Haemodynamic and pulse wave responses to intravenous infusions of angiotensin II during chronic telmisartan therapy in normal volunteers

Effects of telmisartan on metabolic syndrome components: a comprehensive review

Telmisartan is an antagonist of the angiotensin II receptor used in the management of hypertension (alone or in combination with other antihypertensive agents. It belongs to the drug class of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). Among drugs of this class, telmisartan shows particular pharmacologic properties, including a longer half-life than any other angiotensin II receptor blockers that bring higher and persistent antihypertensive activity. In hypertensive patients, telmisartan has superior efficacy than other antihypertensive drugs (losartan, valsartan, ramipril, atenolol, and perindopril) in controlling blood pressure, especially towards the end of the dosing interval. Telmisartan has a partial PPARγ-agonistic effect whilst does not have the safety concerns of full agonists of PPARγ receptors (thiazolidinediones). Moreover, telmisartan has an agonist activity on PPARα and PPARδ receptors and modulates the adipokine levels. Thus, telmisartan could be considered as a suitable alternative option, with multi-benefit for all components of metabolic syndrome including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and hyperlipidemia. This review will highlight the role of telmisartan in metabolic syndrome and the main mechanisms of action of telmisartan are discussed and summarized. Many studies have demonstrated the useful properties of telmisartan in the prevention and improving of metabolic syndrome and this well-tolerated drug can be greatly proposed in the treatment of different components of metabolic syndrome. However, larger and long-duration studies are needed to confirm these findings in long-term observational studies and prospective trials and to determine the optimum dose of telmisartan in metabolic syndrome.

Differential Effects of Angiotensin-II Compared to Phenylephrine on Arterial Stiffness and Hemodynamics: A Placebo-Controlled Study in Healthy Humans

The α₁-adrenoceptor agonist phenylephrine (PE) and Angiotensin II (Ang II) are both potent vasoconstrictors at peripheral resistance arteries. PE has pure vasoconstrictive properties. Ang II, additionally, modulates central nervous blood pressure (BP) control via sympathetic baroreflex resetting. However, it is unknown whether Ang II vs. PE mediated vasoconstriction at equipressor dose uniformly or specifically modifies arterial stiffness. We conducted a three-arm randomized placebo-controlled cross-over trial in 30 healthy volunteers (15 female) investigating the effects of Ang II compared to PE at equal systolic pressor dose on pulse wave velocity (PWV), pulse wave reflection (augmentation index normalized to heart rate 75/min, AIx) and non-invasive hemodynamics by Mobil-O-Graph™ and circulating core markers of endothelial (dys-)function. PE but not Ang II-mediated hypertension induced a strong reflex-decrease in cardiac output. Increases in PWV, AIx, total peripheral resistance and pulse pressure, in contrast, were stronger during PE compared to Ang II at equal mean aortic BP. This was accompanied by minute changes in circulating markers of endothelial function. Moreover, we observed differential hemodynamic changes after stopping either vasoactive infusion. Ang II- and PE-mediated BP increase specifically modifies arterial stiffness and hemodynamics with aftereffects lasting beyond mere vasoconstriction. This appears attributable in part to different interactions with central nervous BP control including modified baroreflex function.

Interaction Between Sacubitril and Valsartan in Preventing Heart Failure Induced by Aortic Valve Insufficiency in Rats

BACKGROUND

Synergistic interactions between neprilysin inhibition (NEPi) with sacubitril and angiotensin receptor type1 blockade (ARB) with valsartan have been implicated in improvement of left ventricular (LV) contractility, relaxation, exercise tolerance, and fibrosis in preexisting heart failure (HF) induced by aortic valve insufficiency (AVI). It is not known whether this pharmacologic synergy can prevent cardiovascular pathology in a similar AVI model. Our aim was to investigate the pharmacology of sacubitril/valsartan in an experimental setting with therapy beginning immediately after creation of AVI.

