Enalapril in low-renin essential hypertension

The antihypertensive efficacy of N-[(S)-1-(ethoxycarbonyl)-3-phenyl-propyl]-L-alanyl-L-proline (enalapril maleate) was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind trial in 23 patients with mild low-renin essential hypertension ranging in age from 32 to 70 yr (20 were black and 3 were white). All underwent a 4-wk washout-placebo phase and were then assigned to a dosing schedule of either 10 mg enalapril once daily, 5 mg enalapril twice daily, or placebo twice daily for 12 wk. Conditional on diastolic pressure, the dose was increased at 4-wk intervals to a maximum of 40 mg daily or until control was achieved or the end of the study reached. At the end of the 12-wk titration phase, there was a follow-up period during which measurements were made after discontinuation of the medication. Mean supine diastolic pressure decreased from baseline (98.5 +/- 2.6 mm Hg) during the titration phase (86.3 +/- 4.6 mm Hg) in the group taking enalapril once daily. In three of the eight patients in the once-daily group and five of eight in the twice-daily group, supine diastolic pressures fell below 90 mm Hg. Neither supine nor standing systolic pressure nor standing diastolic pressure decreased significantly from pretreatment levels during enalapril once or twice daily. Heart rates measured after 5 min supine rest were not altered by enalapril. Enalapril induced inhibition of converting enzyme activity at all dose levels and with both dosing schedules. No adverse effect attributable to enalapril occurred during the study. The data indicate that once-daily enalapril is safe and effective treatment for mild low-renin essential hypertension.     

Indenolol in hypertension

After a complete washout 14 hypertensive inpatients were given placebo for 3 days. Undistinguishable 30- or 60-mg indenolol tablets were then given twice daily for 14 days in a double-blind, randomized manner. Supine and standing arterial pressure and heart rate were measured at rest three times a day. Indenolol decreased systolic and diastolic arterial pressure as well as heart rate in subjects in supine and standing positions. Placebo had no effect. The effect of indenolol on systolic arterial pressure was dose and time related, but independent of the intensity of hypertension. No dose-effect relationship was found on diastolic arterial pressure. Decrease of heart rate was dose and time related, although bradycardia was never noted. Indenolol was well tolerated.     

Blood pressure, plasma volume, and catecholamine levels during enalapril therapy in blacks with hypertension

The effect of enalapril, an antihypertensive inhibitor of angiotensin-converting enzyme, on plasma catecholamine levels and plasma volume (PV) has not been well established. In a randomized, double-blind study, 29 subjects (28 blacks and one white) received one of the following dosing regimens: hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), 25 mg twice a day (group 1; n = 12); enalapril, 10 mg twice a day (group 2; n = 12); or enalapril, 10 mg twice a day, with HCTZ, 25 mg twice a day (group 3; n = 5). Dosages were doubled after 4 wk if diastolic blood pressure was greater than or equal to 90 mm Hg. After 8 wk of therapy, supine blood pressure decreased by 24.1/16.0 mm Hg (systolic/diastolic) in group 1, by 10.8/4.0 mm Hg in group 2, and by 48.0/27.8 mm Hg in group 3. Mean values of supine plasma levels of norepinephrine, epinephrine, and dopamine did not change with therapy. PV fell 7.9% in group 1, 1.3% in group 2, and 5.0% in group 3. There were no correlations between changes in PV and blood pressure, but a decrease in PV correlated with an increase in plasma norepinephrine levels in the group treated with HCTZ alone (r = -0.65) and in all 29 subjects combined (r = -0.45). Enalapril alone was not very effective in lowering blood pressure in these subjects, but the combination of enalapril with HCTZ was very effective. There was no evidence of a direct effect of enalapril on the sympathetic nervous system or on PV.     

Cardiac and hormonal effects of enalapril in hypertension

Systolic time measurements, echocardiography, and bicycle exercise testing with cardiac output determinations (CO2 rebreathing) were used to evaluate cardiac performance in 16 male hypertensives at the end of a 4-wk placebo period and after 12 wk of treatment with increasing doses (maximum = 40 mg/day) of enalapril maleate (N = 11) and of placebo (N = 5). The effect of exercise on plasma renin activity (PRA) and plasma norepinephrine (NE) concentration was also measured. Mean arterial pressure was reduced by 10 mm Hg or more in all but one subject who received enalapril. In both the enalapril- and placebo-treated subjects, the preejection period/left ventricular ejection time ratio and fractional shortening of the left ventricle at rest and cardiac output and stroke volume during moderate exercise did not change during the study. Enalapril induced a compensatory rise in PRA (N = 10). Compared to plasma NE concentration, 1124 +/- 380 pg/ml (mean +/- SD), during exercise at the end of the initial placebo period, there was attenuation of the rise of plasma NE concentration, 851 +/- 290, at the same load of exercise during enalapril therapy. Unchanged cardiac performance despite effective long-term lowering of blood pressure with enalapril may relate to inhibition of angiotensin II-mediated facilitation of NE release from peripheral nerve endings.     

