Lercanidipine reduces matrix metalloproteinase-2 activity and reverses vascular dysfunction in renovascular hypertensive rats

Increased expression/activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), especially MMP-2, plays a role in the vascular alterations induced by hypertension, and increased oxidative stress is a major factor activating MMPs. Here, we hypothesized that lercanidipine, a calcium channel blocker, could attenuate the increases in oxidative stress and MMP-2 expression/activity in the two-kidney, one-clip (2K-1C) hypertensive rats. Sham-operated or 2K-1C hypertension rats were treated with lercanidipine 2.5 mg/kg/day (or vehicle) starting three weeks after hypertension was induced. Systolic blood pressure was monitored weekly. After five weeks of treatment, aortic rings were isolated to assess endothelium-dependent and independent relaxations. Quantitative morphometry of structural changes in the aortic wall were studied in hematoxylin/eosin sections. Aortic MMP-2 levels were determined by gelatin zymography. Aortic MMP-2/tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases (TIMP)-2 mRNA levels were determined by quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Plasma thiobarbituric acid reactive substances concentrations were determined using a fluorometric method. Lercanidipine attenuated 2K-1C hypertension (224 12 versus 183 11 mm Hg in 2K-1C rats and 2K-1C + Lercandipine rats, respectively; P < 0.01) and prevented the reduction in endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation found in 2K-1C rats. Increased MMP-2 and Pro-MMP-2 levels were found in the aortas of 2K-1C rats (all P < 0.05). Lercandipine attenuated 2K-1C-induced increases in MMP-2 by more than 60% and blunted 2K-1C-induced increases in oxidative stress (both P < 0.001). While hypertension-induced significant aortic wall hypertrophy and approximately 9-fold increases in the ratio of MMP-2MMP-2 mRNA expression (both P < 0.05), lercandipine did not affect these changes. These results suggest that lercanidipine produces antihypertensive effects and reverses the endothelial dysfunction associated with 2K-1C hypertension, probably through mechanisms involving antioxidant effects leading to lower MMP-2 activation. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Enantioselectivity in the Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Fluvastatin and Lercanidipine in Healthy Volunteers

Hypertension and dyslipidemia are independent risk factors for cardiovascular mortality and are frequently present in the same patient. Fluvastatin (FV), used to reduce cholesterol levels, and lercanidipine (LER), used to control blood pressured are marketed as racemic mixtures. Therapeutic activities are 30-fold higher for (+)-3R,5S-FV and 100- to 200-fold higher for S-LER compared with their respective antipodes. The present study describes the enantioselective pharmacokinetic interaction between LER and FV in healthy volunteers. A crossover randomized study was conducted in 3 phases on 8 volunteers treated with a single oral racemic dose of LER (20 mg) or FV (40 mg) or LER plus FV. Serial blood samples were collected from 0 to 24 hours. Plasma concentrations of the LER and FV enantiomers were determined by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry, and pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated using the WinNonlin software. The Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests (P < .05) were used to analyze enantiomer ratios and the pharmacokinetic drug interaction. Data are expressed as medians. In monotherapy, the kinetic disposition of both FV and LER was enantioselective. AUC values were significantly higher for (-)-3S,5R-FV than for (+)-3R,5S-FV (358.20 vs 279.68 ng.h/mL) and for S-LER compared with R-LER (13.90 vs 11.88 ng.h/mL). The pharmacokinetic parameters of FV were not enantioselective when combined with LER (AUC: (-)-3S,5R-FV: 325.21; (+)-3R,5S-FV: 316.44 ng.h/mL). There was a significant reduction in S-LER (8.06 vs 13.90 ng.h/mL) and R-LER (6.76 vs 11.88 ng.h/mL) AUC values when FV was coadministered. In conclusion, the interaction between FV-LER might be clinically relevant because AUC values of (+)-3R,5S-FV were increased when LER was coadministered, and AUC values of the 2 LER enantiomers were reduced when FV was coadministered.

Lercanidipine decreases vascular matrix metalloproteinase-2 activity and protects against vascular dysfunction in diabetic rats

