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

Modeling the Molecular Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on the Renin-Angiotensin System

SARS-CoV-2 infection is mediated by the binding of its spike protein to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), which plays a pivotal role in the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). The study of RAS dysregulation due to SARS-CoV-2 infection is fundamentally important for a better understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms and risk factors associated with COVID-19 coronavirus disease and to design effective therapeutic strategies. In this context, we developed a mathematical model of RAS based on data regarding protein and peptide concentrations; the model was tested on clinical data from healthy normotensive and hypertensive individuals. We used our model to analyze the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on RAS, which we modeled through a downregulation of ACE2 as a function of viral load. We also used it to predict the effect of RAS-targeting drugs, such as RAS-blockers, human recombinant ACE2, and angiotensin 1-7 peptide, on COVID-19 patients; the model predicted an improvement of the clinical outcome for some drugs and a worsening for others. Our model and its predictions constitute a valuable framework for in silico testing of hypotheses about the COVID-19 pathogenic mechanisms and the effect of drugs aiming to restore RAS functionality.

Does protein binding modulate the effect of angiotensin II receptor antagonists?

Introduction

Angiotensin II AT 1-receptor antagonists are highly bound to plasma proteins (≥ 99%). With some antagonists, such as DuP-532, the protein binding was such that no efficacy of the drug could be demonstrated clinically. Whether protein binding interferes with the efficacy of other antagonists is not known. We have therefore investigated in vitro how plasma proteins may affect the antagonistic effect of different AT1-receptor antagonists.

Methods

A radio-receptor binding assay was used to analyse the interaction between proteins and the ability of various angiotensin II (Ang II) antagonists to block AT1-receptors. In addition, the Biacore technology, a new technique which enables the real-time monitoring of binding events between two molecules, was used to evaluate the dissociation rate constants of five AT1-receptor antagonists from human serum albumin.

Results

The in vitro AT 1-antagonistic effects of different Ang II receptor antagonists were differentially affected by the presence of human plasma, with rightward shifts of the IC50 ranging from one to several orders of magnitude. The importance of the shift correlates with the dissociation rate constants of these drugs from albumin. Our experiments also show that the way that AT1-receptor antagonists bind to proteins differs from one compound to another. These results suggest that the interaction with plasma proteins appears to modulate the efficacy of some Ang II antagonists.

Conclusion

Although the high binding level of Ang II receptor antagonist to plasma proteins appears to be a feature common to this class of compounds, the kinetics and characteristics of this binding is of great importance. With some antagonists, protein binding interferes markedly with their efficacy to block AT1-receptors.

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.

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.

Angiotensin receptor antagonists to prevent sudden death in heart failure: does the dose matter?

International guidelines recommend ICD implantation in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction of any origin only after careful optimization of medical therapy. Indeed, major randomized clinical trials suggest that suboptimal use of fundamental drugs, such as ACE inhibitors (ACE-i) and beta-blockers, may affect ICD shock-free survival, sudden cardiac death (SCD), and overall mortality. While solid evidence in favour of pharmacological therapy based on ACE-i with or without beta-blockers is available, data on SCD in HF patients treated with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are limited. The present paper systematically analyses the impact of ARBs on SCD in HF and reviews the contributory role of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) to the establishment of arrhythmic substrates. The following hypothesis is supported: (1) the RAS is a critical component of the electrical remodelling of the failing myocardium, (2) RAS blockade reduces the risk of SCD, and (3) ARBs represent a powerful tool to improve overall survival and possibly reduce the risk of SCD provided that high doses are employed to achieve optimal AT1-receptor blockade.

