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

Time-Dependent Effects of Individual and Combined Treatments With Nebivolol, Lisinopril, and Valsartan on Blood Pressure and Vascular Reactivity to Angiotensin II and Norepinephrine

Clinical guidelines suggest the combination of 2 drugs as a strategy to treat hypertension. However, some antihypertensive combinations have been shown to be ineffective. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether differences exist between the results of monotherapy and combination therapy by temporal monitoring of the responses to angiotensin II and norepinephrine, which are vasoconstrictors involved in the development of hypertension. Thus, the purpose of this work was to determine the vascular reactivity to angiotensin II and norepinephrine in spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) aortic rings after treatment with valsartan, lisinopril, nebivolol, nebivolol-lisinopril, and nebivolol-valsartan for different periods of time. In this study, male SHR and Wistar Kyoto normotensive (WKY) rats were divided into 7 groups treated for 1, 2, and 4 weeks: (1) WKY + vehicle, (2) SHR + vehicle; (3) SHR + nebivolol; (4) SHR + lisinopril; (5) SHR + valsartan; (6) SHR + nebivolol-lisinopril; and (7) SHR + nebivolol-valsartan. Blood pressure was measured by the tail-cuff method, and vascular reactivity was determined from the concentration-response curve to angiotensin II and norepinephrine in aortic rings. The results showed that the combined and individual treatments reduced mean blood pressure at all times evaluated. All treatments decreased vascular reactivity to angiotensin II; however, in the case of lisinopril and nebivolol-lisinopril, the effect observed was significant up to 2 weeks. All treatments decreased the reactivity to norepinephrine up to week 4. These results show a time-dependent difference in vascular reactivity between the pharmacological treatments, with nebivolol-valsartan and nebivolol-lisinopril being both effective combinations. Additionally, the results suggest crosstalk between the renin-angiotensin and sympathetic nervous systems to reduce blood pressure and to improve treatment efficacy.

Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Irbesartan in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but its effects on kidney function and cardiac biomarkers in people with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease are unknown.

METHODS

The UK HARP-III trial (United Kingdom Heart and Renal Protection-III), a randomized double-blind trial, included 414 participants with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) 20 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m² who were randomly assigned to sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily versus irbesartan 300 mg once daily. The primary outcome was measured GFR at 12 months using ANCOVA with adjustment for each individual's baseline measured GFR. All analyses were by intention to treat.

RESULTS

In total, 207 participants were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 207 to irbesartan. Baseline measured GFR was 34.0 (SE, 0.8) and 34.7 (SE, 0.8) mL/min/1.73 m², respectively. At 12 months, there was no difference in measured GFR: 29.8 (SE 0.5) among those assigned sacubitril/valsartan versus 29.9 (SE, 0.5) mL/min/1.73 m² among those assigned irbesartan; difference, -0.1 (0.7) mL/min/1.73 m². Effects were similar in all prespecified subgroups. There was also no significant difference in estimated GFR at 3, 6, 9, or 12 months and no clear difference in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio between treatment arms (study average difference, -9%; 95% CI, -18 to 1). However, compared with irbesartan, allocation to sacubitril/valsartan reduced study average systolic and diastolic blood pressure by 5.4 (95% CI, 3.4-7.4) and 2.1 (95% CI, 1.0-3.3) mm Hg and levels of troponin I and N terminal of prohormone brain natriuretic peptide (tertiary end points) by 16% (95% CI, 8-23) and 18% (95% CI, 11-25), respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events (29.5% versus 28.5%; rate ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.75-1.53), nonserious adverse reactions (36.7% versus 28.0%; rate ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.96-1.90), and potassium ≥5.5 mmol/L (32% versus 24%, P=0.10) was not significantly different between randomized groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 12 months, sacubitril/valsartan has similar effects on kidney function and albuminuria to irbesartan, but it has the additional effect of lowering blood pressure and cardiac biomarkers in people with chronic kidney disease.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN11958993.

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.

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.

A case of myelolipoma with bilateral adrenal hyperaldosteronism cured after unilateral adrenalectomy

Myelolipomas are adrenal tumors composed of both adipose and hematopoietic tissues which are rarely associated with primary aldosteronism (PA). Here, we report a case of myelolipoma associated with PA. Aldosterone hypersecretion from bilateral adrenal glands had been confirmed by adrenal venous sampling and pathological analyses, but PA was clinically cured after surgical removal of the unilateral adrenal gland together with the myelolipoma that was not producing aldosterone. It is suggested that myelolipomas may release some factors which stimulate aldosterone production in adrenal glands, although further investigation is necessary. Obesity-related hyperaldosteronism might in part participate in generation of hypertension in the present case.

Local epicardial inotropic drug delivery allows targeted pharmacologic intervention with preservation of myocardial loading conditions

Local myocardial application of inotropes may allow the study of pharmacologically augmented central myocardial contraction in the absence of confounding peripheral vasodilating effects and alterations in heart loading conditions. Novel alginate epicardial (EC) drug releasing platforms were used to deliver dobutamine to the left ventricle of rats. Pressure-volume analyses indicated that although both local and systemic intravenous (i.v.) use of inotropic drugs increase stroke volume and contractility, systemic infusion does so through heart unloading. Conversely, EC application preserves heart load and systemic blood pressure. EC dobutamine increased indices of contractility with minimal rise in heart rate and lower reduction in systemic vascular resistance than i.v. infusion. Drug sampling showed that dobutamine concentration was 650-fold higher in the anterior wall than in the inferior wall. The plasma dobutamine concentration with local delivery was about half as much as with systemic infusion. These data suggest that inotropic EC delivery has a localized effect and augments myocardial contraction by different mechanisms than systemic infusion, with far fewer side effects. These studies demonstrate a pharmacologic paradigm that may improve heart function without interference from effects on the vasculature, alterations in heart loading, and may ultimately improve the health of heart failure patients.

A placebo-controlled comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of candesartan cilexetil, 8 mg, and losartan, 50 mg, as monotherapy in patients with essential hypertension, using 36-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

This double-blind, randomised, controlled study compared the efficacy of candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (n = 87) and losartan 50 mg (n = 89), once daily for 6 weeks, relative to placebo (n = 80) in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure (DBP): 95-115 mmHg). Ambulatory BP measurements were done every 15 min over 36 h. At the end of the 6-week treatment, the mean change in DBP between the baseline and the 0-24-h period after the last dose of study medication was greater in patients receiving candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (-7.3 mmHg +/- 6.9 mmHg) compared with losartan 50 mg (-5.1 mmHg +/- 4.9 mmHg) (p < 0.05) or placebo (0.3 mmHg +/- 6.5 mmHg) (p < 0.001). The mean change in systolic BP (SBP) during this time was greater in patients receiving candesartan cilexetil 8 mg (-10.8 mmHg +/- 11.3 mmHg), or losartan 50 mg (-8.8 mmHg +/- 8.9 mmHg) than placebo (1.2 mmHg +/- 9.9 mmHg) (p < 0.001). Candesartan cilexetil 8 mg was associated with a greater reduction in DBP and SBP, relative to placebo, when compared with losartan 50 mg, during both daytime and night-time, and between 12 and 24 h after dosing (p < 0.001). Both active treatments were well tolerated. In patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension, candesartan cilexetil 8 mg therefore had greater, more consistent antihypertensive efficacy throughout the day and the night, and long-lasting efficacy after the last dose, compared with losartan 50 mg. This greater efficacy is maintained with an excellent tolerability associated with members of the angiotensin Il type 1-receptor blocker class.

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.