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

Use of angiotensin (Ang) II AT1 receptor antagonists for treatment of hypertension is rapidly increasing, yet direct comparisons of the relative efficacy of antagonists to block the renin-angiotensin system in humans are lacking. In this study, the Ang II receptor blockade induced by the recommended starting dose of 3 antagonists was evaluated in normotensive subjects in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 4-way crossover study. At 1-week intervals, 12 subjects received a single dose of losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg), irbesartan (150 mg), or placebo. Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system was assessed before and 4, 24, and 30 hours after drug intake by 3 independent methods: inhibition of the blood pressure response to exogenous Ang II, in vitro Ang II receptor assay, and reactive changes in plasma Ang II levels. At 4 hours, losartan blocked 43% of the Ang II-induced systolic blood pressure increase; valsartan, 51%; and irbesartan, 88% (P<0.01 between drugs). The effect of each drug declined with time. At 24 hours, a residual effect was found with all 3 drugs, but at 30 hours, only irbesartan induced a marked, significant blockade versus placebo. Similar results were obtained when Ang II receptor blockade was assessed with an in vitro receptor assay and by the reactive rise in plasma Ang II levels. This study thus demonstrates that the first administration of the recommended starting dose of irbesartan induces a greater and longer lasting Ang II receptor blockade than that of valsartan and losartan in normotensive subjects.

Pharmacologic profile of UR-7247, an orally active angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonist, in healthy volunteers. p6.

This study was conducted to assess the pharmacologic properties of the new orally active angiotensin II subtype I (AT1) antagonist UR-7247, a product with a half-life >100 h in humans. The experiment was designed as an open-label, single-dose administration study with four parallel groups of four healthy men receiving increasing single oral doses (2.5, 5, and 10 mg) of UR-7247 or losartan, 100 mg. Angiotensin II receptor blockade was investigated < or =96 h after drug intake, with three independent methods [i.e., the inhibition of blood pressure (BP) response to exogenous Ang II, an in vitro Ang II-receptor assay (RRA), and the reactive increase in plasma angiotensin II. Plasma drug levels also were measured. The degree of blockade observed in vivo was statistically significant < or = 96 h with all UR-7247 doses for diastolic BP (p < 0.05) and < or =48 h for systolic BP. The maximal inhibition achieved with 10 mg UR-7247 was measured 6-24 h after drug intake and reached 54 +/- 17% and 48 +/- 20% for diastolic and systolic responses, respectively. Losartan, 100 mg, induced a greater short-term AT1-receptor blockade than 2.5- and 5.0-mg doses of UR-7247 (p < 0.001 for diastolic BP), but the UR-7247 effect was longer lasting. In vivo, no significant difference was observed between 10 mg UR-7247 and 100 mg losartan 4 h after drug intake, but in vitro, the blockade achieved with 100 mg losartan was higher than that seen with UR-7247. Finally, the results confirm that UR-7247 has a very long plasma elimination half-life, which may be due to a high but also tight binding to protein binding sites. In conclusion, UR-7247 is a long-lasting, well-tolerated AT1 receptor in healthy subjects.

Gene transfer of a soluble IL-1 type 2 receptor-Ig fusion protein improves cardiac allograft survival in rats.