AT1 receptor blockade for the prevention of cardiovascular events after myocardial infarction

Myocardial infarction is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Multiple therapeutic modalities have been shown to be effective in reducing adverse postmyocardial infarction outcomes. The most prominent drugs that have been used in this group of patients are those that oppose the effects of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. These drugs include beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and aldosterone blockers. Following initial success with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in reducing mortality and cardiac remodeling in postmyocardial infarction patients, recent focus has been on adjunctive or alternative use of angiotensin II-receptor antagonists. Multiple large-scale, randomized trials have been conducted in order to compare angiotensin II-receptor antagonists with a combination of angiotensin II-receptor antagonists and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors alone in postmyocardial infarction patients and also in heart failure. Although some results are conflicting, the weight of evidence is towards equivalency of these two groups of medicines, provided that the maximum effective dose of the angiotensin II-receptor antagonists is used. The combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin II-receptor antagonist may have additional benefits for some, but not all, patients; for example, reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure but not in postmyocardial infarction patients. Indeed, in the postmyocardial infarction setting, the combination appears simply to increase the side effects, without conferring additional benefits. Use of aldosterone antagonists as adjunctive therapy in postmyocardial infarction patients is associated with added benefits in terms of mortality reduction and will become the standard of care in this group of patients.

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.

Effects of AT1 receptor blockade on plasma thromboxane A2 (TXA2) level and skin microcirculation in young healthy women on low salt diet

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of AT1 receptor antagonism on skin microcirculation and plasma level of thromboxane A2 (TXA2).

METHODS

Healthy women (n=20) maintained 7 days low salt (LS) diet (intake <40 mmol Na/day) without (LS) or together with 50 mg/per day of losartan (a selective AT1 receptor inhibitor) (LS diet+losartan group). Laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) measurements of changes in post occlusive hyperemic blood flow, plasma concentration of stable TXA2 metabolite thromboxane B2 (TXB2) and plasma renin activity (PRA) aldosterone concentration, electrolytes (Na(+), K(+)), as well as blood pressure and heart rate were determined before and after study protocols.

RESULTS

PRA and aldosterone increased significantly after 7 days of both LS diet and LS diet+losartan. LS diet or LS diet+losartan administrations had no significant effect on post-occlusion hyperemia While there was no change in TXB2 after LS diet TXB2 significantly increased after one week of LS+losartan compared to control levels (cTXB2 pg/mL control 101±80 vs. LS diet+losartan 190±116, p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that inhibition of AT1 receptors could lead to activation of AT2 receptors, which maintain hyperemia, despite the increased level of vasoconstrictor TXA2. These findings also suggest an important role of crosstalk between renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and arachidonic acid metabolites in the regulation of microcirculation under physiological conditions.

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.

Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are available in different dosages and it is common clinical practice to uptitrate if blood pressure goal is not achieved with the initial dose. Data on the incremental antihypertensive efficacy with uptitration are scarce. It is also unclear if antihypertensive efficacy of losartan is comparable with other ARBs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically reviewed PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane databases for all randomized clinical trials until December 2012 reporting 24 h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) for most commonly available ARBs in patients with hypertension. Reduction in ABP with ARBs was evaluated at 25% of the maximum (max) dose, 50% of the max dose, and at the max dose. Comparison was made between 24 h BP-lowering effect of losartan 50 and 100 mg and other ARBs at 50% max dose and the max dose, respectively. Sixty-two studies enrolling 15 289 patients (mean age 56 years; 60% men) with a mean duration of 10 weeks were included in the analysis. Overall, the dose-response curve with ARBs was shallow with decrease of 10.3/6.7 (systolic/diastolic), 11.7/7.6, and 13.0/8.3 mmHg with 25% max dose, 50% max dose, and with the max dose of ARBs, respectively. Losartan in the dose of 50 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at 50% max dose by 2.5 mmHg systolic (P < 0.0001) and 1.8 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.0003). Losartan 100 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at max dose by 3.9 mm Hg systolic (P = 0.0002) and 2.2 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In this comprehensive analysis of the antihypertensive efficacy of ARBs by 24 h ABP, we observed a shallow dose-response curve, and uptitration marginally enhanced the antihypertensive efficacy. Blood pressure reduction with losartan at starting dose and at max dose was consistently inferior to the other ARBs.