Metoclopramide and domperidone block the antihypertensive effect of bromocriptine in hypertensive patients

This study was conducted in normotensive and hypertensive subjects at the Vargas Hospital of Caracas. Normotensive subjects received, in a cross-over fashion, placebo, metoclopramide (MTC), or domperidone (DOMP), 40 mg of each drug, daily for 1 week. The first group of patients under placebo for 1 week received a single 2.5-mg oral dose of bromocriptine (Br). The second group of patients received 30 mg MTC daily (divided into three doses) for 1 week. At the end of the period a single dose of 2.5 mg Br was administered to each patient. The third group of eight hypertensive patients received DOMP for 1 week at 30 mg/d and then a single 2.5-mg Br dose. Cardiovascular and biochemical parameters including arterial pressure, heart rate, plasma renin activity, and plasma aldosterone were evaluated during the 6-hour period before and after the administration of Br. Neither DOMP nor MTC significantly modified blood pressure and heart rate in normotensive patients. Br reduced both systolic and diastolic arterial pressure in hypertensive subjects. The peak of the antihypertensive effect appeared 3 hours after drug administration, but reduction of arterial pressure lasted approximately 6 hours. At the same time, Br reduced plasma aldosterone levels and plasma renin activity. MTC and DOMP reversed the antihypertensive effect of Br and its effect on aldosterone levels and plasma renin activity. We conclude from these findings that Br acts as an antihypertensive agent at peripheral and central levels by stimulating dopamine-2 receptors, which are involved in the aldosterone and renin secretion.     

Low-dose combination treatment for hypertension versus single-drug treatment-bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide versus amlodipine, enalapril, and placebo: combined analysis of comparative studies

To assess the efficacy and safety of 2.5, 5, and 10 mg bisoprolol/6. 25 mg hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), 2.5, 5, and 10 mg amlodipine; and 5, 10, 20, and 40 mg enalapril in subjects (n = 541) with a sitting diastolic blood pressure of 95 to 114 mm Hg, data from two comparative studies were pooled. All drugs were titrated to a diastolic blood pressure 90 mm Hg or less. Both studies were double-blind, randomized, parallel dose escalation trials with similar designs and included three active treatments. The second study also had a placebo group. The mean change from baseline of systolic and diastolic blood pressure for placebo (n = 79) was -0. 1/-2.2 mm Hg; amlodipine (n = 154), -12.4/-10.3 mm Hg; enalapril (n = 155), -9.4/-8.2 mm Hg; and bisoprolol/HCTZ (n = 155), -14.0/-12.0. Overall efficacy analyses documented a statistically significant decrease in sitting diastolic blood pressure for bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ compared with placebo, amlodipine, and enalapril. There was a significant reduction in sitting systolic blood pressure for bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ compared with placebo and enalapril but not amlodipine. Also, there was a significant decrease in sitting heart rate for bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ (-6.2 beats/min) compared with placebo (+0.1 beats/min), amlodipine (+1.2 beats/min), and enalapril (+0.5 beats/min). The control rate (diastolic blood pressure < or = 90 mm Hg) for bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ (66.5%) was significantly better than for placebo (21.8%) and enalapril (47.1%) but not amlodipine (58.4%). Of those patients achieving and maintaining control, 49% of the bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ subjects were on the lowest two doses compared with 30% of the amlodipine and 26% of the enalapril subjects. Percentages of patients reporting at least one drug-related adverse event through week 12 were 27%, 24%, 28%, and 25% for placebo, bisoprolol/6.25 mg HCTZ, amlodipine, and enalapril (not significant). Lower doses of two drugs in fixed combination can provide as good or better blood pressure control compared with higher doses of a single drug with similar tolerability and safety.     