OBJECTIVE: Interleukin-1 (IL-1) mediates ischemia-reperfusion injury and graft inflammation after heart transplantation. IL-1 affects target cells through two distinct types of transmembrane receptors, type-1 receptor (IL-1R1), which transduces the signal, and the non-signaling type-2 receptor (IL-1R2), which acts as a ligand sink that subtracts IL-1beta from IL-1R1. We analyzed the efficacy of adenovirus (Ad)-mediated gene transfer of a soluble IL-1R2-Ig fusion protein in delaying cardiac allograft rejection and the mechanisms underlying the protective effect. METHODS: IL-1 inhibition by IL-1R2-Ig was tested using an in vitro functional assay whereby endothelial cells preincubated with AdIL-1R2-Ig or control virus were stimulated with recombinant IL-1beta or tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and urokinase-type plasminogen activator (u-PA) induction was measured by zymography. AdIL-1R2-Ig was delivered to F344 rat donor hearts ex vivo, which were placed in the abdominal position in LEW hosts. Intragraft inflammatory cell infiltrates and proinflammatory cytokine expression were analyzed by immunohistochemistry and real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), respectively. RESULTS: IL-1R2-Ig specifically inhibited IL-1beta-induced u-PA responses in vitro. IL-1R2-Ig gene transfer reduced intragraft monocytes/macrophages and CD4(+) cell infiltrates (p<0.05), TNF-alpha and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) expression (p<0.05), and prolonged graft survival (15.6+/-5.7 vs 10.3+/-2.5 days with control vector and 10.1+/-2.1 days with buffer alone; p<0.01). AdIL-1R2-Ig combined with a subtherapeutic regimen of cyclosporin A (CsA) was superior to CsA alone (19.4+/-3.0 vs 15.9+/-1.8 days; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Soluble IL-1 type-2 receptor gene transfer attenuates cardiac allograft rejection in a rat model. IL-1 inhibition may be useful as an adjuvant therapy in heart transplantation.

Angiotensin II receptor blockade: is there truly a benefit of adding an ACE inhibitor?

We assessed the blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) achieved with 2 angiotensin (Ang) antagonists given either alone at different doses or with an ACE inhibitor. First, 20 normotensive subjects were randomly assigned to 100 mg OD losartan (LOS) or 80 mg OD telmisartan (TEL) for 1 week; during another week, the same doses of LOS and TEL were combined with 20 mg OD lisinopril. Then, 10 subjects were randomly assigned to 200 mg OD LOS and 160 mg OD TEL for 1 week and 100 mg BID LOS and 80 mg BID TEL during the second week. Blockade of the RAS was evaluated with the inhibition of the pressor effect of exogenous Ang I, an ex vivo receptor assay, and the changes in plasma Ang II. Trough blood pressure response to Ang I was blocked by 35+/-16% (mean+/-SD) with 100 mg OD LOS and by 36+/-13% with 80 mg OD TEL. When combined with lisinopril, blockade was 76+/-7% with LOS and 79+/-9% with TEL. With 200 mg OD LOS, trough blockade was 54+/-14%, but with 100 mg BID it increased to 77+/-8% (P<0.01). Telmisartan (160 mg OD and 80 mg BID) produced a comparable effect. Thus, at their maximal recommended doses, neither LOS nor TEL blocks the RAS for 24 hours; hence, the addition of an ACE inhibitor provides an additional blockade. A 24-hour blockade can be achieved with an angiotensin antagonist alone, provided higher doses or a BID regimen is used.

Comparative angiotensin II receptor blockade in healthy volunteers: the importance of dosing.

OBJECTIVES: We have reported previously that 80 mg valsartan and 50 mg losartan provide less receptor blockade than 150 mg irbesartan in normotensive subjects. In this study we investigated the importance of drug dosing in mediating these differences by comparing the AT(1)-receptor blockade induced by 3 doses of valsartan with that obtained with 3 other antagonists at given doses. METHODS: Valsartan (80, 160, and 320 mg), 50 mg losartan, 150 mg irbesartan, and 8 mg candesartan were administered to 24 healthy subjects in a randomized, open-label, 3-period crossover study. All doses were given once daily for 8 days. The angiotensin II receptor blockade was assessed with two techniques, the reactive rise in plasma renin activity and an in vitro radioreceptor binding assay that quantified the displacement of angiotensin II by the blocking agents. Measurements were obtained before and 4 and 24 hours after drug intake on days 1 and 8. RESULTS: At 4 and 24 hours, valsartan induced a dose-dependent "blockade" of AT(1) receptors. Compared with other antagonists, 80 mg valsartan and 50 mg losartan had a comparable profile. The 160-mg and 320-mg doses of valsartan blocked AT(1) receptors at 4 hours by 80%, which was similar to the effect of 150 mg irbesartan. At trough, however, the valsartan-induced blockade was slightly less than that obtained with irbesartan. With use of plasma renin activity as a marker of receptor blockade, on day 8, 160 mg valsartan was equivalent to 150 mg irbesartan and 8 mg candesartan. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the differences in angiotensin II receptor blockade observed with the various AT(1) antagonists are explained mainly by differences in dosing. When 160-mg or 320-mg doses were investigated, the effects of valsartan hardly differed from those obtained with recommended doses of irbesartan and candesartan.

