973 resultados para angiotensin receptor antagonists
Resumo:
The objective was to analyze the outcome following prenatal exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) or angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARBs). For this purpose, a systematic review of published case reports and case series dealing with intrauterine exposure to ACE-Is or to ARBs using Medline as the source of data was performed. The publications retained for analysis included patients who were described individually, revealing, at minimum, the gestational age, substance used, period of medication intake, and the outcome. In total, 72 reports were included; 37 articles (118 well-documented cases) described the prenatal exposure to ACE-Is; and 35 articles (68 cases) described the prenatal exposure to ARBs. Overall, 52% of the newborns exposed to ACE-Is and 13% of the newborns exposed to ARBs did not exhibit any complications (P<0.0001). Neonatal complications were more frequent following exposure to ARBs and included renal failure, oligohydramnios, death, arterial hypotension, intrauterine growth retardation, respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary hypoplasia, hypocalvaria, limb defects, persistent patent ductus arteriosus, or cerebral complications. The long-term outcome is described as positive in only 50% of the exposed children. Fetopathy caused by exposure to ACE-Is or ARBs has relevant neonatal and long-term complications. The outcome is poorer following exposure to ARBs. We propose the term "fetal renin-angiotensin system blockade syndrome" to describe the related clinical findings. Thirty years after the first description of ACE-I fetopathy, relevant complications are, at present, regularly described, indicating that the awareness of the deleterious effect of prenatal exposure to drugs inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system should be improved.
Resumo:
The role of drugs in new cancer occurrence and cancer-related death is a major concern. Recently, a meta-analysis raised the possibility that angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) might have an adverse effect on patients. This generated a significant debate until the publication of two further meta-analyses, neither of which demonstrated an increased risk of new cancer occurrence or cancer-related death with the use of ARBs in patients with hypertension, heart failure, and/or nephropathy. This illustrates that the results of meta-analyses should be interpreted cautiously and critically as bias, such as selection bias, might lead to erroneous conclusions. Overall, the bulk of evidence today indicates that ARBs are not associated with increased cancer risk.
Resumo:
1. The availability of orally active specific angiotensin receptor antagonists (AT1 antagonists) has opened new therapeutic choices and provided probes to test the specific role of the renin-angiotensin system in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease. 2. The data available so far suggest that the antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor antagonists is comparable to that of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. This provides further evidence that this latter class of drugs exerts its effect mainly through blockade of the renin-angiotensin enzymatic cascade. As expected, the association of a diuretic exerts an equally strong additive effect to the antihypertensive efficacy of both classes of drugs. 3. The most common side effect of ACE inhibitors, dry cough, does not occur with AT1 antagonists, which confirms the long-held view that this untoward effect of the ACE inhibitors is due to renin-angiotensin-independent mechanisms. 4. Long-term studies with morbidity/mortality outcome results are needed, before a definite position can be assigned to this newcomer in the orchestra of modern antihypertensive drugs. Notwithstanding, this new class of agents already represents an exciting new addition to our therapeutic armamentarium.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of angiotensin II receptor antagonists as a therapeutic class. DESIGN: Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling study. METHODS: The data of 14 phase I studies with 10 different drugs were analysed. A common population pharmacokinetic model (two compartments, mixed zero- and first-order absorption, two metabolite compartments) was applied to the 2685 drug and 900 metabolite concentration measurements. A standard nonlinear mixed effect modelling approach was used to estimate the drug-specific parameters and their variabilities. Similarly, a pharmacodynamic model was applied to the 7360 effect measurements, i.e. the decrease of peak blood pressure response to intravenous angiotensin challenge recorded by finger photoplethysmography. The concentration of drug and metabolite in an effect compartment was assumed to translate into receptor blockade [maximum effect (Emax) model with first-order link]. RESULTS: A general pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model for angiotensin antagonism in healthy individuals was successfully built up for the 10 drugs studied. Representatives of this class share different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Their effects on blood pressure are dose-dependent, but the time course of the effect varies between the drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The characterisation of PK-PD relationships for these drugs gives the opportunity to optimise therapeutic regimens and to suggest dosage adjustments in specific conditions. Such a model can be used to further refine the use of this class of drugs.