EFFICACY OF RAMIPRIL VERSUS ENALAPRIL IN PATIENTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION

SUMMARY This double-blind, randomised, cross-over study investigated the antihypertensive efficacy of ramipril and enalapril was completed by 30 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. After a four-week placebo run-in phase, the patients received either 2.5mg ramipril or 10mg enalapril once daily for four weeks. The dosages were increased to 5mg ramipril and 20mg enalapril for a further four weeks. After a placebo washout phase of four weeks, the patients were crossed over to the alternative treatment. The decrease in average 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure from week 0 to week 8 was 1.6mmHg greater with ramipril than enalapril (90% confidence interval 0.6-2.7mmHg). The corresponding reduction in for systolic blood pressure was also greater with ramipril than enalapril by 2.4mmHg (90% confidence interval: 0.5-4.2mmHg). For the difference in the drop of 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure between ramipril and enalapril the lower level of the 90% confidence interval (CI) is above the clinically relevant difference of -3mmHg. This is an indication that ramipril (2.5 and 5mg dose) is at least as effective as enalapril (10 and 20mg dose) in decreasing blood pressure in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. The duration of adequate antihypertensive effect was relatively long for both ramipril and enalapril; however, ramipril tended to have a more prolonged antihypertensive effect. Ramipril had a higher diastolic and systolic trough/peak ratio than enalapril, resulting in a more uniform antihypertensive effect over the 24-hour treatment period. Both ramipril and enalapril were well tolerated and the two treatment groups had similar safety profiles.     

Guanabenz in essential hypertension.

Fifty-five patients with mild to moderately severe essential hypertension were treated with guanabenz (2, 6-dichlorobenzylidene aminoguanidine acetate) in doses from 4 to 16 mg twice daily in a randomized, placebo-controlled study. The patients treated with placebo in the initial phase of the study were subsequently treated with guanabenz. The mean arterial pressure in the guanabenz group decreased from 130.6 to 107.6; that in the placebo group decreased from 129.6 to 126.6 standing and from 126.6 tp 109.9 and 128.8 to 120.5, respectively, supine. The principle adverse effects included sedation, dry mouth, weakness, and tiredness. Of the guanabenz-treated patients 84% had sustained decrease in supine diastolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more, whereas in the placebo-treated patients only 32% had such a response. There was no significant orthostatic hypotension. Guanabenz thus appears to be an effective antihypertensive drug in patients with mild to moderately severe hypertension.     

Once daily compared with twice daily administration of slow-release diltiazem as monotherapy for hypertension

We compared the efficacy of the antihypertensive drug diltiazem in a slow release formulation administered once daily with its twice daily administration as monotherapy in 34 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. All subjects received placebo for three weeks before the randomised, double blind, crossover study, and their supine diastolic blood pressure (BP) ranged from 95 mmHg to 115 mmHg. After the patients had received the placebo for three weeks diltiazem was titrated in the open label treatment to either 120 mg or 180 mg twice daily until the target BP level was achieved. After the open three weeks' of treatment with diltiazem twice daily patients were allocated randomly for either once daily or twice daily administration. After a six week, double blind period, the treatment was changed according to the crossover design. With a dose of 120 mg or 180 mg twice daily patients' supine and standing BP readings were significantly lower than when they took the drug once daily. In the subgroup (n = 19) with the maximum dose of diltiazem given twice daily and once daily BP levels were lower in those subjects on twice daily treatment than in those treated once a day with the same total daily dose, the differences being significant. Administration of diltiazem once a day in a slow release formulation was not as effective as a twice daily dose when the dose titration was greatest or when compared with the same dosage (240 mg x 1/day or 120 mg x 2/day).     

ACE Inhibitors as First-Line Treatment Agents: A Comparative Study of Trandolapril and Enalapril on Casual and Ambulatory Blood Pressures

This double-blind, randomized, parallel-ground study was designed to compare the efficacy of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, trandolapril and enalapril, in 65 patients with mild to moderate primary hypertension. After a 4-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to receive either trandolapril 0.5 mg or enalapril 2.5 mg once daily. At 2-week intervals, trandolapril was titrated to 1, 2, or 4 mg and enalapril to 5, 10, or 20 mg in order to achieve a goal supine diastolic blood pressure (BP) of <90 mm Hg. In addition to casual BP measurement, 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring was performed at the end of the placebo period (baseline) and after 10 weeks of stable therapy at optimal and/or maximal dosage. Both drugs induced significant and comparable decreases in clinic systolic and diastolic BPs. The mean doses used were 3.2 mg for trandolapril and 16.6 mg of enalapril. The maximal effect was obtained at the highest dosage for both drugs in most patients with a mean decrease in supine diastolic BP of 8.6 mm Hg and 7.3 mm Hg for trandolapril 4 mg and enalapril 20 mg, respectively. Moreover, both agents significantly and similarly reduced mean 24-h as well as awake and sleep ambulatory BPs. Heart rates remained unchanged throughout the study. Our results demonstrate that both trandolapril and enalapril given at high dose exhibited significant decreases in clinic as well as in 24-h, awake, and sleep ambulatory BPs with no clear-up difference between the two treatment regimens. Moreover, our results emphasize the role of ambulatory BP monitoring when assessing the efficacy as well as the duration of action of new antihypertensive agents.     