Comparative vascular and renal tubular effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers combined with a thiazide diuretic in humans.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate whether angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) induce a comparable blockade of AT1 receptors in the vasculature and in the kidney when the renin-angiotensin system is activated by a thiazide diuretic. METHOD: Thirty individuals participated in this randomized, controlled, single-blind study. The blood pressure and renal hemodynamic and tubular responses to a 1-h infusion of exogenous angiotensin II (Ang II 3 ng/kg per min) were investigated before and 24 h after a 7-day administration of either irbesartan 300 mg alone or in association with 12.5 or 25 mg hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). Irbesartan 300/25 mg was also compared with losartan 100 mg, valsartan 160 mg, and olmesartan 20 mg all in association with 25 mg HCTZ. Each participant received two treatments with a 1-week washout period between treatments. RESULTS: The blood pressure response to Ang II was blocked by more than 90% with irbesartan alone or in association with HCTZ and with olmesartan/HCTZ and by nearly 60% with valsartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ (P < 0.05). In the kidney, Ang II reduced renal plasma flow by 36% at baseline (P < 0.001). Irbesartan +/- HCTZ and olmesartan/HCTZ blocked the renal hemodynamic response to Ang II nearly completely, whereas valsartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ only blunted this effect by 34 and 45%, respectively. At the tubular level, Ang II significantly reduced urinary volume (-84%) and urinary sodium excretion (-65%) (P < 0.01). These tubular effects of Ang II were only partially blunted by the administration of ARBs. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that ARBs prescribed at their recommended doses do not block renal tubular AT1 receptors as effectively as vascular receptors do. This observation may account for the need of higher doses of ARB for renal protection. Moreover, our results confirm that there are significant differences between ARBs in their capacity to induce a sustained vascular and tubular blockade of Ang II receptors.

Effect of endotoxin on the angiotensin II receptor in cultured vascular smooth muscle cells.

1. In some tissues, a decrease in the number of cell surface receptors and alterations of the receptor coupling have been proposed as possible mechanisms mediating the deleterious effects of bacterial endotoxin in septic shock. 2. The effects of bacterial lipopolysaccharide (Escherichia coli 0111-B4; LPS) on vascular angiotensin II and vasopressin receptors have been examined in cultured aortic smooth muscle cells (SMC) of the rat by use of radioligand binding techniques. 3. In vascular SMC exposed to 1 micrograms ml-1 endotoxin for 24 h, a significant increase in angiotensin II binding was found. The change in [125I]-angiotensin II binding corresponded to an increase in the number of receptors whereas the affinity of the receptors was not affected by LPS. In contrast, no change in [3H]-vasopressin binding was observed. 4. The pharmacological characterization of angiotensin II binding sites in control and LPS-exposed cells demonstrated that LPS induced an increase in the AT1 subtype of the angiotensin II receptors. Receptor coupling as evaluated by measuring total inositol phosphates was not impaired by LPS. 5. The effect of LPS on the angiotensin II receptor was dose-, time- and protein-synthesis dependent and was associated with an increased expression of the receptor gene. 6. The ability of LPS to increase angiotensin II binding in cultured vascular SMC was independent of the endotoxin induction of NO-synthase. 7. These results suggest that, besides inducing factors such as cytokines and NO-synthase, endotoxin may enhance the expression of cell surface receptors. The surprising increase in angiotensin II binding in LPS exposed VSM cells may represent an attempt by the cells to compensate for the decreased vascular responsiveness. It may also result from a non-specific LPS-related induction of genes.

Clinical and hormonal effects of the new angiotensin II receptor antagonist LRB081.

