Is there a place for combining angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor antagonists in the treatment of hypertension, renal disease or congestive heart failure?

Combination Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Therapy: Its Role in Clinical Practice

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are commonly prescribed for the management of hypertension. In addition, each of these drug classes has been shown to be effective in the treatment of congestive heart failure, proteinuric chronic kidney disease, and most recently the high-cardiac-risk profile patient. The individual success of each of these drug classes has fueled the theory that given together, the overall biologic effect of both would surpass that of either given alone. The foundation of this premise, although biologically plausible, has yet to be proven in a compelling enough fashion to support the everyday use of these two drug classes in combination. Additional clarifying studies are required to establish whether specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.

Combination ACE Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Therapy-Future Considerations

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are regularly prescribed for the management of hypertension. Each of these drug classes has also been shown to provide survival benefits for patients with heart failure, proteinuric chronic kidney disease, and/or a high cardiac risk profile. The individual gains seen with each of these drug classes have led to speculation that their combination might offer additive if not synergistic outcome benefits. The foundation of this hypothesis, although biologically possible, has thus far not been sufficiently well proven to support the everyday use of these 2 drug classes in combination. Additional outcomes trials, which are currently proceeding to their conclusion, may provide the necessary proof to support an expanded use of these 2 drug classes in combination.

Comparison of the effects of angiotensin receptor antagonist, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, and their combination on regression of left ventricular hypertrophy of diabetes type 2 patients on recent onset hemodialysis therapy

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is frequently found at the initiation of dialysis therapy of diabetic and hypertensive patients, and is highly predictive of future cardiac morbidity and mortality. In patients with hypertension and LVH, both an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and an angiotensin type 1 receptor (AT1) antagonist regress LVH. However, it remains controversial whether dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system will regress LVH in these patients using a combination of ACE inhibitor and AT1 antagonist. Thirty-three type II diabetic patients with end-stage renal disease who had just entered into hemodialysis therapy and were diagnosed as having LVH evaluated by echocardiography were selected from three dialysis units staffed by the faculty of Saitama Medical School, Saitama, Japan between 1999 and 2001. The study was carried out for 1 year. All patients were assigned randomly to three groups with equal number: group I, an ACE inhibitor, enalapril 10 mg daily; group II, an AT1 antagonist, losartan 100 mg daily; group III, combination of enalapril 10 mg and losartan 100 mg daily. All antihypertensive drugs were given 30 min after the cessation of dialysis therapy. LVH was evaluated by echocardiography before the start of administration of drugs, at 6 months and 12 months after the start of drug therapy. Systolic blood pressure levels less than 140 mmHg were the target for the three groups. Using repeated measures analysis of variance, applied to those with four echocardiograms, there were progressive decreases over time in left ventricular mass index, posterior wall thickness and interventricular septum thickness. There were no significant differences in regression of LVH as well as blood pressure control between enalapril and losartan groups; however, dual blockade induced an additional 28% reduction in left ventricular mass index compared with any type of monotherapy. Both ACE inhibitors and AT1 antagonists benefit the regression of LVH in diabetic patients who start dialysis therapy. Moreover, combination therapy with ACE inhibitors and AT1 antagonists would provide more beneficial effects on LVH in these patients than monotherapy.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonist Regresses Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Associated with Diabetic Nephropathy in Dialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is frequently found at the initiation of dialysis therapy for diabetic and hypertensive patients, and is highly predictive of future cardiac morbidity and mortality. Angiotensin type 1 receptor (AT1) antagonists may be able to regress LVH by mechanisms independent of their antihypertensive effects in diabetic patients. It is not known whether AT1 antagonists are able to reverse LVH in diabetic patients on dialysis therapy.

METHOD

Twenty-four type II diabetic patients with end-stage renal disease who had just entered into hemodialysis therapy, and were diagnosed as having LVH evaluated by echocardiography, were selected from 3 dialysis units staffed by the faculty of Saitama Medical School between 1998 and 2001. The study was carried out for 1 year. All patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups. One group received an AT 1 antagonist, losartan 100 mg daily 30 minutes after the cessation of dialysis therapy on dialysis days, or in the evening when dialysis therapy did not occur. The control group received placebo. LVH was evaluated by echocardiography before the start of administration of drugs, at 4 and 8 months, and again at 12 months after the start of drug therapy. A systolic blood pressure of less than 140 mm Hg was the target blood pressure in both groups.

RESULTS

Using repeated measures analysis of variance, applied to those with 4 echocardiograms, there were progressive decreases over time in the left ventricular mass index (LVMi), posterior wall thickness, and intraventricular wall thickness in patients receiving losartan. The biggest changes in mass and the other parameters occurred between baseline and at month 6. Compared with these changes in the patients receiving losartan, left ventricular internal diameters and their derived parameters (e.g., ejection fraction) remained unchanged throughout the study. In spite of a similar reduction of bp in the patients receiving placebo, no significant changes in echocardiographic parameters were found in these patients.

CONCLUSION

An AT 1 antagonist, losartan, is beneficial for the regression of LVH in diabetic patients who started dialysis therapy under adequate blood pressure control.

Pharmacoeconomic aspects of losartan treatment to delay progression of renal disease in patients with Type 2 diabetes

There is growing evidence from clinical trials that losartan (Cozaar, Merck & Co., Inc.) and other angiotensin (A)-II-receptor antagonists have beneficial effects on the progression of renal disease among Type 2 diabetic patients beyond the benefits derived from the effect of blood-pressure lowering alone [corrected]. Comparators used is the studies were not angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitors but typically conventional hypertensive therapy plus placebo, placebo alone and in one case, amlodipine. These trials have reported reductions in progression to end stage renal disease (ESRD) (losartan and irbesartan) and to nephropathy (irbesartan). An important pharmacoeconomic question is whether potential cost-savings on reduced progression to ESRD and nephropathy outweigh the extra costs of A-II-antagonist treatment. This paper will review the published economic studies for A-II-receptor antagonists and their pharmacoeconomic implications. In particular, potential pharmacoeconomic implications and related methodological aspects of the recent RENAAL trial for losartan are considered.

The practical aspects of combination therapy with angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for the management of hypertension. ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) and, more recently, ARBs have an established track record of success in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF), proteinuric renal disease and most recently the hypertensive patient with a high cardiac-risk profile. The individual success of each of these drug classes has fuelled speculation that given together the overall effect of both would exceed that of either given alone. This premise, although biologically plausible, has yet to be proven in a convincing enough fashion to support the routine use of these two drug classes in combination. Additional clarifying studies are needed to establish whether specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in combination: theory and practice

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are commonly used to treat hypertension and/or a range of progressive end-organ diseases. The success of each of these drug classes in disease-state management is without dispute, and has led to speculation that given together the observed response would improve upon that observed with a member of each drug class individually given. Few studies are available, however, which carefully address the effect(s) of the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker. Review of available studies would seem not to strongly support combination therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker as preferred therapy in the broad base of general hypertensive patients with or without end-organ disease. Additional clarifying studies are needed to determine if specific patient subsets exist that might benefit from such combination therapy.