Clinical pharmacology of nabilone, a cannabinol derivative.

Nabilone is a modified cannabinol derivative with central nervous system activity. Administration of nabilone in single doses of 1 to 5 mg results in dose-related pharmacologic effects in man. One and 2.5 mg doses of nabilone induced relaxant and sedative effects in all subjects. No euphoria, dry mouth, tachycardia, or postural hypotension was seen after 1 mg, minimal effects were seen after 2.5 mg, and marked effects were seen after 5 mg. Effects were evident within 60 to 90 min and persisted for 8 to 12 hr. Nabilone produced no significant tachycardia. There were no changes in supine blood pressure; however, marked postural hypotension occurred after the 5-mg dose. The administration of nabilone at doses of 1 mg or 2 mg two times daily resulted in euphoria and dry mouth during the first two days of drug; thereafter tolerance developed to these effects but there was no apparent decrease in relaxation. Subjects challenged with a single 5-mg dose of nabilone showed a 66% reduction in symptoms and signs after the 7-day drug period compared to that of the same dose after 1 wk of placebo. Comparison of nabilone with other cannabinol derivatives suggests that some of the undesirable pharmacologic effects can be separated within the group.     

Effects of enalapril in insulin-dependent diabetic subjects with mild to moderate uncomplicated hypertension

The antihypertensive efficacy of enalapril and its effects on the metabolism and kidney function were investigated in 11 insulin-dependent diabetic subjects with uncomplicated mild to moderate hypertension. During a short-term single-blind controlled trial, one daily dose of 20 or 40 mg enalapril significantly reduced both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In the supine position, mean systolic blood pressure declined from 169 +/- 6 to 142 +/- 6 mmHg (P less than .01) and mean diastolic blood pressure from 101 +/- 1.5 to 85 +/- 2 mmHg (P less than .001). No changes in heart rate or postural hypotension were observed. During 1 yr of treatment, the antihypertensive efficacy of enalapril did not decline, and no clinical side effects were observed. Inhibition by enalapril of angiotensin-converting enzyme did not modify daily insulin requirements, glycemic control, uricemia, or lipid metabolism; kalemia and the markers of diabetic nephropathy were not significantly altered. These results suggest that enalapril once daily should be used as the first step in the treatment of diabetic patients with mild to moderate hypertension.     

A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of enalapril and sustained-release diltiazem in mild to moderate essential hypertension

The subjects of this multicenter study were 159 patients aged 21 to 76 years with mild to moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension. The patients were randomly assigned to receive up to 40 mg of enalapril daily or 360 mg of sustained-release diltiazem daily for a titration period of eight weeks and then maintenance doses for four weeks. The treatment goal was a supine diastolic blood pressure of less than 90 mmHg or a fall of at least 10 mmHg from baseline. During titration, 62% of the enalapril-treated patients and 51% of the diltiazem-treated patients reached the treatment goal after two weeks, 82% and 74% after four weeks, 87% and 84% after six weeks, and 92% and 87% after eight weeks. During the maintenance period, 85% of the enalapril-treated and 87% of the diltiazem-treated patients maintained the goal blood pressure. Treatment side effects were reported by 21% of the enalapril-treated patients and 29% of the diltiazem-treated patients; treatment was discontinued in two patients from each group because of side effects. It is concluded that both drugs were generally well tolerated and effective in the treatment of adult mild to moderate essential hypertension.     