The renin-angiotensin system is a major contributor to the pathophysiology of cardiovascular diseases such as congestive heart failure and hypertension. Antagonizing angiotensin (Ang) II at the receptor site may produce fewer side effects than inhibition of the promiscuous converting enzyme. The present study was designed to assess in healthy human subjects the effect of LRB081, a new orally active AT1-receptor antagonist, on the pressor action of exogenous Ang II. At the same time, plasma hormones and drug levels were monitored. At 1-week intervals and in a double-blind randomized fashion, 8 male volunteers received three doses of LRB081 (10, 40, and 80 mg) and placebo. Blood pressure (BP) was measured at a finger by photoplethysmograph. The peak BP response to intravenous injection of a standard dose of Ang II was determined before and for < or = 24 h after administration of an oral dose of LRB081 or placebo. After drug administration, the blood BP response to Ang II was expressed in percent of the response before drug administration. At the same time, plasma renin activity (PRA), Ang II, aldosterone, catecholamine (radioassays), and drug levels (by high-performance liquid chromatography) were monitored. After LRB081 administration, a dose dependent inhibition of the BP response to Ang II was observed. Maximal inhibition of the systolic BP response was 54 +/- 3 (mean +/- SEM), 63 +/- 2, and 93 +/- 1% with 10, 40, and 80 mg LRB081, respectively. The time to peak was 3 h for 6 subjects and 4 and 6 h for 2 others. Preliminary plasma half-life (t1/2) was calculated at 2 h. With the highest dose, the inhibition remained significant for 24 h (31 +/- 5%, p < 0.05). Maximal BP-blocking effect and maximal plasma drug level coincided, suggesting that the unmetabolized LRB081 is responsible for the antagonistic effect. PRA and Ang II increased dose dependently after LRB081 intake. Aldosterone, epinephrine, and norepinephrine concentrations remained unchanged. No clinically significant adverse reaction was observed during the study. LRB081 is a well-tolerated, orally active, potent, and long-acting Ang II receptor antagonist. Unlike in the case of losartan, no active metabolite of LRB081 has been shown to be responsible for the main effects.

Characterization of the angiotensin II receptor antagonist TCV-116 in healthy volunteers.

The purpose of this study was to assess the inhibitory effect of TCV-116, an orally active angiotensin II (Ang II) antagonist, on the pressor action of exogenous Ang II and to determine the compensatory rise in plasma renin activity and Ang II levels. Twenty-three male volunteers were treated for 8 days in a double-blind fashion with either placebo or TCV-116 (1, 2, or 4 mg PO daily) and challenged on the first, fourth, and eighth days with repeated bolus injections of Ang II. An additional 4 subjects received 8 mg PO daily in a single-blind fashion. The inhibitory effect on the systolic blood pressure response to Ang II was long lasting and clearly dose related. Six hours after 4 mg TCV-116, the systolic blood pressure response to a given dose of Ang II was reduced to 40 +/- 4% and 35 +/- 8% of baseline value on days 1 and 8, respectively. TCV-116 induced a dose-related increase in plasma renin activity and Ang II levels that was more pronounced on the eighth than on the first day of drug administration. Despite this compensatory mechanism, the relation between the time-integrated systolic blood pressure response to Ang II and the time-integrated CV-11974 levels, the active metabolite of TCV-116, was not different between days 1 and 8. In conclusion, TCV-116 appears to be a well-tolerated, orally active, potent, and long-lasting antagonist of Ang II in men.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic profile of angiotensin II receptor antagonists.

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of nonpeptide angiotensin antagonists in humans are reviewed in this paper. Representatives of this new therapeutic class share common features: lipophilia, intermediate bioavailability, high affinity for plasma proteins and liver metabolism; some have active metabolites. Angiotensin II antagonists block the blood pressure response to exogenous angiotensin II in healthy volunteers, decrease baseline blood pressure in both normal and hypertensive patients, produce a marked rise in plasma renin activity and endogenous angiotensin II and increase renal blood flow without altering glomerular filtration rate. These effects are dose-dependent, but their time course varies between the drugs owing to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences. Additionally, the extent of blood pressure reduction is dependent on physiological factors such as sodium and water balance. The characterisation of their pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships deserves further refinement for designing optimal therapeutic regimens and proposing dosage adaptations in specific conditions.