METHODS

HF was induced through partial disruption of the aortic valve in rats. Therapy began 3 hours after valve disruption and lasted 8 weeks. Sacubitril/valsartan (68 mg/kg), valsartan (31 mg/kg), sacubitril (31 mg/kg), or vehicle were administered daily via oral gavage (N=8 in each group). Hemodynamic assessments were conducted using Millar technology, and an exercise tolerance test was conducted using a rodent treadmill.

RESULTS

Only sacubitril/valsartan increased total arterial compliance and ejection fraction (EF). Therapies with sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan similarly improved load-dependent (dP/dt_max) and load independent indices (Ees) of LV contractility, and exercise tolerance, whereas sacubitril did not. None of the therapies improved LV relaxation (dP/dt_min), whereas all reduced myocardial fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

1) The synergistic interaction between NEPi and ARB in early therapy with sacubitril/valsartan leads to increased total arterial compliance and EF. 2) Improvement in indices of LV contractility, and exercise tolerance with sacubitril/valsartan is likely because of ARB effect of valsartan. 3) All three therapies provided antifibrotic effects, suggesting both ARB and NEPi are capable of reducing myocardial fibrosis.

Telmisartan: a different angiotensin II receptor blocker protecting a different population?

The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET()) showed that the angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) telmisartan was as protective as the reference-standard ramipril in a broad cross-section of patients at increased cardiovascular risk, but was better tolerated. Telmisartan has a unique profile among ARBs, with a high affinity for the angiotensin II type 1 receptor, a long duration of receptor binding, a high lipophilicity and a long plasma half life. This leads to sustained and powerful blood pressure lowering when compared with the first marketed ARBs, such as losartan and valsartan. Some pharmacological properties of telmisartan clearly distinguish it from other members of the ARB class and may contribute to the clinical effects seen with telmisartan. A class effect for ARBs cannot be assumed. To date, telmisartan is the only ARB that has been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk in at-risk cardiovascular patients.

New standards in hypertension and cardiovascular risk management: focus on telmisartan

Blockade of the renin–angiotensin system is an important approach in managing high blood pressure, and has increasingly been shown to affect cardiovascular disease processes mediated by angiotensin II throughout the cardiovascular and renal continua. Telmisartan is an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) displaying unique pharmacologic properties, including a longer half life than any other ARB, that result in large and sustained reductions of blood pressure. In patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, telmisartan has proved superior to other antihypertensive agents (valsartan, losartan, ramipril, perindopril, and atenolol) in controlling blood pressure particularly towards the end of the dosing interval. There is also clinical evidence that telmisartan reduces left ventricular hypertrophy, reduces arterial stiffness and the recurrence of atrial fibrillation, and confers renoprotection. The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET^®) study has demonstrated that telmisartan has similar cardiovascular protective effects to ramipril in a large, high-risk patient population but was better tolerated. The powerful and sustained blood pressure control apparent in clinical trials, together with cardiovascular protection and tolerability demonstrated in ONTARGET^® means that telmisartan may be a preferred option for patients with hypertension.

Does compensatory nitric oxide and angiotensin II receptor activity reduce arterial stiffness in early-stage insulin resistance?

Increased arterial stiffness is influenced by both functional and structural properties of the vessel wall, including changes in content of smooth muscle, elastin and collagen, reduced endothelial production of NO and increased release of endothelin-1 or AngII (angiotensin II). The RAS (renin-angiotensin) system is likely to be central to increases in arterial stiffness, since the changes in arterial structure observed with enhanced AngII activity are similar to the same pathophysiological changes that contribute to arterial stiffness. The role of AT(1)R and AT(2)R (AngII type 1 and type 2 receptors respectively) in the development of arterial stiffening, particularly in the early stages of insulin resistance, is however unclear. In this issue of Clinical Science, Brillante and co-workers have observed that in insulin-resistant subjects exhibiting reduced arterial stiffness, wave reflection from small-to-medium-sized, but not large, arteries was increased following separate intravenous infusions of AngII, the selective AT(2)R inhibitor PD123319 and the NO inhibitor L-NMMA (N(G)-monomethyl-L-arginine) in comparison with normal healthy age- and sex-matched controls. These increases probably reflect increased AT(1)R and AT(2)R expression/activity in addition to up-regulation of basal NO release in the small-to-medium-sized arteries. These changes may be compensatory mechanisms related to early vascular damage and may have clinical implications for treatment in hypertensive patients with evidence of the metabolic syndrome.