Resumo:
Losartan is an orally active angiotensin II antangonist that selectively blocks effects mediated by the stimulation of the AT1 subtype of the angiotensin II receptor. This agent, at doses of 50-150mg/day, is as effective at lowering blood pressure as chronic angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Losartan is generally well tolerated and has an incidence of adverse effects very similar, in double-blind controlled trials, to that of placebo. It does not cause coughing, the most common side-effect of the ACE inhibitors, most probably because angiotensin II antagonism has no impact on ACE, an enzyme known to process bradykinin and other cough-inducing peptides. Losartan is a promising antihypertensive agent with the potential to become a first-line option for the treatment of patients with high blood pressure.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Acute blockade of the renin-angiotensin system with the parenterally active angiotensin II antagonist saralasin has been shown to effectively lower blood pressure in a large fraction of patients with essential hypertension and to improve haemodynamics in some patients with congestive heart failure. It is now possible to chronically antagonize angiotensin II at its receptor using non-peptide angiotensin II inhibitors such as losartan (DuP 753/MK-954) or TCV 116. EFFECT OF NON-PEPTIDE ANGIOTENSIN II ANTAGONISTS: When administered by mouth, DuP 753 and TCV 116 induce dose-dependent inhibition of the pressor response to exogenous angiotensin II. This effect is closely related to circulating levels of the corresponding active metabolites E3174 and CV11974. Preliminary studies performed in hypertensive patients suggest that losartan lowers blood pressure to an equivalent extent to an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is required to show whether these new angiotensin II antagonists compounds compare favourably with ACE inhibitors.
Resumo:
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)
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are known to promote sodium retention and to blunt the blood pressure lowering effects of several classes of antihypertensive agents including beta-blockers, diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the acute and sustained effects of indomethacin on the renal response to the angiotensin II receptor antagonist valsartan and to the ACE inhibitor enalapril. METHODS: Twenty normotensive subjects maintained on fixed sodium intake (100 mmol sodium/day) were randomized to receive for one week: valsartan 80 mg o.d., enalapril 20 mg o.d., valsartan 80 mg o.d. + indomethacin 50 mg bid and enalapril 20 mg o.d. + indomethacin 50 mg bid. This single-blind study was designed as a parallel (valsartan vs. enalapril) and cross-over trial (valsartan or enalapril vs. valsartan + indomethacin or enalapril + indomethacin). Renal hemodynamics and urinary electrolyte excretion were measured for six hours after the first and seventh administration of each treatment regimen. RESULTS: The results show that valsartan and enalapril have comparable renal effects characterized by no change in glomerular filtration rate and significant increases in renal plasma flow and sodium excretion. The valsartan- and enalapril-induced renal vasodilation is not significantly blunted by indomethacin. However, indomethacin similarly abolishes the natriuresis induced by the angiotensin II antagonist and the ACE inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS: This observation suggests that although angiotensin receptor antagonists do not affect prostaglandin metabolism, the administration of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug blunts the natriuretic response to angiotensin receptor blockade.
Resumo:
The effects of drugs on new cancer and cancer-related death are a major concern. Recently, a meta-analysis raised the possibility that ARBs might have an adverse impact in this respect. This point of view was highly debated until the publication of two other meta-analyses which did not demonstrate any increased risk of new cancer occurrence as well as of cancer related-death with the use of ARBs in patients with hypertension, heart failure and/or nephropathy. This illustrates that the results of meta-analyses should be interpreted cautiously and critically in order to avoid biased conclusions. Overall the bulk of evidence today indicates that ARBs are not associated with an increased cancer risk.