An integrated physiology-based model for the interaction of RAA system biomarkers with drugs

The renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) is a paramount target for the pharmacological treatment of cardiovascular diseases. As modeling and simulation techniques are becoming increasingly utilized in cardiovascular research, our aim was to develop a physiology-based model that describes the effect of different drugs at different doses on the RAAS and integrates physiology-based description drug pharmacokinetics (PK). First, a basic RAAS model was developed in which equations for drug effects were included and missing parameters estimated. Next, a physiology-based PK model for enalapril and enalaprilat was developed and coupled to the RAAS model. Simulation of the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and aliskiren administration on angiotensins I and II did not reveal significant overestimation or underestimation. For all drugs, the error numerics were acceptable. The model also encompassed the PK of intravenous and oral enalapril and its conversion to enalaprilat. In summary, we report a physiology-based model for the interaction of the RAAS biomarkers angiotensin I and II with enalapril, benazepril, aliskiren, and losartan that allows for an adequate description of the RAAS response after single administration of the drugs. Such a comprehensive description may lead to a better understanding of the effects of pharmacological interventions in the RAAS.

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.

The role of AT1 receptor-mediated reproductive function in renovascular hypertension in male rats

There is an association between hypertension and reproductive dysfunction. Angiotensin II (Ang II) is involved in the pathogenesis of hypertension and the regulation of reproduction. The present study aimed to determine whether the angiotensinergic system mediates the effects of hypertension on reproductive function in male rats subjected to a two-kidney, one-clip (2K1C) model. Sexual behavior parameters, gametogenesis and plasma concentrations of Ang II, testosterone, prolactin and corticosterone were evaluated in male rats 28days after 2K1C or sham surgery and losartan (Los) treatment (a type 1 angiotensin II (AT1) receptor antagonist) or vehicle (V) treatment. The animals were divided into Sham+V, 2K1C+V, Sham+Los and 2K1C+Los groups. The 2K1C+V group showed a hypertensive response, inhibition of sexual behavior, spermatogenesis dysfunction, and increases in plasma Ang II and prolactin. Conversely, plasma testosterone decreased, and plasma corticosterone remained constant. Losartan treatment normalized blood pressure and prevented the changes in plasma testosterone and prolactin, sexual behavior and spermatogenesis in the 2K1C+Los group. In addition, losartan treatment caused an additional increase in circulating Ang ll in both groups (Sham+Los and 2K1C+Los). Together, these results suggest that Ang ll, acting through the AT1 receptor, modulates behavioral and endocrine parameters of reproductive function during renovascular hypertension. In addition, the effects of circulating Ang II on plasma testosterone and prolactin seem to contribute to the spermatogenic and sexual dysfunctions in hypertensive rats.

Cognitive enhancement following acute losartan in normotensive young adults

RATIONALE

Losartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist (AIIA), is an antihypertensive that has previously been suggested to have cognitive-enhancing potential for older adults. The objective indices for such effects are equivocal, however, and if these drugs do offer dual advantages of hypertension control plus cognitive-enhancing potential, there exists a clear need to establish this directly.

OBJECTIVES

This work examines the potential of losartan administered as a single dose to healthy young adults to improve cognitive performance alone or to reverse scopolamine-induced cognitive decrements.

METHODS

In two placebo-controlled, double-blind studies, participants completed a cognitive test battery once before and once after drug absorption. In experiment 1, participants were randomly allocated to receive placebo, losartan 50 mg or losartan 100 mg. In experiment 2, participants were randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups: placebo/placebo, placebo/scopolamine, losartan/scopolamine and losartan/placebo (50 mg losartan p.o. and 1.2 mg scopolamine hydrochloride p.o.).

RESULTS

Losartan 50 mg improved performance on a task of prospective memory when administered alone and reversed the detrimental effects of scopolamine both in a standard lexical decision paradigm (p < 0.01) and when the task incorporated a prospective memory component (p < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight a cognitive-enhancing potential for losartan on compromised cognitive systems and emphasise the potential of AIIAs to produce benefits over and above hypertension control.