Abnormal matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) activity causes cardiovascular diseases. Because hyperglycemia increase MMPs activities through increased oxidative stress. we hypothesized that antioxidant effects produced by lercanidipine could attenuate the increases in MMP-2 expression/activity in diabetic rats. Control and diabetic (alloxan-induced diabetes) rats received lercanidipine 2.5 mg/kg/day (or tap water) starting three weeks after alloxan (or vehicle) injections. Blood pressure was monitored weekly. After six weeks of treatment, vascular reactivity and structural changes were assessed in aortic rings. MMP-2 levels were determined by gelatin zymography, and MMP-2/tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases (TIMP)-2 mRNA levels were determined by quantitative real time RT-PCR. Plasma thiobarbituric acid reactive substances concentrations were determined by fluorimetry. Lercanidipine produced antihypertensive effects (201 +/- 5 vs. 163 +/- 7 mm Hg in diabetic rats untreated and treated with lercaniclipine, respectively; P < 0.01) and reversed the impairment in endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation in diabetic rats. Increased MMP-2 and Pro-MMP-2 levels were found in the aortas of diabetic rats (both P < 0.001). Lercandipine attenuated the increases in oxidative stress and in MMP-2 (both P < 0.05). While diabetes induced no major structural changes, it caused a 16-fold increase in the ratio of MMP-2/TIMP-2 mRNA expression, which was completely reversed by lercanidipine (both P < 0.001). These results show that antioxidant and beneficial vascular effects produced by lercanidipine in diabetic rats are associated with reversion of the imbalance in vascular MMP-2MMP-2 expression. (C) 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Treatment of essential hypertension with calcium channel blockers: what is the place of lercanidipine?

In all actual clinical guidelines, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) belong to the recommended first line antihypertensive drugs to treat essential hypertension. Several recent large clinical trials have confirmed their efficacy not only in lowering blood pressure but also in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients with a normal or high cardiovascular risk profile. In clinical trials such as ALLHAT, VALUE or ASCOT, an amlodipine-based therapy was at least as effective, when not slightly superior, in lowering blood pressure and sometimes more effective in preventing target organ damages than blood pressure lowering strategies based on the use of diuretics, beta-blockers and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. One of the main clinical side effects of the first and second generation CCBs including amlodipine is the development of peripheral edema. The incidence of leg edema can be markedly reduced by combining the CCB with a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system. This strategy has now led to the development of several fixed-dose combinations of amlodipine and angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Another alternative to lower the incidence of edema is to use CCBs of the third generation such as lercanidipine. Indeed, although no major clinical trials have been conducted with this compound, clinical studies have shown that lercanidipine and amlodipine have a comparable antihypertensive efficacy but with significantly less peripheral edema in patients receiving lercanidipine. In some countries, lercanidipine is now available in a single-pill association with an ACE inhibitor thereby further improving its efficacy and tolerability profile.

Renal protection with calcium antagonists: the role of lercanidipine.

Abstract Background: Clinical research in the field of hypertension is now increasingly focusing on the potential effects of antihypertensive treatments that may go beyond the reduction of blood pressure (BP). In particular, renal protection appears as a desirable goal, especially considering that hypertension is associated with an increased risk of developing kidney damage, which may eventually lead to end-stage renal disease and a higher mortality. Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are widely used in the field of hypertension therapy but the different renal effects of the various CCBs have been poorly explored to date. Scope: This review will discuss available evidence on the renal effects of two calcium channel blockers: amlodipine and lercanidipine, on the basis of clinical data. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for inclusion of relevant studies. No limitations in time were considered. Results: Results from preclinical and clinical studies suggest that amlodipine is overall less effective in terms of renal protection when compared with other antihypertensive tested agents. Its beneficial effect in retarding the progression of renal disease is achievable only when combined with a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system. Conversely lercanidipine seems to provide renal protection in a similar way to ACE inhibitors, probably thanks to its mechanism of action which acts directly on the afferent and efferent renal arterioles. Conclusions: Treatment of hypertension with CCBs should take into consideration the special effects of each single agent at different levels; lercanidipine for example may play a useful role in the management not only of hypertension but also in renal protection of hypertensive patients.

Patient adherence and the choice of antihypertensive drugs: focus on lercanidipine.

Despite the development of many effective antihypertensive drugs, target blood pressures are reached in only a minority of patients in clinical practice. Poor adherence to drug therapy and the occurrence of side effects are among the main reasons commonly reported by patients and physicians to explain the poor results of actual antihypertensive therapies. The development of new effective antihypertensive agents with an improved tolerability profile might help to partly overcome these problems. Lercanidipine is an effective dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker of the third generation characterized by a long half-life and its lipophylicity. In contrast to first-generation dihydropyridines, lercanidipine does not induce reflex tachycardia and induces peripheral edema with a lower incidence. Recent data suggest that in addition to lowering blood pressure, lercanidipine might have some renal protective properties. In this review we shall discuss the problems of drug adherence in the management of hypertension with a special emphasis on lercanidipine.

Superior palatability of crushed lercanidipine compared with amlodipine among children

To compare the taste of equivalent doses of pulverized amlodipine and lercanidipine, two calcium channel blockers, among children with kidney disease.