Antihypertensive activity of isradipine in humans: a new dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist

Isradipine (Sandoz PN 200-110), a new dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist, was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial for antihypertensive efficacy in 24 patients with essential hypertension. Two groups were studied: one received placebo throughout the entire study (n = 12) and the other received isradipine (n = 12), 2.5 mg b.i.d., for the first week, 5 mg b.i.d. the second week, and 10 mg b.i.d. the third week after an initial 3-week baseline placebo period. Blood pressure was measured approximately 3 hours after dosing. Isradipine, at a total daily dose of 10 mg, lowered average supine diastolic blood pressure 11.8 mm Hg, with only a 3.5 mm Hg decrease in systolic blood pressure compared with baseline. At a total daily dose of 20 mg, average supine diastolic blood pressure decreased 14.8 mm Hg and supine systolic blood pressure declined 13.9 mm Hg; both were significantly decreased compared with placebo or baseline. Heart rate was increased only minimally by isradipine. Renin level activity was increased slightly by isradipine. No serious adverse clinical or laboratory experiences were noted. Isradipine appears to be effective in lowering blood pressure without reflex tachycardia.     

Evaluation of an Oral Suspension of VP20621, Spores of Nontoxigenic Clostridium difficile Strain M3, in Healthy Subjects

VP20621, spores of nontoxigenic Clostridium difficile (NTCD) strain M3, is protective against challenge with toxigenic strains in hamsters. Human administration and colonization may prevent primary C. difficile infection (CDI) or recurrent CDI. Healthy adult subjects 18 to 45 years old or ≥60 years old received single or multiple doses of an oral suspension of VP20621 (10(4), 10(6), or 10(8) spores) or placebo. Group 4 (≥60 years old) received oral vancomycin for 5 days, followed by 14 days of VP20621 or placebo. Subjects were monitored for safety and followed through day 28. Stool was cultured for C. difficile before, during, and after VP20621 administration. Isolates were tested for toxin by enzyme immunoassay, and VP20621 was confirmed by molecular typing. After single escalating doses, no subjects had C. difficile-positive stool cultures. VP20621 was found in the stool of all subjects given 10(8) spores twice a day. Following vancomycin administration, VP20621 was detected in the stool of all subjects given 10(4), 10(6), or 10(8) spores daily beginning on day 2 to 6. Recovered isolates were toxin negative and confirmed to be VP20621. There were no serious adverse events, and no subjects prematurely discontinued study drugs. Following vancomycin administration, 2 placebo subjects became colonized with toxigenic C. difficile and 3 placebo subjects became colonized with VP20621. Persistent colonization with VP20621 was detected in stools on days 21 to 28 in 44% of subjects. VP20621 was well tolerated and able to colonize the gastrointestinal tracts of subjects pretreated with vancomycin. Further study of VP20621 to prevent CDI in patients is warranted.     

Pharmacokinetics,safety, and tolerability of oral posaconazole administered in single and multiple doses in healthy adults

The pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of posaconazole, an investigational triazole antifungal, were evaluated following the administration of rising single and multiple oral doses. A total of 103 healthy adults were enrolled in two phase I trials. Each study had a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design with a rising single-dose (RSD) or rising multiple-dose (RMD) scheme. In the RSD study, subjects received single doses of posaconazole oral tablets (50 to 1200 mg) or placebo. In the RMD study, subjects received posaconazole oral tablets (50 to 400 mg) or placebo twice daily for 14 days. By using model-independent methods, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve and the maximum concentration in plasma were determined and used to assess dose proportionality. In the RSD study, the levels of posaconazole in plasma increased proportionally between the 50- and 800-mg dose range, with saturation of absorption occurring above 800 mg. Dose proportionality was also observed in the RMD study. In both studies, the apparent volume of distribution was large (range, 343 to 1341 liters) and the terminal-phase half-life was long (range, 25 to 31 h). Posaconazole was well tolerated at all dose levels, and the adverse events were not dose dependent. No clinically significant changes in clinical laboratory test values or electrocardiograms were observed. Following the administration of single and twice-daily rising doses, the level of posaconazole exposure increased in a dose-proportional manner. The long elimination-phase half-life of posaconazole supports once- or twice-daily dosing in clinical trials; however, additional studies are required to determine if further division of the dose will enhance exposure.     

