Does the beta-blocker nebivolol increase coronary flow reserve?

INTRODUCTION: Nebivolol, a highly selective beta1-adrenergic receptor-blocker, increases basal and stimulated endothelial nitric oxide (NO)-release. It is unknown, whether coronary perfusion is improved by the increase in NO availability. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the effect of nebivolol on coronary flow reserve (CFR) and collateral flow. METHODS: Doppler-flow wire derived coronary flow velocity measurements were obtained in ten controls and eight patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) at rest and after intracoronary nebivolol. CFR was defined as maximal flow during adenosine-induced hyperemia divided by resting flow. In the CAD group, collateral flow was determined after dilatation of a flow-limiting coronary stenosis. Collateral flow index (CFI) was defined as the ratio of flow velocity during balloon inflation divided by resting flow. RESULTS: CFR at rest was 3.0+/-0.6 in controls and 2.1+/-0.4 in CAD patients. After intracoronary doses of 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5 mg nebivolol, CFR increased to 3.4+/-0.7, 3.9+/-0.9, and 4.0+/-0.1 (p<0.01) in controls, and to 2.3+/-0.7, 2.6+/-0.9, and 2.6+/-0.5 (p<0.05) in CAD patients. CFI decreased significantly with intracoronary nebivolol and correlated to changes in heart rate (r=0.75, p<0.001) and rate-pressure product (r=0.59, p=0.001). DISCUSSION: Intracoronary nebivolol is associated with a significant increase in CFR due to reduction in resting flow (controls), or due to an increase in maximal coronary flow (CAD patients). CFI decreased with nebivolol parallel to the reduction in myocardial oxygen consumption.

Management of infusion reactions in clinical trials and beyond: the US and EU perspectives

Monoclonal antibodies have expanded our cancer-fighting armamentarium in both the United States and Europe. While in general, monoclonal antibodies are well tolerated and do not have significant overlapping side effects with traditional cytotoxic agents, severe infusion reactions (IRs)--sometimes severe enough to be life threatening--have been reported. The pathophysiology of severe infusion reactions associated with monoclonal antibodies is poorly understood, but mechanisms are beginning to be elucidated. Geographic differences in the incidence of IRs have become apparent. Understanding the risk, recognizing the signs and symptoms, and being ready to promptly manage severe IRs are key for the clinician to avoid unnecessarily discontinuing these effective anticancer agents and prevent potentially tragic consequences for their patients. To date, clinical trials have incorporated monoclonal antibodies into combinations with standard cytotoxic regimens; it is expected that in time clinical trials will be testing promising new combinations utilizing multiple targeted agents, resulting in improved toxicity profiles and efficacy for cancer patients.