARB group had a nonsignificantly greater therapeutic value of LVMi or LVEF when compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI; P = 0.74 and 0.49, respectively). No significant alterations were observed in LVMi and LVEF between the combination of ARBs and ACEIs and ARBs group (P = 0.43 and 0.24, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

ARBs are associated with a greater reduction in LVH in patients on dialysis. The ARB therapy tends to have a similar favorable effectiveness as ACEI; however, the combination of ARBs with ACEIs did not show additional benefit to LVH in patients on hemodialysis.

The role of irbesartan in the treatment of patients with hypertension: a comprehensive and practical review

Irbesartan is an orally active angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist (angiotensin receptor blocker [ARB]) whose pharmacological profile differs significantly from those of many other compounds of the same class. In particular, according to its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, irbesartan has a high bioavailability, a long duration of action and a small potential for pharmacological interactions due to the nature of the enzymatic pathway involved in its metabolic process. Morbidity data with irbesartan have been mainly accumulated in patients with renal impairment where the drug has demonstrated the most remarkable evidence of efficacy among the ARBs class, regardless of the stage of the renal disease (from early to late) and the length of the observational period. The efficacy of irbesartan has also been demonstrated in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and congestive heart failure. The drug is indicated for the treatment of hypertension and renal impairment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) and hypertension, and its tolerability and safety profile have been extensively investigated and reported to be similar to placebo. From the pharmacoeconomic point of view, treating patients with T2D, hypertension and overt nephropathy using irbesartan was both a cost- and life-saving procedure compared with the use of amlodipine and standard antihypertensive treatment in an Italian setting. The role of irbesartan in the management of hypertension with or without T2D and renal impairment is clearly recognized by national and international guidelines and largely acknowledged by the medical community according to the efficacy of the drug in the prevention of cardiovascular risk in addition to and beyond kidney prevention.

Primary prevention of heart failure

Most heart failure research and quality improvement efforts are targeted at treatment and secondary prevention of patients with manifest heart failure. This is distinct from coronary disease where primary prevention has been a focus for over three decades. Given the current importance and the projected worsening of heart failure epidemiology, a more focused effort on prevention is urgently needed.

Differential effects of strict blood pressure lowering by losartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy and high-dose amlodipine monotherapy on microalbuminuria: the ALPHABET study

We investigated the effects of losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) fixed combination therapy and high-dose amlodipine monotherapy on BP measurements and target organ protection. In this open-label multicenter trial, hypertensive patients were randomly allocated to receive losartan 50 mg or amlodipine 5 mg for 4 weeks, and the treatments were changed to combination of losartan 50 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg or amlodipine 10 mg for a further 4 weeks. A total of 91 hypertensive patients (age 63.6 years), 47 in the losartan/HCTZ group and 44 in amlodipine group, were enrolled. After 8 weeks, the clinic BP, home BP, and 24-hour ambulatory BP were successfully controlled to the same level in both treatment groups (P < .001). Furthermore, both groups showed the same degree of BP reduction in the 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime (P < .001). B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) also significantly decreased to the same level in both groups, whereas the reduction of urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) was greater in the losartan/HCTZ group than in the high-dose amlodipine group (-47.6% vs 2.4%, P < .001). Losartan/HCTZ combination and high-dose amlodipine have similar effects on clinic, home, and ambulatory BP control and BNP reduction, whereas losartan/HCTZ has superior effect on UACR reduction when compared with high-dose amlodipine.

Long-term use and tolerability of irbesartan for control of hypertension

In this review, we discuss the pharmacological and clinical properties of irbesartan, a noncompetitive angiotensin II receptor type 1 antagonist, successfully used for more than a decade in the treatment of essential hypertension. Irbesartan exerts its antihypertensive effect through an inhibitory effect on the pressure response to angiotensin II. Irbesartan 150-300 mg once daily confers a lasting effect over 24 hours, and its antihypertensive efficacy is further enhanced by the coadministration of hydrochlorothiazide. Additionally and partially beyond its blood pressure-lowering effect, irbesartan reduces left ventricular hypertrophy, favors right atrial remodeling in atrial fibrillation, and increases the likelihood of maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion in atrial fibrillation. In addition, the renoprotective effects of irbesartan are well documented in the early and later stages of renal disease in type 2 diabetics. Furthermore, both the therapeutic effectiveness and the placebo-like side effect profile contribute to a high adherence rate to the drug. Currently, irbesartan in monotherapy or combination therapy with hydrochlorothiazide represent a rationale pharmacologic approach for arterial hypertension and early-stage and late-stage diabetic nephropathy in hypertensive type II diabetics.