Studies of the renal effects of angiotensin II receptor blockade: the confounding factor of acute water loading on the action of vasoactive systems.

The acute renal tubular effects of two pharmacologically distinct angiotensin II receptor antagonists have been evaluated in normotensive volunteers on various salt diets. In the first study, the renal response to a single oral dose of losartan (100 mg) was assessed in subjects on a low (50 mmol Na/d) and on a high (200 mmol Na/d) salt intake. In a second protocol, the renal effects of 50 mg irbesartan were investigated in subjects receiving a 100 mmol Na/d diet. Both angiotensin II antagonists induced a significant increase in urinary sodium excretion. With losartan, a modest, transient increase in urinary potassium and a significant increase in uric acid excretion were found. In contrast, no change in potassium and uric acid excretions were observed with irbesartan, suggesting that the effects of losartan on potassium and uric acid are due to the intrinsic pharmacologic properties of losartan rather than to the specific blockade of renal angiotensin II receptors. Assessment of segmental sodium reabsorption using lithium as a marker of proximal tubular reabsorption demonstrated a decreased distal reabsorption of sodium with both antagonists. A direct proximal tubular natriuretic effect of the angiotensin II antagonist could be demonstrated only with irbesartan. This apparent discrepancy allowed us to reveal the importance of acute water loading as a possible confounding factor in renal studies. The results of the present analysis show that acute water loading per se may enhance renal sodium excretion and hence modify the level of activity of the renin-angiotensin system expected from a given sodium diet. Since acute water loading is a common practice in clinical renal studies, this confounding factor should be taken into account when investigating the renal effects of vasoactive systems.

Short-term and sustained renal effects of angiotensin II receptor blockade in healthy subjects.

We investigated the short-term and sustained hormonal and renal effects of angiotensin II (Ang II) receptor blockade in normotensive healthy volunteers. Twenty-four subjects maintained on a fixed sodium diet were randomized to receive for 8 days a placebo or 10 or 50 mg doses of the Ang II antagonist irbesartan (SR 47436, BMS 186295) according to a double-blind, parallel group design. Plasma renin activity, plasma immunoreactive Ang II and aldosterone levels, blood pressure, renal hemodynamics, and urinary electrolyte excretion were measured for 8 hours after the first and eighth administration of each dose of irbesartan or placebo. Ang II receptor blockade with irbesartan induced a dose-dependent compensatory increase in plasma renin activity and plasma angiotensin levels and a significant decrease in plasma aldosterone levels. The compensatory rise in plasma renin activity and Ang II levels was more pronounced on day 8, reflecting a long duration of the blocking effect of irbesartan. Irbesartan induced small changes in blood pressure and did not significantly modify renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate. However, a significant decrease in filtration fraction was observed during receptor blockade on days 1 and 8. The tubular effects of irbesartan were characterized by a dose-dependent increase in sodium and chloride excretions. Interestingly, the cumulative natriuretic response to Ang II receptor blockade was similar on days 1 and 8, suggesting that in these subjects, renal Ang II receptors are not blocked over 24 hours during repeated administration even though this antagonist has a long duration of action (t1/2 of 15 to 17 hours).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Comparative vascular and renal tabular effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers combined with a thiazide diurectic in humans

