-
1.
Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: Results from PARADIGM-HF India sub-study.
Jain, AR, Aggarwal, RK, Rao, NS, Billa, G, Kumar, S
Indian heart journal. 2020;(6):535-540
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril in Indian patients of PARADIGM-HF trial. METHODS A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase III sub-study (NCT01035255) was conducted between April 2010 and May 2014. Patients with chronic heart failure (HF), aged >18 years with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% were randomized (1:1) to receive either sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg twice-daily or enalapril 10 mg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was to compare efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan to enalapril in delaying time-to-first occurrence of the composite endpoint (cardiovascular [CV] death or HF hospitalization). RESULTS The trial was stopped after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for benefit with sacubitril/valsartan had crossed. Among 637 Indian patients in PARADIGM-HF (sacubitril/valsartan, n = 322 and enalapril, n = 315), the primary outcome, CV death, and the first hospitalization for HF occurred in 21.81% and 24.76% (HR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.646-1.231), 17.45% and 20.63% (HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.605-1.236), and 7.48% and 9.52% (HR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.461-1.350) patients in the sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril group, respectively. The all-cause mortality (19.0% vs. 21.9%) and adverse events (78.4% vs. 82.2%) were comparatively lower in the sacubitril/valsartan than enalapril group. No significant difference was seen between the benefits of treatment in Indian and the total PARADIGM-HF cohort (p value for interaction >0.05). CONCLUSION Results support the use of sacubitril/valsartan in Indian patients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction with treatment benefits similar to global PARADIGM-HF cohort.
-
2.
Efficacy and safety of lercanidipine/enalapril fixed combination in Lebanon: a prospective observational study.
Arnaout, S, ,
Current medical research and opinion. 2015;(1):187-90
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The DUAL study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of the fixed-dose combination of lercanidipine and enalapril in a real-practice scenario; the effects of this combination on a number of markers of cardiovascular risk have been also investigated. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a 2 month, phase IV, open-label, single-group, prospective observational study. Adult patients with untreated or uncontrolled hypertension (blood pressure [BP] >140/90 mmHg) were eligible for this study. All patients received lercanidipine/enalapril, in a once-daily fixed combination (10 mg/10 mg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The patients were evaluated at baseline, at 1 month and at 2 months. The following parameters were evaluated at all time points: systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP); heart rate (HR). A number of laboratory parameters were measured at baseline and at 2 months. Safety considerations were performed. RESULTS In total, 188 patients were enrolled (104 males; mean age 58 ± 12 years). At baseline, mean SBP was 159 ± 10 mmHg and mean DBP was 94 ± 7 mmHg. Treatment with lercanidipine/enalapril in fixed combination was associated with a reduction in both SBP and DBP already at 1 month; this reduction was sustained until month 2 (SBP: 131 ± 7 mmHg; DBP: 79 ± 5 mmHg; p < 0.05 vs baseline). At baseline HR was 78 ± 10 bpm; a significant reduction in this parameter was observed at month 2 (75 ± 7 bpm; p < 0.05 vs baseline). A significant decrease in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and fasting glucose, and a significant increase in K(+), and Ca(2+) was observed at month 2 compared with baseline values. In total, two patients (1%) experienced dry cough. No other adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS Even with all the limitations of any observational study, these data show that a 2 month treatment with a fixed dose of lercanidipine/enalapril is associated with significant reductions in SBP and DBP, HR, and improvement in a number of laboratory parameters.
-
3.
[Possibilities of Correction of Endothelial Dysfunction at the Background of Combined Antihypertensive Therapy in Patients With Arterial Hypertension and Type 2 Diabetes].
Statsenko, ME, Derevianchenko, MV
Kardiologiia. 2015;(3):17-20
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the impact of a 12-week combined antihypertensive therapy with enalapril + indapamide on endothelial dysfunction in patients with arterial hypertension (AH) and diabetes mellitus (DM) type 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 30 patients with AH stage II-III and DM type 2 age from 40 to 65 years were included into research. The combined antihypertensive therapy with enalapril 28.6 ± 1.9 + indapamide 2.5 ± 0 mg/day was assigned for 12 weeks. We studied endothelial function by determining the concentration of NO metabolites and endothelin-1 in serum and urine, the results of occlusion test. RESULTS After 12-week therapy, 100% of the patients achieved BP goals. There was no impairment of carbohydrate metabolism. Endothelial function was improved in hypertensive patients with T2DM: there were increases in both serum and urinary NO production (by 381 and 48.2%, respectively) and decreases in urinary endothelin-1 secretion (by 56.3%). The number of patients with normal microcirculation increased from 13.3 to 53.3% (p < 0.001) by reducing the number of patients with abnormal (hyperemic and stagnant-stasic) types of microcirculation. CONCLUSION Twelve-week treatment with the combined antihypertensive medication. The combined antihypertensive therapy with enalapril + indapamide is highly effective and safe for recovering endothelial function in hypertensive patients with T2DM.