Pleiotropic effects of angiotensin receptor blockers: addressing comorbidities by optimizing hypertension therapy

The efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the management of hypertension is well established. Whether these agents induce pleiotropic effects that promote the amelioration of vascular disorders independent of blood pressure reduction remains controversial. This review examines preclinical and clinical data that highlight a potentially important role for ARBs in several common vascular disorders, including cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, renal, and metabolic disorders. The preponderance of evidence suggests that some of the benefits derived from ARBs might improve outcomes in these disorders by actions that extend beyond blood pressure reduction. This review also identifies some potentially important differences in the mechanism of action between ARBs and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors that may have clinical significance in the management of vascular diseases.

Effect of candesartan treatment on left ventricular remodeling after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis

In hypertension, angiotensin receptor blockers can augment regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. It is not known whether this also is the case after aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS). To test the hypothesis that treatment with candesartan in addition to conventional treatment is able to augment LV and left atrial (LA) reverse remodeling in patients with AS undergoing AVR, we studied 114 patients scheduled for AVR. Patients were randomized to treatment with candesartan 32 mg 1 time/day or conventional therapy immediately after AVR. Patients were followed with echocardiographic evaluations 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Primary end point was change in LV mass index. At baseline and during follow-up no differences in systolic, diastolic, and pulse pressures were seen between groups. Baseline LV mass index was 134 +/- 41 g/m(2) with no difference between groups. Mean decrease in LV mass index in the control group was 12 +/- 28 g/m(2) compared to 30 +/- 40 g/m(2) in the candesartan group (p = 0.015) during follow-up. After 12 months LV mass index was significantly lower in the candesartan group (103 +/- 29 vs 119 +/- 31 g/m(2), p = 0.01). In addition, the candesartan group had greater improvement in longitudinal LV systolic function assessed by tissue Doppler S' wave (0.6 +/- 0.1-cm/s increase in control group vs 1.4 +/- 0.1 cm/s in candesartan group, p = 0.01, p for trend = 0.02) and a decrease in LA volume (p for trend = 0.01). Treatment had no effect on diastolic E/e' ratio or B-type natriuretic peptide. In conclusion, angiotensin receptor blockade with candesartan after AVR in patients with AS is associated with augmented reverse LV and LA remodeling compared to conventional management.

Comparing angiotensin II receptor blockers on benefits beyond blood pressure

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is one of the main regulators of blood pressure, renal hemodynamics, and volume homeostasis in normal physiology, and contributes to the development of renal and cardiovascular (CV) diseases. Therefore, pharmacologic blockade of RAAS constitutes an attractive strategy in preventing the progression of renal and CV diseases. This concept has been supported by clinical trials involving patients with hypertension, diabetic nephropathy, and heart failure, and those after myocardial infarction. The use of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in clinical practice has increased over the last decade. Since their introduction in 1995, seven ARBs have been made available, with approved indications for hypertension and some with additional indications beyond blood pressure reduction. Considering that ARBs share a similar mechanism of action and exhibit similar tolerability profiles, it is assumed that a class effect exists and that they can be used interchangeably. However, pharmacologic and dosing differences exist among the various ARBs, and these differences can potentially influence their individual effectiveness. Understanding these differences has important implications when choosing an ARB for any particular condition in an individual patient, such as heart failure, stroke, and CV risk reduction (prevention of myocardial infarction). A review of the literature for existing randomized controlled trials across various ARBs clearly indicates differences within this class of agents. Ongoing clinical trials are evaluating the role of ARBs in the prevention and reduction of CV rates of morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients.

Effects of renin-angiotensin system inhibition on left atrial function of hypertensive patients: an echocardiographic tissue deformation imaging study

BACKGROUND

Although renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors have beneficial effects on left ventricular myocardium, their effect on left atrial (LA) function remains unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of treatment with RAS inhibitors on LA function of patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

Forty hypertensive patients (17 males, mean age 47.1 +/- 1.5, mean blood pressure 158.3 +/- 1.8/97.1 +/- 0.7 mm Hg) were studied using LA strain and strain rate (SR) imaging before and after 9 months of treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs).