Rapport de synthese :Comparaison des effets vasculaires et tubulaires rénaux de plusieurs antagonistes des récepteurs de |'angiotensine II en combinaison avec un diurétique thiazidique chez l'humainObjectif : Le but de ce travail était d'investiguer si les antagonistes des récepteurs AT1 de l'angiotensine II (ARA2) entraînent un blocage équivalent des récepteurs au niveau vasculaire et au niveau rénal, en particulier lorsque le système rénine- angiotensine est stimulé par l'administration d'un diurétique thiazidique. Méthode : trente volontaires masculins en bonne santé ont participé à cette étude randomisée, contrôlée, en simple insu. Nous avons mesuré les variations de pression artérielle, d'hémodynamique rénale ainsi que la réponse tubulaire rénale à une perfusion d'angiotensine II 3ng/kg/min administrée sur 1 heure. Ceci avant traitement puis après sept jours d'administration, 24 heures après la dernière dose de médicament. Nous avons comparé l'irbésartan 300 mg seul ou en association avec 12.5 ou 25 mg d'hydrochlorothiazide. (irbésartan 300/12.5 ; irbésartan 300/25). Nous avons également comparé les effets de l'irbésartan 300/25 au losartan 100 mg, au valsartan 160 mg ainsi qu'à l'olmésartan 20 mg, tous administrés avec 25 mg d'hydrochlorothiazide. Chaque participant a été randomisé pour recevoir 2 traitements de 7 jours espacés d'une période d'une semaine sans traitement. Résultats: La réponse de la pression artérielle à |'angiotensine II exogène était bloquée >90% avec l'irbésartan 300 mg seul ou en association avec le diurétique. Il en était de même avec l'olmésartan 20/25. Par contre le blocage n'était que de 60% environ dans les groupes valsartan 160/25 et losartan 100/25. Au niveau rénal, |'angiotensine II exogène réduisait le flux plasmatique rénal de 36% en pré- traitement. Dans les groupes recevant l'irbésartan 300 mg et l'olmésartan 20 mg associés à l'hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg, la vasoconstriction rénale était bloquée presque entièrement alors qu'el|e ne |'était que partiellement avec le valsartan 160/25 et le losartan 100/25 (34 et 45%, respectivement). En pré-traitement, au niveau tubulaire, l'angiotensine II exogène réduisait le volume urinaire de 84% et l'excrétion urinaire de sodium de 65 %. Les effets tubulaires n'étaient que partiellement bloqués par l'administration d'ARA2. Conclusion: Ces résultats démontrent que les ARA; aux doses maximales recommandées ne bloquent pas aussi efficacement les récepteurs ATI au niveau tubulaire qu'au niveau vasculaire. Cette observation pourrait constituer une justification à l'hypothèse selon laquelle des doses plus importantes d'ARA2 seraient nécessaires afin d'obtenir une meilleure protection d'organe. De plus, nos résultats confirment qu'i| y a d'importantes différences entre les ARA2, relatives à leur capacité d'induire un blocage prolongé sur 24 heures des récepteurs AT1 au niveau vasculaire et tubulaire.

Interleukin-1 receptor antagonist gene polymorphism and circulating levels of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in Brazilian women.

Interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra) gene polymorphisms in 83 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-seropositive women were evaluated. Fourteen of the subjects (16.9%) were homozygous for IL-1ra allele 2 (IL-1RN*2). These women had a lower median level of HIV RNA than did women homozygous for allele 1 (IL-1RN*1) (P = 0.01) or heterozygous for both alleles (P = 0.04). Among 46 subjects not receiving antiretroviral treatment, HIV levels were also reduced in IL-1RN*2 homozygous individuals (P < 0.05). There was no relation between IL-1ra alleles and CD4 levels.

DuP 532, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist: first administration and comparison with losartan.

We investigated the tolerability and angiotensin II antagonist activity of oral DuP 532 in healthy male subjects. DuP 532 (1 to 200 mg) was well tolerated, with no effect on blood pressure or heart rate. Compared with losartan (100 mg), DuP 532 (200 mg) was a weak antagonist of pressor responses to intravenous angiotensin II. Maximum inhibition of diastolic pressor response was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84%, 88%) approximately 4.6 hours after losartan and 48% (95% CI, 38%, 56%) 8.7 hours after DuP 532. Twenty-four hours after dosing, inhibition by losartan and DuP 532 was similar (40% to 45%). DUP 532 is extensively bound in human plasma, with an in vitro free fraction of 0.06. Although DuP 532 and EXP3174 (losartan's active metabolite) have similar AT1-receptor potency, and plasma concentrations of DuP 532 were much greater than losartan/EXP3174, the level of antagonism was much less for DuP 532. These results indicate that multiple factors determine the in vivo potency of angiotensin II antagonists, including affinity for and distribution to the receptor as modulated by plasma binding.