Single- and multiple-ascending-dose studies of the NS3 protease inhibitor asunaprevir in subjects with or without chronic hepatitis C

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitors combined with pegylated alfa interferon-ribavirin have demonstrated improved efficacy compared with pegylated alfa interferon-ribavirin alone for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. Asunaprevir (BMS-650032), a novel HCV NS3 protease inhibitor in clinical development, was evaluated for safety, antiviral activity, and resistance in four double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential-panel, single- and multiple-ascending-dose (SAD and MAD) studies in healthy subjects or subjects with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. In SAD studies, subjects (healthy or with chronic HCV infection) were randomized to receive asunaprevir in dose groups of 10 to 1,200 mg or a placebo. In MAD studies, healthy subjects were randomized to receive asunaprevir in dose groups of 10 to 600 mg twice daily or a placebo for 14 days; subjects with HCV infection received asunaprevir in dose groups of 200 to 600 mg twice daily, or a placebo, for 3 days. Across all four studies, headache and diarrhea were the most frequent adverse events in asunaprevir recipients. Asunaprevir at doses of 200 to 600 mg resulted in rapid HCV RNA decreases from the baseline; maximal mean changes in HCV RNA over time were 2.7 and 3.5 log(10) IU/ml in the SAD and MAD studies, respectively. No enrichment of signature asunaprevir-resistant viral variants was detected. In conclusion, the novel NS3 protease inhibitor asunaprevir, when administered at single or multiple doses of 200 to 600 mg twice daily, is generally well tolerated, achieving rapid and substantial decreases in HCV RNA levels in subjects chronically infected with genotype 1 HCV.     

Hormonal and metabolic effects of enalapril treatment in hypertensive subjects with NIDDM

The effects of enalapril treatment on blood glucose, insulin, and C-peptide levels and effects on the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system were studied in 22 hypertensive patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. After a 4-wk run-in period during which all previous antihypertensive drugs were discontinued, treatment was commenced with one daily dose of 10 mg enalapril. The dose was adjusted upward at 3-wk intervals to a maximum of 40 mg daily. In 3 subjects, addition of a thiazide diuretic was required after 9 wk of treatment. At completion of run-in and after 9 and 13 wk of treatment, subjects had blood samples drawn after fasting and 2 h after a standardized 1.6-mJ mixed meal. Mean fasting blood glucose at the end of the run-in period was 8.3 +/- 0.5 mM and at study completion was 7.3 +/- 0.4 mM. Mean postprandial blood glucose was 10.8 +/- 1.0 mM before treatment and 9.8 +/- 0.7 mM at study completion. The changes in fasting and postprandial blood glucose levels were not significant (P = .06 and P = .15, respectively). There was no significant change in glycosylated hemoglobin levels. Fasting and meal-stimulated insulin and C-peptide levels were not altered by enalapril treatment. Treatment was associated with a sustained reduction in plasma angiotensin-converting enzyme activity, an increase in plasma renin activity, reduced plasma aldosterone levels, and significant reductions in supine, seated, and standing arterial blood pressures.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Clinical efficacy and safety of telmisartan 80 mg once daily compared with enalapril 20 mg once daily in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: results of a multicentre study

The efficacy and safety of once-daily telmisartan 80 mg vs. once-daily enalapril 20 mg in the treatment of essential hypertension were evaluated in a multicentre, single-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial. In total, 68 patients (49 females, 19 males) with mild-to-moderate hypertension, defined as morning supine systolic blood pressure (SBP) 141-149 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95-114 mmHg, were enrolled. After a 4-week placebo run-in phase, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with telmisartan or enalapril administered once daily in the morning for 8 weeks. No statistically significant differences were found in the baseline characteristics of patients in either group. Both SBP and DBP were decreased in both treatment groups, but the reductions were statistically different in favour of telmisartan (SBP, p = 0.013; DBP, p = 0.002). The incidence of adverse effects was lower in the telmisartan group, with the absence of cough. In conclusion, telmisartan is more effective and better tolerated than enalapril for the treatment of hypertension and has the advantage that it does not cause cough.     

舌下含服卡托普利与依那普利急性降压作用的比较

为探讨卡托普利与依那普利两药的急性降压作用与安全性，将高血压病患者４２例随机分为两组，其中２２例以卡托普利５０ｍｇ舌下含服为治疗组，２０例采用依那普利１０ｍｇ舌下含服为对照组。结果显示，两种药物均能显著降低收缩压和舒张压，其中收缩压降低的有效率均为１００．０％，舒张压降低有效率在两组分别为８１．８％和８５．０％，收缩压下降幅度大于舒张压。疗效无显著性差异。两药均不干扰心率，对血糖、血脂、血清电解质、肝肾功能无不良影响。舌下含服卡托普利的起效时间和作用高峰时间较依那普利明显提前（Ｐ＜０．０１）。提示依那普利不宜用于高血压急症的即刻治疗