RESULTS

Standard echocardiographic parameters of LA function (LA volumes, ejection fraction, active and passive emptying fraction, and ejection force), as well as left ventricular diastolic indexes did not change with RAS-blocking treatment. However, peak systolic LA strain and SR were significantly higher at study end compared to baseline (77.8 +/- 5.2% vs. 63.3 +/- 4.1%, P < 0.001 and 3.9 +/- 0.2 s(-1) vs. 3.1 +/- 0.2 s(-1), P < 0.0001, respectively). No correlation was found between changes in systolic or diastolic blood pressure, and changes in strain or SR change during treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

LA strain and SR imaging improved after reduction of blood pressure with RAS inhibitors in hypertensive patients, whereas standard LA echocardiographic parameters remained unchanged. LA strain/SR values may have a role in detecting subclinical myocardial involvement in essential hypertension at an early stage; the association between change in these indexes after antihypertensive treatment and clinical outcome merits further evaluation.

Effect of telmisartan on QT interval variability and autonomic control in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to examine the effect of the antihypertensive AT1 receptors antagonist telmisartan on cardiovascular autonomic function and QT dispersion in hypertensive patients with LVH.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients (18 males and seven women, mean age 49.8±5.2 years) with mild essential arterial hypertension and LVH were compared with 25 age-matched healthy controls. All the participants underwent a complete clinical examination, including electrocardiogram for QT interval measurements and 24h ambulatory ECG monitoring for measurement of heart rate variability. The ECG, 24h ambulatory ECG, and echocardiogram were repeated after eight weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

At baseline, hypertensive patients showed QT dispersion (p<0.001) and QTc dispersion (p<0.001) significantly higher than control subjects. An eight-week telmisartan treatment significantly reduced blood pressure (p<0.0001), without significant change in left ventricular mass. Telmisartan-based treatment induced an increased vagal activity without significant change of sympathetic activity and a reduction of QT dispersion (p<0.001) and QTc dispersion (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that therapy with telmisartan significantly improves the sympathovagal balance increasing parasympathetic activity, and cardiac electrical stability reducing the heterogeneity of ventricular repolarization in hypertensive subjects. These effects could contribute to reduce arrhythmias as well as sudden cardiac death in at-risk hypertensive patients.

Angiotensin receptor blockers: role in hypertension management, cardiovascular risk reduction, and nephropathy

BACKGROUND

The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) plays a central pathogenic role in the development of hypertension and associated vascular disorders. However, whether the two main classes of agents that blunt RAS activity-angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)-yield comparable cardioprotective and renoprotective effects in high-risk patients is controversial.

METHOD

An analysis of several controlled clinical trials provides evidence that, in patients with or without heart failure, ARBs provide protective effects and improvements in prognosis compared with those achieved with ACEIs.

RESULTS

This article describes the critical studies that examine the cardioprotective and renoprotective efficacy of ARBs and identifies the populations and doses at which these agents are most effective.

DISCUSSION

In the clinical setting, ARBs may be a valuable alternative to ACEI therapy. Because of their tolerability profile, ARBs or ARB combination therapy may be an option for patients susceptible to ACEI-related adverse events.

Regression of Left Ventricular Mass by Antihypertensive Treatment

Blood pressure–lowering therapy reduces left ventricular mass, but the question of whether differences exist among drug classes has not been fully resolved. Our aim was to compare the effects of diuretics, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers on left ventricular mass regression in patients with hypertension on the basis of prospective, randomized comparative studies. We performed meta-analyses, involving pooled pairwise comparisons of the drug classes and of each class versus other classes statistically combined, and meta-regression analyses to identify the determinants of the regression. The 75 relevant publications involved 84 pairwise comparisons and 6001 patients. Regression of left ventricular mass was significantly less ( P =0.01) with β-blockers (9.8%) than with angiotensin receptor blockers (12.5%), but none of the other analyzable pairwise comparisons between drug classes revealed significant differences ( P >0.10). In addition, β-blockers showed less regression than the other 4 classes statistically combined ( P <0.01), and regression was more pronounced with angiotensin receptor blockers versus the others ( P <0.01). In multivariable meta-regression analysis on all of the treatment arms, β-blocker treatment was a significant and negative predictor of the regression (−3.6%; P <0.01), but this was not the case for the other drug classes, including angiotensin receptor blockers. In conclusion, β-blockers show less regression of left ventricular mass, whereas angiotensin receptor blockers may induce larger regression. The inferiority of β-blockers appears to be more convincing than the superiority of angiotensin receptor blockers.