-
4.
Effect of chronic inhibition of converting enzyme on renal handling of salt and water: a study on a pediatric population.
Dieguez, SM, Cánepa, CA, Amorena, C
Pharmacology. 2012;(5-6):321-6
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition (ACEi) is amply documented in several pathological conditions. However, there are few reports about the effect of chronic ACEi on salt and water balance.The present work evaluates the effect of chronic ACEi on salt and water balance in a population of children receiving enalaprilchronically in order to reduce albuminuria elicited by auremic hemolytic syndrome. METHODS Nine children aged from 9 to 19 years with normal glomerular filtration rate, normotension and with urinary concentration capacity preserved were treated with enalapril with doses ranging between 0.1 and 0.30 mg/kg/day. Diuresis, urinary absolute and fractional excretion of Na(+), K(+) and urea, creatinine clearance,osmolal clearance and tubular water reabsorption were measured under three experimental procedures: (1)with free access to water; (2) with a water load and (3) with water restriction. In the last group urinary antidiuretic hormone(ADH) was measured. These tests were performed ina paired way, just before starting ACEi treatment and after 6 months of enalapril treatment. RESULTS Enalapril treatment diminished the urinary concentration capacity without affecting Na(+) and K(+) urinary excretion. Creatinine clearance was not modified except in the condition of water load where a fall in it was found after ACEi. ADH increased after enalapril treatment in children under water restriction. CONCLUSION In these children chronic ACEi decreases urinary concentration capacity.
-
5.
[Hypotensive effectiveness of therapy combined enalapril and nitrendipine and influence on the quality of life].
Bryl, W, Cymerys, M, Kujawska-Luczak, M, Pupek-Musialik, D
Polski merkuriusz lekarski : organ Polskiego Towarzystwa Lekarskiego. 2005;(105):287-90
Abstract
UNLABELLED It has been proved that effectiveness of monotherapy in mild hypertension is about 50%; in the other half of patients the dose of previously used drug should be increased or combined therapy should be recommended. THE AIM OF THE STUDY was to compare treatment with angiotensin convertase enzyme inhibitor--ACE-I (enalapril 10 mg bid--group 1) to therapy with ACE-I combined with calcium antagonist (enalapril 5 mg bid + nitrendipine 20 mg qd--group 2). MATERIAL AND METHODS In a prospective, open, randomised crossover study we assessed 44 hypertensive subjects (17 women, 27 men), aged 35-69 years (mean age 48.6 years) with poorly controlled hypertension treated with enalapril 5 mg twice daily. Mean initial systolic blood pressure was 150.8 < or = 9.9 mmHg, diastolic 94.7 +/- 5.3 mmHg respectively. The influence of the treatment regimen on the quality of life (QoL) was estimated by a questionnaire. RESULTS The effectiveness of both used procedures did not differ statistically--in both groups mean blood pressure reduction was similar (14/8 mmHg in 4 weeks), also percentage of patients with well controlled hypertension (about 50%) did not differ significantly. In the group with changes regimen from monotherapy to combined therapy the improvement of systolic blood pressure was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05); in the case of combined therapy replaced with monotherapy such an improvement was not observed. In the subgroup with the isolated systolic hypertension combined therapy was considerably more effective. The improvement of QoL was noted in both groups, mainly in the initial phase of the study. CONCLUSION In mild hypertension ACE-I and calcium antagonist combination is effective in blood pressure reduction and in the improvement of the quality of life. Nitrendipine in a dose 20 mg in an once daily regimen is a potent and safe hypotensive agent, particularly in isolated systolic hypertension.
-
6.
Enhancement of blood glucose lowering effect of a sulfonylurea when coadministered with an ACE inhibitor: results of a glucose-clamp study.