Comparative study on antioxidant effects and vascular matrix metalloproteinase-2 downregulation by dihydropyridines in renovascular hypertension

The vascular remodeling associated with hypertension involves oxidative stress and enhanced matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) expression/activity, especially MMP-2. While previous work showed that lercanidipine, a third-generation dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB), attenuated the oxidative stress and increased MMP-2 expression/activity in two-kidney, one-clip (2K1C) hypertension, no previous study has examined whether first- or second-generation dihydropyridines produce similar effects. We compared the effects of nifedipine, nimodipine, and amlodipine on 2K1C hypertension-induced changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP), vascular remodeling, oxidative stress, and MMPs levels/activity. Sham-operated and 2K1C rats were treated with water, nifedipine 10 mg/kg/day, nimodipine 15 mg/kg/day, or amlodipine 10 mg/kg/day by gavage, starting 3 weeks after hypertension was induced. SBP was monitored weekly. After 6 weeks of treatment, quantitative morphometry of structural changes in the aortic wall was studied in hematoxylin/eosin-stained sections. Aortic and systemic reactive oxygen species levels were measured by using dihydroethidine and thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARs), respectively. Aortic MMP-2 levels and activity were determined by gelatin zymography, in situ zymography, and immunofluorescence. Nifedipine, nimodipine, or amlodipine attenuated the increases in SBP in hypertensive rats by approximately 17% (P<0.05) and prevented vascular hypertrophy (P<0.05). These CCBs blunted 2K1C-induced increases in vascular oxidative stress and plasma TBARs concentrations (P<0.05). All dihydropyridines attenuated the increases in aortic MMP-2 levels and activity associated with 2K1C hypertension. These findings suggest lack of superiority of one particular dihydropyridine, at least with respect to antioxidant effects, MMPs downregulation, and inhibition of vascular remodeling in hypertension.

Modulation of osteoclastogenesis by antihypertensive drugs

Despite its rigid structure, bone is a dynamic tissue that is in constant remodeling. This process requires the action of the bone-resorbing osteoclasts and the bone-synthesing osteoblasts. One of the adverse effects attributed to some antihypertensive agents is the ability to alter normal bone metabolism. However, their effective actions on human bone cells remain to be clarified. In this work, the effects of five calcium channel blockers, a class of antihypertensive drugs (AHDs), were investigated on osteoclastic differentiation. Osteoclastic cell cultures were established from precursor cells isolated from human peripheral blood, and were maintained in the absence (control) or in the presence of 10-8-10-4 M of different AHDs (amlodipine, felodipine, diltiazem, lercanidipine and nifedipine). Cell cultures were characterized throughout a 21 day period for tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) activity, number of TRAP+ multinucleated cells, presence of cells with actin rings and expressing vitronectin and calcitonin receptors, and apoptosis rate. Also, the involvement of several signaling pathways on the cellular response was addressed. It was observed that the tested AHDs had the ability to differentially affect osteoclastogenesis. At low doses, amlodipine and felodipine caused an increase on osteoclastic differentiation, while the other drugs inhibited it. At higher doses, all the molecules caused a decrease on the process. The tested AHDs also showed different effects on the analysed signaling pathways. In conclusion, AHDs appeared to have a direct effect on human osteoclast precursor cells, affecting their differentiation. Interestingly, some of them increased while others inhibited the process. Unraveling the mechanisms beneath these observations might help to explain the adverse effects on bone tissue described for this drug class.

Taste acceptability of pulverized brand-name and generic drugs containing amlodipine or candesartan.

Trials with pulverized brand-name antihypertensive drugs suggest that, from the perspective of taste acceptability, crushed candesartan, chlortalidon, hydrochlorothiazide, lercanidipine and lisinopril should be preferred to pulverized amlodipine, atenolol, bisoprolol, enalapril, irbesartan, losartan, ramipril, telmisartan and valsartan. Brand-name antihypertensive drugs and the corresponding generic medicines have never been compared with respect to their taste acceptability. We therefore investigated among healthy health care workers the taste acceptability of a pulverized 1 mg-test dose of the brand-name and two generics containing either the dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker amlodipine (Norvasc(®), Amlodipin-Mepha(®) and Amlodipin Pfizer(®)) or the angiotensin receptor antagonist candesartan (Atacand(®), Cansartan-Mepha(®) and Pemzek(®)). For this purpose, a smiley-face scale depicting four degrees of pleasure was used. Between November and December 2013, the taste test was performed among 19 nurses (15 female and 4 male subjects) and 12 physicians (5 female and 7 male subjects) aged between 25 and 49 years. Pulverized brand-names and generics containing either amlodipine or candesartan did not differ with respect to their taste acceptability.