Understanding heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: clinical importance and future outlook

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF) accounts for approximately one half of all HF patients admitted with acute decompensated HF and carries a significant morbidity and mortality burden. This condition, however, has been largely understudied because it is difficult to diagnose, and management guidelines are still being discussed. This article provides an overview of HF-PEF and its pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment, with a focus on clinical trials using renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers. Inhibitors of the RAAS have been studied in HF-PEF to determine whether their benefits extend beyond blood pressure control. However, the 3 trials conducted to date (CHARM-Preserved, PEP-CHF, and I-PRESERVE) with candesartan, perindopril, and irbesartan, have failed to demonstrate significant morbidity and mortality benefits. Although no agent has proven statistically significant benefits in morbidity and mortality in HF-PEF, recent studies have added to the breadth of clinical data and understanding of the demographics of these patients.

Position of fixed‐dose combinations containing an AT1‐receptor blocker and a thiazide diuretic

Treatment of hypertension remains a difficult task despite the availability of different types of medications lowering blood pressure by different mechanisms. In order to reach the target blood pressures recommended today combination therapy is required in most patients. The co-administration of two drugs with different impacts on the cardiovascular system markedly increases the antihypertensive effectiveness without altering adversely tolerability. Fixed low-dose combinations are becoming a valuable option not only as second-line, but also as first-line therapy. In this respect the co-administration of thiazide diuretic with an AT(1)-receptor blocker is particularly appealing. The diuretic-induced decrease in total body sodium activates the renin-angiotensin system, thus rendering blood pressure maintenance angiotensin II-dependent. During blockade of the renin-angiotensin system low doses of thiazides generally suffice, allowing the prevention of undesirable metabolic effects. Also, blockade of the AT(1)-receptor, particularly when angiotensin II production is enhanced in response to diuretic therapy, is expected to be beneficial, since angiotensin II seems to contribute importantly to the pathogenesis of cardiovascular and renal complications of hypertension.

PPAR transcriptional activator complex polymorphisms and the promise of individualized therapy for heart failure

The PPAR gene pathway consists of interrelated genes that encode transcription factors, enzymes, and downstream targets which coordinately act to regulate cellular processes central to glucose and lipid metabolism. The pathway includes the PPAR genes themselves, other class II nuclear hormone receptor transcription factors within the PPAR family, PPAR co-activators, PPAR co-repressors, and downstream metabolic gene targets. This review focuses on the transcription factors that comprise the PPAR transcriptional activator complex--the PPARs (PPARalpha, PPARbeta, or PPARgamma), PPAR heterodimeric partners, such as RXRalpha, and PPAR co-activators, such as PPARgamma coactivator 1alpha (PGC-1alpha) and the estrogen-related receptors (ERRalpha, ERRbeta, and ERRgamma). These transcription factors have been implicated in the development of myocardial hypertrophy and dilated cardiomyopathy as well as response to myocardial ischemia/infarction and, by association, ischemic cardiomyopathy. Human expression studies and animal data are presented as the background for a discussion of the emerging field of pharmacogenetics as it applies to these genes and the consequent implications for the individualization of therapy for patients with heart failure.

Evidence for benefits of angiotensin receptor blockade beyond blood pressure control

Elevated levels of angiotensin II result in oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction, which initiate atherogenic pathologic processes that are important in cardiovascular disease development. Angiotensin II induces its deleterious effects primarily through the type 1 receptor; these effects are inhibited by angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) directly at the receptor level. Angiotensin II may potentiate protective mechanisms through stimulation of the type 2 receptor, which is not blocked by ARBs. Accumulating data suggest that blockade of angiotensin II production or activity provides vascular and cardioprotective benefits, such as reduction of atrial fibrillation, acute myocardial infarction, and heart failure events. Moreover, blockade of the renin-angiotensin system has been shown to offer renal protection in subjects with and without diabetes mellitus and to reduce the risk of new-onset diabetes.