Lukas Makris

Losartan in Heart Failure Hemodynamic Effects and Tolerability

BACKGROUND The aim of the present study was to assess the short- and long-term effects of multiple doses of the angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan in heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS A multicenter, placebo-controlled, oral, multidose (2.5, 10, 25, and 50 mg losartan once daily) double-blind comparison in patients with symptomatic heart failure and impaired left ventricular function (ejection fraction < 40%). Invasive 24-hour hemodynamic assessment was performed after the first dose and after 12 weeks of treatment. Clinical status and tolerability of treatment with losartan over the 12-week period were also evaluated. One hundred fifty-four patients were enrolled, of which 134 met the protocol criterion of baseline pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > or = 13 mm Hg. During short-term administration, systemic vascular resistance (SVR) (largest reduction against placebo of 197 dyne.s-1.cm-5 at 4 hours) and blood pressure fell significantly with 50 mg, lesser decreases were seen with 25 mg, and no discernible effects were seen with 2.5 and 10 mg. After 12 weeks of treatment, similar effects were seen on SVR and blood pressure (maximal fall in SVR against placebo, 318 dyne.s-1.cm-5 at 5 hours with 50 mg). In addition, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure fell with 2.5, 25, and 50 mg (largest reduction against placebo of 6.3 mm Hg at 6 hours with 50 mg), cardiac index rose with 25 and 50 mg, and heart rate was lower with all active treatment groups. Active treatment was well tolerated, and excess cough was not reported. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that oral losartan administered to patients with symptomatic heart failure resulted in beneficial hemodynamic effects with short-term administration, with additional beneficial hemodynamic effects seen after 12 weeks of therapy. Clear effects were seen with both 25 and 50 mg, with the greatest effect seen with 50 mg.

Comparative Effects of Losartan and Enalapril on Exercise Capacity and Clinical Status in Patients With Heart Failure

OBJECTIVES This study was designed to determine 1) whether 12-week oral administration of losartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist, in patients with heart failure is well tolerated; and 2) whether functional capacity and clinical status of patients with heart failure in whom treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor is replaced with losartan for 12 weeks will remain similar to that noted in patients in whom treatment with an ACE inhibitor is continued. BACKGROUND Losartan is a specific, nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonist. Although specific receptor blockade with losartan has certain theoretic advantages over nonspecific ACE inhibition, definitive demonstration of comparable effects in patients with congestive heart failure is lacking. METHODS A double-blind, multicenter, randomized, parallel, enalapril-controlled study was conducted in 116 patients with congestive heart failure (New York Heart Association functional classes II to IV) and left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 45% previously treated with stable doses of ACE inhibitors and diuretic agents, with or without concurrent digitalis and other vasodilators. After a baseline exercise period, open-label ACE inhibitors were discontinued, and patients were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of therapy with losartan, 25 mg/day (n = 38); losartan, 50 mg/day (n = 40); or enalapril, 20 mg/day (n = 38). Drug efficacy was evaluated by changes in maximal treadmill exercise time (using a modified Naughton protocol), 6-min walk test, left ventricular ejection fraction and dyspnea-fatigue index. Safety was measured by the incidence of clinical and laboratory adverse experiences. RESULTS The treadmill exercise time and the 6-min walk test did not change significantly after replacement of ACE inhibitor therapy with losartan. Similarly, a significant change was not observed in either the dyspnea-fatigue index or left ventricular ejection fraction at the end of double-blind period relative to baseline. CONCLUSIONS Losartan was generally well tolerated and comparable to enalapril in terms of exercise tolerance in this short-term (12-week) study of patients with heart failure. The clinical effects of long-term angiotensin II receptor blockade compared with ACE inhibition remain to be studied.