Angiotensin II receptor blocker combinations: from guidelines to clinical practice

European guidelines recommend a combination of at least two antihypertensive drugs to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals in the majority of patients. In addition, they encourage simplification of treatment regimens using single-pill, fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) to aid compliance. Of the preferred combinations, those based on angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) may be more desirable than those based on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, because of equivalent efficacy and superior tolerability. Significantly better BP reductions and control rates have been observed with the dual combinations of ARBs with amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide (HCZT) compared with component monotherapies. Furthermore, in the 15-20% of patients who require triple combination therapy to achieve BP goals, fixed-dose triple combinations with an ARB, calcium-channel blocker and diuretic, which have recently become available, provide significantly better BP reductions and control compared with dual combinations. Within the ARB class, olmesartan stands out as being one that has been recently investigated in a considerable number of studies that are relevant to the modern concept of FDC therapy in terms of both dual and triple combination therapy. The availability of such single-pill FDCs has the potential to deliver strong antihypertensive efficacy with good tolerability and improved compliance.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of losartan

INTRODUCTION

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system is one of the major therapeutic strategies in the management of patients with essential hypertension, congestive heart failure and diabetic as well as non-diabetic renal diseases. As the first angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) on the market, losartan belongs to the most frequently prescribed ARB.

AREA COVERED

The present review examines the pharmacokinetics of losartan with a special discussion on the dose of losartan that should be used in clinical practice to obtain the maximal benefits of the drug. Readers are provided with arguments suggesting that the dose of 50 mg losartan is probably too low and that losartan should preferably be prescribed at the dose of 100 mg/day or higher.

EXPERT OPINION

Losartan is an effective antagonist of angiotensin II AT(1) receptors which has been shown to provide important clinical benefits in patients with hypertension, congestive heart failure and renal diseases. Losartan should be prescribed at the dose of 100 mg/day and the use of higher doses should be reconsidered in future studies to improve its clinical efficacy.

ACE inhibitors - angiotensin II receptor antagonists: A useful combination therapy for ischemic heart disease

Morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular diseases are still high, even with the use of the best available therapies. There is mounting evidence that excessive renin-angiotensin system activation triggers much of the damaging and progressive nature of cardiovascular and kidney diseases through expression of angiotensin II. Moreover, angiotensin II play a major role in the development of end organ damage through a variety of inflammatory mechanisms. Today, angiotensins-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists have clearly demonstrated their efficacy in preventing target organ damage and in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in ischemic heart disease (IHD). Moreover, the development of angiotensin II receptor antagonists has enabled a large gain in tolerability and safety. Several clinical trials have firmly established that these drugs act on the renin–angiotensin system, reducing the incidence of coronary events with monotherapy and combination therapy. In this review we summarize the role mono- and combined therapy of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists play in ischemic heart disease. In this respect the review will improve ideas for developing new formulations with combinations of these drugs in the future.

Valsartan addition to amlodipine is more effective than losartan addition in hypertensive patients inadequately controlled by amlodipine

Introduction:

This study evaluated the effects on blood pressure (BP) of valsartan 160 mg or losartan 100 mg addition to amlodipine 5 mg in hypertensive patients.

Methods:

221 patients with inadequately controlled BP (DBP ≥ 90 mmHg) after 4 weeks of treatment with amlodipine 5 mg were randomized to receive losartan/amlodipine combination therapy or valsartan/amlodipine combination therapy for 4 weeks in a cross-over study design. At the end of the wash-out period and of each treatment period, clinic and ambulatory BP measurements were recorded.