Rave, K, Flesch, S, Kühn-Velten, WN, Hompesch, BC, Heinemann, L, Heise, T
Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews. 2005;(5):459-64
Abstract
BACKGROUND To investigate if coadministration of enalapril alters the metabolic effect of glibenclamide by employing an euglycemic glucose-clamp technique in healthy volunteers. METHODS A double-blind crossover study with nine healthy normotensive volunteers (age 27 +/- 3 y, BMI 23.3 +/- 2.0 kg m(-2); mean +/- SD)-randomly assigned to a 3-day treatment of either 5 mg enalapril or placebo. In the morning of the fourth day, volunteers orally received 3.5 mg glibenclamide together with either 10 mg enalapril or placebo. Blood glucose levels of volunteers were allowed to fall by 10% from fasting levels and were kept constant thereafter by employing a Biostator-based euglycemic glucose clamp. RESULTS Coadministration of enalapril-compared with placebo-resulted in a temporarily higher metabolic effect of glibenclamide (AUC GIR(0-120)229 +/- 173 vs 137 +/- 44 mg kg(-1), p < 0.01; mean +/- SD), which lasted from 120 min to 240 min after enalapril administration. In parallel, the maximal metabolic effect of glibenclamide tended to be higher with enalapril (GIR(max)5.2 +/- 1.9 vs 4.1 +/- 1.3 mg kg(-1) min(-1); p = 0.19). However, the total metabolic effect of glibenclamide was almost identical between volunteers taking enalapril or placebo (AUC GIR(0-600)1267 +/- 334 vs 1286 +/- 249 mg kg(-1), ns). In contrast, serum insulin levels, C-peptide levels, and serum glibenclamide profiles were not significantly different between enalapril and placebo. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study may explain the higher incidence of hypoglycemic episodes observed in patients with type 2 diabetes when taking ACE inhibitors together with sulfonylureas or insulin. ACE inhibitors may cause a temporary increase of the insulin sensitivity, which leads to an increased risk of hypoglycemia under these conditions.
-
7.
Effects of nifedipine GITS 20 mg or enalapril 20 mg on blood pressure and inflammatory markers in patients with mild-moderate hypertension.
Agabiti Rosei, E, Morelli, P, Rizzoni, D
Blood pressure. Supplement. 2005;:14-22
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Calcium antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and other drug classes either alone or in combination have been recommended for the treatment of hypertension. Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) 20 mg is a new low-dose formulation with an improved tolerability. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of nifedipine GITS 20 mg and enalapril 20 mg on blood pressure and circulating adhesion molecules in hypertensive patients. METHODS This randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial compared the blood pressure lowering effects of a 12-week treatment of nifedipine GITS 20 mg vs enalapril 20 mg in 264 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. RESULTS Nifedipine GITS 20 mg induced a reduction of clinic blood pressure, which was similar to that observed with enalapril 20 mg. Nifedipine GITS and enalapril lowered mean sitting diastolic blood pressure by 11.8 and 12.4 mmHg, respectively, while systolic blood pressure was reduced by 15.3 and 16.3 mmHg, respectively. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring-derived blood pressure data showed similar results in both groups without any statistically significant differences between treatments. Both enalapril and nifedipine tended to reduce ICAM-1 and E-selectin, while only nifedipine reduced von Willebrand factor. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS Our findings demonstrate a similar antihypertensive effectiveness of a low dose (20 mg) of nifedipine GITS in comparison with a standard dose of enalapril (20 mg). Given its clinical efficacy and good tolerability, low-dose nifedipine GITS may be considered a valuable treatment option for hypertensive patients.
-
8.
Sodium status and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: effects on plasma angiotensin-(1-7) in healthy man.
Kocks, MJ, Lely, AT, Boomsma, F, de Jong, PE, Navis, G
Journal of hypertension. 2005;(3):597-602
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors provide effective intervention for cardiovascular and renal disease. Changes in angiotensin-(1-7) have been proposed to be involved in the mechanism of action of ACE inhibition (ACEi). In particular, an altered balance between angiotensin II and angiotensin-(1-7) might be involved. A shift in sodium status modifies the activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the effects of ACEi, but its effects on angiotensin-(1-7) are unknown. We therefore studied the effect of a shift in sodium intake on angiotensin-(1-7), during placebo and ACEi. METHODS A double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 17 healthy men. The subjects were studied for two 2-week periods: 20 mg/day enalapril and placebo. The first week of each period they used a 50 mmol Na+ diet [low sodium (LS)], the second week a 200 mmol Na+ diet. Angiotensin levels and blood pressure were measured at the end of each week. RESULTS During placebo, LS intake elicited a three-fold rise in ang-(1-7) that paralleled the rise in other components of the renin-angiotensin system. During ACEi LS did not affect angiotensin II, but did induce a clear-cut rise in angiotensin-(1-7)--to the extent that angiotensin-(1-7) was highest during combination of ACEi and LS. Consequently, during ACEi LS shifted the balance between angiotensin-(1-7) and angiotensin II towards angiotensin-(1-7). CONCLUSION The sodium status modifies levels of angiotensin-(1-7). During ACEi angiotensin-(1-7) is still subject to stimulation by sodium restriction, and provides opportunity for therapeutic manipulation. Exploration of this opportunity in patient populations may lead to strategies to improve therapeutic benefits of ACEi.
-
9.