Efficacy and tolerability of losartan potassium and atenolol in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension

The objective of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of losartan potassium (losartan) and atenolol in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. This was a multinational, prospective, randomized, 12-week double-blind parallel study with a follow-up of 4 to 10 days posttreatment to assess any adverse effects of abrupt therapy withdrawal. Two hundred two patients were randomized (2:1) to treatment with losartan or atenolol, 50 mg once daily. Patients were titrated after 6 weeks to 100 mg once daily if their blood pressure was uncontrolled (sitting diastolic blood pressure > or = 90 mm Hg). Trough sitting diastolic blood pressure reductions at weeks 6 and 12 were similar in both the losartan (-9.2 mm Hg and -8.3 mm Hg) and atenolol (-10.8 mm Hg and -10.1 mm Hg) groups and a similar percentage of patients responded to each drug. Both agents were generally well tolerated, although eight patients (two patients taking losartan, and six taking atenolol) were withdrawn because of clinical adverse events (P < or = .05). Reduction in pulse rate from baseline averaged 10 beats/min in the atenolol group with no pulse rate reduction observed in the losartan group (P < .01). No evidence of rebound hypertension was observed in either group. In conclusion, losartan was as efficacious as atenolol in blood pressure reduction, and was at least as well tolerated.

Inadequate Treatment of Depressed Nursing Home Elderly

To determine the prevalence of antidepressant drug treatment among nursing home elderly with major depression.

Antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of once daily losartan potassium compared with captopril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.

Introduction: Losartan potassium, an orally active, highly selective AT1 angiotensin II receptor inhibitor, effectively reduces blood pressure by direct receptor blockade, thereby lessening the likelihood of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitorassociated side effects such as dry cough or possibly angioedema Study design: In this multinational, double-blind, randomized, parallel study, the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily losartan (50 mg) versus once-daily ACE inhibitor (captopril; 50 mg) was evaluated in 163 patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Non-responders after a 6-week treatment period had the dosage doubled for both study drugs until the end of study (week 12) Results: Mean reductions in trough sitting diastolic blood pressure were significantly greater in the losartan group at week 6 (7.8 mmHg) and week 12 (9.1 mmHg) than in the captopril group (5.2 and 5.7 mmHg, respectively). Losartan and captopril were well tolerated. Headache was the most common adverse event reported in both groups Conclusions: It was concluded that a once-daily administration of losartan was significantly more effective in this study in lowering sitting diastolic blood pressure than once-daily administration of captopril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Both losartan and captopril regimes were well tolerated

First-dose effects of enalapril 2.5 mg and captopril 6.25 mg in patient with heart failure: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter study

Significant decreases in blood pressure (BP) may occur when administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors is initiated for the treatment of heart failure. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and tolerability of recommended initial doses of the longer-acting ACE inhibitor enalapril (ENAL) with those of the shorter-acting captopril (CAP) in patients with heart failure who were treated concomitantly with digitalis and diuretic agents. We evaluated BP, serum ACE activity, and clinical status when a low, first dose of ENAL (2.5 mg, n = 59) or CAP (6.25 mg, n = 58) was administered in a double-blind, randomized, and parallel fashion to 117 patients with mild to moderate heart failure. BP and serum ACE activity were measured at 30 min and hourly for 8 hours after drug administration. BP decreases were similar for both groups (mean supine BP -6.2/-4.8 mm Hg for ENAL vs -8.3/-6.4 mm Hg for CAP; mean standing BP -9.2/-5.6 mm Hg for ENAL vs -10.0/-4.7 mm Hg for CAP). Although the maximum mean decrease in BP occurred at hours 4 and 5 in the ENAL group and hours 1 and 2 in the CAP group, considerable between-group overlap was observed for individual patients. Decreases in mean serum ACE activity occurred earlier and were of shorter duration in the CAP group. ENAL significantly inhibited serum ACE activity to a greater extent than did CAP at all time points except the 1st hour. Administration of a first dose of ENAL, 2.5 mg or CAP, 6.25 mg to patients with heart failure was well tolerated.