Results:

166 patients completed the study. Both combination treatments induced a greater ambulatory BP reduction than did monotherapy. However, the further mean reductions in BP versus monotherapy were significantly greater with the valsartan/amlodipine combination (SBP/DBP: −7.9 ± 3.4/−6.5 ± 2.6 mmHg for 24-hour, −8.0 ± 3.4/−6.6 ± 2.7 mmHg for daytime; −7.7 ± 3.3/−6.4 ± 2.7 mmHg for nighttime) than with the losartan/amlodipine combination (SBP/DBP: −5.5 ± 2.8/−4.2 ± 2.1 mmHg for 24-hour, −5.7 ± 2.9/−4.4 ± 2.2 mmHg for daytime; −4.8 ± 2.8/−3.7 ± 2.2 mmHg for nighttime; P < 0.01 vs valsartan/amlodipine). The incidence of adverse events with valsartan/amlodipine (8%) and losartan/amlodipine (9%) was lower than that observed with amlodipine monotherapy (17%; P < 0.05 vs combinations).

Conclusion:

Valsartan 160 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg produced greater BP reductions than losartan 100 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg.

Use of antihypertension agents for the suppression of arterial pulse pressure waveforms in patients with intracranial aneurysms

Object

Patients with intracranial aneurysms tend toward raised blood pressure and abnormal pulse pressure profiles. The authors have investigated the influence of three antihypertension agents on blood pressure and pulse pressure waveforms in patients with known intracranial aneurysms, with a view to assessing the potential benefits of longterm antihypertension therapy on the progression of unruptured intracranial aneurysms.

Methods

Nineteen patients with a mean age of 56 years (range 38–76 years) were recruited for this study. All patients had confirmed intracranial aneurysms. A double-blind, randomized, crossover study was performed using perindopril, irbesartan, isosorbide mononitrate, and a placebo. Blood pressure and pulse pressure waveforms were assessed at the end of each 4-week treatment period.

Perindopril and irbesartan were well tolerated. For all measured parameters except heart rate (p = 0.03), no significant difference between baseline and placebo was identified. Each drug when compared with placebo reduced peripheral arterial blood pressure. Perindopril significantly decreased mean blood pressure by 10 mm Hg (p = 0.004), irbesartan by 9 mm Hg (p = 0.004), and isosorbide mononitrate by 13 mm Hg (p = 0.005).

The administration of each drug effected a significant reduction in the carotid artery augmentation index (AIX) compared with baseline values (perindopril p = 0.01, irbesartan p = 0.0002, and isosorbide mononitrate p = 0.03). There was also a significant difference in the AIX between irbesartan and the placebo (p = 0.05). Compared with the placebo, there was a significant difference in AIX (adjusted for heart rate) following the administration of irbesartan (p = 0.003) and isosorbide mononitrate (p = 0.01), but not with perindopril (p = 0.17).

Conclusions

Irbesartan appears to be the most effective treatment for the combined suppression of blood pressure and AIX in patients with intracranial aneurysms and has a high degree of patient tolerance.

Targeting effective blood pressure control with angiotensin receptor blockers

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have become established as a major class of antihypertensive on the basis of their powerful effects on blood pressure (BP), excellent tolerability and pleiotropic end-organ-protective effects. However, individual ARBs vary in antihypertensive efficacy, which may be important to clinical outcome. Several strategies are available to ensure that BP reductions with ARBs are at least as great as that which can be achieved with other antihypertensive classes. Firstly, several newer ARBs, including irbesartan, candesartan, telmisartan and olmesartan, have been reported to provide equivalent antihypertensive efficacy to amlodipine and greater efficacy than either losartan, valsartan or both. Secondly, increases in dose may improve the antihypertensive efficacy of agents such as valsartan, although clinical studies are necessary to provide characterisation of new, higher-dose monotherapies. Thirdly, fixed dose combinations with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) increase the antihypertensive effect of all ARBs. It is likely that differences in efficacy between newer and older ARBs will in some cases be sustained in combination therapy, such that the most potent ARBs and HCTZ will provide another tier of control. The future use of ARBs is likely to involve a growing emphasis on compound-specific data, with regard to the antihypertensive efficacy and pleiotropic protective actions of agents.