The effect of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and a K+(ATP) channel opener on warm up angina.
Edwards, RJ, Redwood, SR, Lambiase, PD, Marber, MS
European heart journal. 2005;(6):598-606
Abstract
AIMS: In various models, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and K+(ATP) channel openers can potentiate and mimic ischaemic preconditioning, respectively. Our aim was to determine whether these characteristics are shared by the phenomenon of warm up in angina, often regarded as a surrogate of ischaemic preconditioning. METHODS AND RESULTS Twenty patients with ischaemic heart disease were assigned in a double blind, randomized cross-over design to equivalent pressor doses of nicorandil 20 mg bid, enalapril 10 mg bid, losartan 25 mg bid, or placebo for 3 days. Patients underwent three consecutive exercise tolerance tests on each medication separated by a 1-week interval. Each patient underwent 12 exercise tests in total and 13 patients completed the study. On each medication the second exercise was separated from the first by 15 min of rest and the third exercise was performed 90 min after the second to control for training. The time to 0.1 mV ST depression and rate pressure product at 0.1 mV ST depression increased significantly in all groups during exercise two compared with exercise one. Nicorandil reduced angina but did not attenuate this warm up effect. This benefit of first exercise waned by test three with placebo, losartan, and nicorandil, but not with enalapril. CONCLUSION In contrast to predictions based on ischaemic preconditioning the magnitude of the warm up was apparently unaltered by nicorandil, losartan, or enalapril, however its duration seemed to be extended by enalapril. Thus ischaemic preconditioning and warm up angina are likely to have differing pharmacological profiles suggesting a diverse underlying mechanism.
-
10.
Manidipine versus enalapril monotherapy in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 24-week study.
Luque Otero, M, Martell Claros, N, ,
Clinical therapeutics. 2005;(2):166-73
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood pressure reduction is associated with a reduced risk for cardiovascular events and death, particularly in patients with both hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy, tolerability, and effect on metabolic risk factors of manidipine, a new dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist, and enalapril, a widely used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension and type 2 diabetes. METHODS This multicenter, double-blind trial compared manidipine and enalapril in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 90-104 mm Hg, systolic blood pressure [SBP] < or =190 mm Hg). Following a 3-week, single-blind placebo run-in period, eligible patients were randomized to receive either manidipine 10 mg or enalapril 10 mg once daily for 24 weeks. The dose was doubled after 3 weeks in patients who had not responded to treatment (DBP > or =90 mm Hg). The primary efficacy end point was change in DBP from baseline to the end of the study. Secondary outcomes were the responder rate (DBP <90 mm Hg and/or a DBP reduction of > or =10 mm Hg) at the end of the study. Other secondary measures were changes from baseline to the end of the study in heart rate and in the following measures obtained by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM): 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime mean DBP and SBP, and the trough:peak ratio. Blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, uric acid, and creatinine were measured at the end of the placebo run-in period and the end of treatment. The study had 80% power to detect a between-treatment difference in mean sitting DBP of >3 mm Hg. RESULTS One hundred twenty-four patients were enrolled in the study. After the placebo run-in period, 13 patients were excluded from the study: 4 for DBP values outside the specified limits, 7 at their request, and 2 for adverse events. Thus, 111 patients met the eligibility criteria and were randomized to treatment (53 manidipine, 58 enalapril). The population consisted of 61 men and 50 women with a mean (SD) age of 62 (11) years and a body mass index of 28.2 (2.4) kg/m2. Among patients who completed the study, drug doses were doubled in 67.6% (25/37) of patients in the manidipine group and 60.0% (24/40) of patients in the enalapril group (P = NS). Similar reductions in blood pressure were observed in both groups, from a mean (SD) of 164 (12)/97.5 (5) mm Hg at baseline to 141 (12)/84.5 (6) mm Hg at the end of the study in the manidipine group (P < 0.01), and from 159 (12)/98 (4) mm Hg to 139 (12)/86 (8) mm Hg in the enalapril group (P < 0.01). The proportion of responders was 66.7% (32/48) in the manidipine group and 60.0% (30/50) in the enalapril group; the difference between groups was not significant. Twenty-four-hour ABPM revealed significant (P < 0.01) and similar reductions in blood pressure in both groups, with a trough:peak ratio of approximately -50%. Neither drug affected heart rate. Among the statistically significant changes in metabolic parameters, significant reductions in HbA(1c) (from 6.7% [1.4%] to 6.2% [1.1%]) and blood glucose concentrations (from 152 [44] to 143 [44] mg/dL) were observed only in the manidipine group (P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse events was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS In the present study, manidipine was as metabolically neutral and as effective as enalapril in reducing blood pressure in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes, providing a sustained 24-hour antihypertensive effect.