Arterial stiffness and haemodynamic response to vasoactive medication in subjects with insulin-resistance syndrome

INSR (insulin-resistance syndrome) affects 25% of the Australian population and is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. In the present study, we postulated that early cardiovascular changes in these individuals may be associated with an activated RAS (renin–angiotensin system). We studied 26 subjects: 13 with INSR [waist circumference, 99±6 cm; HOMA (homoeostasis model assessment) score, 2.5±0.3] and 13 NCs (normals controls; waist circumference, 77±2 cm; HOMA score, 1.4±0.2). All received intravenous GTN (glyceryl trinitrate; 10, 20 and 40 μg/min), L-NMMA (NG-monomethyl-L-arginine; 3 mg/kg of body weight), AngII (angiotensin II; 8 and 16 ng/min), the selective AT2R (AngII type 2 receptor) inhibitor PD123319 (10 and 20 μg/min) and AngII (16 ng/min)+PD123319 (20 μg/min). At the end of each infusion, arterial stiffness indices [SI (stiffness index) and RI (reflection index)] and haemodynamic parameters were measured. There was a significantly higher RI response to AngII (P=0.0004 for both 8 and 16 ng/min doses) and to PD123319 (P=0.004 and P=0.03 for 10 and 20 μg/min doses respectively) in subjects with INSR compared with NCs. Co-infusion of AngII and PD123319 did not lead to additive changes in RI. RI responses to L-NMMA and GTN were not significantly different in both groups. No significant differences in SI and haemodynamic responses were detected. In conclusion, AT1R (AngII type 1 receptor) and AT2R activity produce arterial stiffness changes in subjects with INSR. Evidence of increased AT1R- and AT2R-mediated responses in small-to-medium-sized arteries in INSR was found, and may play an early role in the pathogenesis of vascular changes in INSR before haemodynamic changes become apparent.

Acute effects of renin-angiotensin system blockade on arterial function in hypertensive patients

The acute effects of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers may be important in some clinical settings. To assess the acute impact of such drugs on arterial function, we studied the effects of captopril 25 mg, quinapril 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg on 100 hypertensive patients, according to a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Central (aortic) blood pressure (BP) and augmentation index (AIx, a measure of wave reflections), as well as flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) of the brachial artery and forearm blood flow (FBF) (measures of conduit and resistance artery endothelial function, respectively), were evaluated before and 2 h after oral drug administration. Compared to placebo, captopril and quinapril decreased central systolic (by 7.5 mm Hg, P<0.05 and by 12.3 mm Hg, P<0.001) and diastolic BP (by 4.9 mm Hg, P<0.01 and by 8.4 mm Hg, P<0.001), whereas telmisartan had no significant effect (P=NS). Additionally, AIx was reduced after quinapril (absolute decrease of 7.2%, P<0.01) and marginally after captopril (decrease of 4.7%, P=0.07). Only quinapril led to a beneficial change of FMD (absolute increase of 2.7%, P<0.001). No treatment was related to significant changes of peak hyperaemic or 3-min hyperaemic FBF. In adjusted analyses, all the favourable alterations induced by quinapril were independent of potential confounding haemodynamic factors. Our data show that acute RAS inhibition with quinapril (20 mg) may be more beneficial in terms of arterial function and central haemodynamics compared to captopril (25 mg) or telmisartan (80 mg). Further studies are needed to investigate whether these acute arterial effects of quinapril are clinically significant.