Mechanisms underlying the endothelium-independent relaxation induced by angiotensin II in rat aorta

It has been suggested that low concentrations of angiotensin II cause vasoconstriction, whereas high concentrations evoke vasodilation. Thus, this work aimed to characterize functionally the mechanisms underlying angiotensin II-induced relaxation, at high concentration, in isolated rat aortic rings. Vascular reactivity experiments, using standard muscle bath procedures, showed that angiotensin II (1-30 microM) concentration-dependently induces relaxation of phenylephrine-precontracted rings with intact or denuded endothelium. The relaxation was not altered in the presence of ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), a nonselective inhibitor of metalloprotease. The selective antagonist of AT2 receptors, PD123319, inhibited angiotensin II-induced relaxation. Conversely, losartan or A-779, selective AT1 and Ang1-7 receptor antagonists, respectively, did not alter the relaxation induced by angiotensin II. HOE-140, a selective antagonist of the bradykinin B2 receptor, and amiloride, a Na+/H+ exchanger inhibitor, abolished angiotensin II-induced relaxation. Administration of exogenous bradykinin on precontracted tissues produced concentration-dependent relaxation, which was also inhibited by HOE-140. Preincubation of denuded-rings with NG-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME), 1H-[1,2,4]oxadiazolo[4,3-a]quinoxalin-1-one (ODQ), indomethacin, or tetraethylammonium (TEA) reduced angiotensin II-induced relaxation. The combination of L-NAME, indomethacin, and TEA completely abolished the relaxation induced by angiotensin II. 4-Aminopyridine (4-AP) as well as charybdotoxin reduced angiotensin II-induced relaxation. On the other hand, neither apamin nor glibenclamide altered the relaxation induced by angiotensin II. The major new finding of this work is that it demonstrated functionally the existence of AT2 receptors located on smooth muscle of rat aortic rings that mediated vasorelaxation via stimulation of B2 receptors by bradykinin, which in turns results in the activation of the NO-cGMP pathway, vasodilator cyclooxygenase product(s), and voltage-dependent and Ca+-activated large-conductance K+ channels.

Comparison of antihypertensive effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, a calcium antagonist and a diuretic in patients with hypertension not controlled by angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the additional antihypertensive effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist and a diuretic in patients whose hypertension is not controlled by full-dose angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Individuals with an ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) that was not controlled by valsartan 160 mg once daily were allocated randomly to two groups: those in group A (n = 35) were assigned randomly to treatment with benazepril 20 mg once daily or chlorthalidone 12.5 mg once daily, whereas patients in group B (n = 29) were assigned randomly to benazepril 20 mg once daily or amlodipine 5 mg once daily. All individuals continued to receive background valsartan 160 mg once daily. After 5 weeks, patients crossed over to the alternative valsartan-based combination treatment of each group for a second 5-week period. Twenty-four-hour ABP monitoring was performed before the random allocation to groups and at the end of each randomized combination pharmacotherapy period.

RESULTS

Sixty-four individuals completed the study: 32 men and 32 women (mean +/- SD age 48.2 +/- 7.9 years, average 24-h ABP on valsartan monotherapy 143.4 +/- 12.6/87.7 +/- 7.8 mmHg). Significant additional antihypertensive effects on the average 24-h ABP were obtained with benazepril (8.6 +/- 8.8/6.3 +/- 6.7 mmHg), amlodipine (15.2 +/- 12.9/9.9 +/- 6.8 mmHg) and chlorthalidone (13.5 +/- 11.6/9.5 +/- 7.7 mmHg) (P < 0.001 for all additional antihypertensive effects). The additional effects of amlodipine and chlorthalidone added to valsartan were approximately 6/3.5 mmHg (P < 0.05) greater than that of benazepril.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients in whom hypertension was not controlled by full-dose ARB monotherapy, a diuretic, a calcium antagonist or an ACE inhibitor provided significant additional antihypertensive effect. The antihypertensive effects of the ARB-diuretic and the ARB-calcium antagonist combinations were superior to that of the ARB-ACE inhibitor combination.

Irbesartan: a review of its use in hypertension and in the management of diabetic nephropathy

Irbesartan (Avapro, Aprovel) is a potent and selective angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor antagonist indicated for use in patients with hypertension, including those with type 2 diabetes mellitus and nephropathy. Once-daily administration of irbesartan provided 24-hour control of blood pressure (BP). In patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension irbesartan was as effective as enalapril, atenolol and amlodipine, and more effective than valsartan in terms of absolute reduction in BP and response rates. Irbesartan produced a greater reduction in diastolic BP at trough than once-daily losartan, but had a smaller effect than olmesartan; the reduction in systolic BP achieved with irbesartan was similar or greater than that with losartan and similar to that seen with olmesartan. The combination of irbesartan with hydrochlorothiazide produced additive effects on BP reduction. Irbesartan also induced regression of left ventricular mass in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. In two large studies (IRbesartan MicroAlbuminuria type 2 diabetes mellitus in hypertensive patients [IRMA 2] and the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial [IDNT]) irbesartan exerted a renoprotective effect in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes at both the early and later stages of diabetic nephropathy. The renoprotective effect was at least partly independent of the BP-lowering effect. In the IRMA 2 trial, the proportion of patients progressing to overt nephropathy was significantly lower for recipients of irbesartan 300mg once daily than placebo. In patients with overt nephropathy in the IDNT, irbesartan 300mg once daily provided significantly greater renoprotection than amlodipine 10mg once daily or placebo. The relative risk of doubling of serum creatinine was significantly lower with irbesartan than amlodipine or placebo. Irbesartan is well tolerated in hypertensive patients, including those with type 2 diabetes and incipient or overt nephropathy. The overall incidence of adverse events with irbesartan was similar to that with placebo. Irbesartan was associated with a lower incidence of cough than enalapril and was not associated with ankle oedema or with any clinically significant drug interactions. In conclusion, irbesartan is a well tolerated and effective antihypertensive agent. It also slows the progression of renal disease in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes at both the early and later stages of diabetic nephropathy. Thus, irbesartan is a valuable agent in the management of patients with these indications.

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.

Angiotensin II and nitric oxide interaction

Nitric oxide degradation linked to endothelial dysfunction plays a central role in cardiovascular diseases. Superoxide producing enzymes such as NADPH oxidase and xanthine oxidase are responsible for NO degradation as they generate a variety of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Moreover, superoxide is rapidly degraded by superoxide dismutase to produce hydrogen peroxide leading to the uncoupling of NO synthase and production of increased amount of superoxide. Angiotensin II is an important stimulus of NADPH oxidase. Through its AT(1) receptor, Ang II stimulates the long-term increase of several membrane component of NADPH oxidase such as P(22) phox or nox-1 and causes an increased activity of NADPH oxidase with inactivation of NO leading to impaired endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation, vascular smooth muscle cell hypertrophy, proliferation and migration, extracellular matrix formation, thrombosis, cellular infiltration and inflammatory reaction. Several preclinical and clinical studies have now confirmed the involvement of the AT(1) receptor in endothelial dysfunction. It is proposed that the AT(2) receptor counterbalances the deleterious effect of the Ang II-induced AT(1) receptor stimulation through bradykinin and NOS stimulation. This mechanism could be especially relevant in pathological cases when the NADPH oxidase activity is blocked with an AT(1) receptor antagonist.

In vitro and in vivo characterization of the activity of telmisartan: an insurmountable angiotensin II receptor antagonist

In vitro studies have shown that telmisartan is an insurmountable angiotensin II subtype-1 (AT1) receptor antagonist. Herein, the molecular basis of this insurmountable antagonism has been investigated in vitro, and the effect of telmisartan has been compared in vivo with that of irbesartan and candesartan. Association and dissociation kinetics of telmisartan to AT1 receptors have been characterized in vitro on rat vascular smooth muscle cells (RVSMC) expressing solely the AT1 receptor subtype. In a second set of experiments, the antagonistic efficacy of single intravenous doses (0.1, 0.3, and 1 mg/kg) of telmisartan was compared with that of irbesartan (0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 10.0 mg/kg) and candesartan (0.3 and 1 mg/kg) in conscious, normotensive, male Wistar rats. The results show that the specific binding of [(3)H]telmisartan to the surface of living RVSMC is saturable and increases quickly to reach equilibrium within 1 h. Telmisartan dissociates very slowly from the receptor with a dissociation half-life (t(1/2)) of 75 min, which is comparable with candesartan and almost 5 times slower than angiotensin II (AngII). In vivo, telmisartan blunts the blood pressure response to exogenous AngII dose dependently. The blockade is long lasting and remains significant at 24 h at doses >0.1 mg/kg. Ex vivo assessment of the AT1 receptor blockade using an in vitro AngII receptor binding assay shows similar results. When administered intravenously in rats, telmisartan is 10-fold more potent than irbesartan and comparable to candesartan. Taken together, our in vitro data show that the insurmountable antagonism of telmisartan is due at least in part to its very slow dissociation from AT1 receptors.

Angiotensin II Type 1 receptor antagonists in chronic heart failure

Angiotensin II Type 1 receptor antagonists share most but not all of their pharmacological actions with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. The latter belong to standard heart failure therapy, with proven benefit in terms of morbidity and mortality. Promising data have been provided for angiotensin II Type 1 receptor antagonists in experimental models of heart failure. In patients with hypertension and those with diabetic nephropathy, favourable results have been observed with regards to blood pressure control, reversibility of structural changes or prevention of progression of disease. The currently available clinical trials in heart failure patients with angiotensin II Type 1 receptor antagonists suggest that they may be equivalent to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, but superiority has not been proven. There is no doubt about their effectiveness with regards to symptoms; however, their effect on hospitalisation and mortality is not unequivocally demonstrated. Further trials are warranted, particularly to define their role in comparison with and in addition to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and to further characterise heart failure patient populations who derive benefit from angiotensin II Type 1 receptor blockers above and beyond angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers and spironolactone.

An ambulatory blood pressure monitoring study of the comparative antihypertensive efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and valsartan

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to compare the change from baseline in mean diastolic ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) at 24 h post dose (trough measurement) after 8 weeks of treatment with irbesartan or valsartan in subjects with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Secondary objectives included comparing the mean changes from baseline in systolic ABP at trough; 24-h ABP; morning and night-time ABP; self-measured systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP); and office-measured SBP and DBP at trough.

DESIGN

After a 3-week, single blind, placebo lead-in period, 426 subjects were randomized to receive either irbesartan 150 mg or valsartan 80 mg for 8 weeks.

METHODS

Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were obtained at baseline and at week 8. Self-measured morning and evening DBP and SBP readings were obtained at home over a 7-day period at baseline and at week 8. Office-measured seated DBP and SBP measurements were obtained at trough, at baseline, and at week 8.

RESULTS

Irbesartan demonstrated significantly greater reductions than valsartan for mean change from baseline in diastolic ABP at trough (-6.73 versus -4.84 mmHg, respectively; P = 0.035). Irbesartan produced significantly greater reductions than valsartan for mean systolic ABP at trough (-11.62 versus -7.5 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and for mean 24-h diastolic ABP (-6.38 versus -4.82 mmHg, respectively; P = 0.023) and systolic ABP (-10.24 versus -7.76 mmHg; P < 0.01). Irbesartan also produced significantly greater reductions than valsartan for office-measured seated DBP (-10.46 versus 7.28 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and SBP (-16.23 versus -9.96 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and for self-measured morning DBP (-6.28 versus -3.75 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01) and SBP (-10.21 versus -6.97 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.01). Both drugs were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Irbesartan was more effective than valsartan in reducing DBP and SBP at trough and in providing greater overall 24-h blood pressure-lowering efficacy.

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.