Search

Background: We aimed to determine the influence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on blood pressure (BP) control assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM)., Methods: Office BP and ABPM data from two visits conducted within a 9-15 months interval were collected from patients treated for hypertension. In the prepandemic group, both visits took place before, while in the pandemic group, Visit-1 was done before and Visit-2 during the pandemic period., Results: Of 1811 collected patients 191 were excluded because they did not meet the required ABPM time frames. Thus, the study comprised 704 patients from the pandemic and 916 from the prepandemic group. Groups did not differ in sex, age, duration of hypertension, frequency of first line antihypertensive drug use and mean 24 h BP on Visit-1. The prevalence of sustained uncontrolled hypertension was similar in both groups. On Visit-2 mean 24 h BP, daytime and nighttime systolic BP and diastolic BP were higher in the pandemic compared to the prepandemic group ( P  < 0.034). The prevalence of sustained uncontrolled hypertension on Visit-2 was higher in the pandemic than in the prepandemic group [0.29 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.26-0.33) vs. 0.25 (95% CI: 0.22-0.28), P  < 0.037]. In multivariable adjusted analyses a significant difference in BP visit-to-visit change was observed, with a more profound decline in BP between visits in the prepandemic group., Conclusions: This study using ABPM indicates a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on BP control. It emphasizes the need of developing strategies to maintain BP control during a pandemic such as the one induced by COVID-19., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) faces the highest rate of hypertension worldwide. Blood pressure (BP) control rests on the association of lifestyle modification and antihypertensive medicines. We aimed to systematically review antihypertensive strategies implemented in SSA to achieve BP control. A systematic search beginning in 2003 was performed in MEDLINE, COCHRANE and EMBASE. We included only original and observational studies in SSA countries. Thirty studies were included from 11 countries. No study was multinational. The number of patients varied from 111 to 897 (median: 294; IQR: 192-478). Overall, 21% of patients received monotherapy, 42.6% two-drug and 26.6% three-drug combinations. Out of all the strategies, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers were mostly prescribed, followed by diuretics and calcium channel blockers. In monotherapy, RAS blockers were the first to be prescribed. Only 10 articles described antihypertensive strategies beyond triple combinations. BP control was highly variable (range: 16.4 to 61.2%). Multicentre studies performed in several SSA countries are needed to ensure international guidelines actually do improve outcomes in SSA.

Background: The recent progress in molecular biology generates an increasing interest in investigating molecular biomarkers as markers of response to treatments. The present work is motivated by a study, where the objective was to explore the potential of the molecular biomarkers of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) to identify the undertaken antihypertensive treatments in the general population. Population-based studies offer an opportunity to assess the effectiveness of treatments in real-world scenarios. However, lack of quality documentation, especially when electronic health record linkage is unavailable, leads to inaccurate reporting and classification bias., Method: We present a machine learning clustering technique to determine the potential of measured RAAS biomarkers for the identification of undertaken treatments in the general population. The biomarkers were simultaneously determined through a novel mass-spectrometry analysis in 800 participants of the Cooperative Health Research In South Tyrol (CHRIS) study with documented antihypertensive treatments. We assessed the agreement, sensitivity and specificity of the resulting clusters against known treatment types. Through the lasso penalized regression, we identified clinical characteristics associated with the biomarkers, accounting for the effects of cluster and treatment classifications., Results: We identified three well-separated clusters: cluster 1 (n = 444) preferentially including individuals not receiving RAAS-targeting drugs; cluster 2 (n = 235) identifying angiotensin type 1 receptor blockers (ARB) users (weighted kappa κ w  = 74%; sensitivity = 73%; specificity = 83%); and cluster 3 (n = 121) well discriminating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) users (κ w  = 81%; sensitivity = 55%; specificity = 90%). Individuals in clusters 2 and 3 had higher frequency of diabetes as well as higher fasting glucose and BMI levels. Age, sex and kidney function were strong predictors of the RAAS biomarkers independently of the cluster structure., Conclusions: Unsupervised clustering of angiotensin-based biomarkers is a viable technique to identify individuals on specific antihypertensive treatments, pointing to a potential application of the biomarkers as useful clinical diagnostic tools even outside of a controlled clinical setting., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Importance: Although early trials of endovascular renal denervation (RDN) for patients with resistant hypertension (RHTN) reported inconsistent results, ultrasound RDN (uRDN) was found to decrease blood pressure (BP) vs sham at 2 months in patients with RHTN taking stable background medications in the Study of the ReCor Medical Paradise System in Clinical Hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN TRIO) trial., Objectives: To report the prespecified analysis of the persistence of the BP effects and safety of uRDN vs sham at 6 months in conjunction with escalating antihypertensive medications., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, sham-controlled, clinical trial with outcome assessors and patients blinded to treatment assignment, enrolled patients from March 11, 2016, to March 13, 2020. This was an international, multicenter study conducted in the US and Europe. Participants with daytime ambulatory BP of 135/85 mm Hg or higher after 4 weeks of single-pill triple-combination treatment (angiotensin-receptor blocker, calcium channel blocker, and thiazide diuretic) with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 40 mL/min/1.73 m2 or greater were randomly assigned to uRDN or sham with medications unchanged through 2 months. From 2 to 5 months, if monthly home BP was 135/85 mm Hg or higher, standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment starting with aldosterone antagonists was initiated under blinding to treatment assignment., Interventions: uRDN vs sham procedure in conjunction with added medications to target BP control., Main Outcomes and Measures: Six-month change in medications, change in daytime ambulatory systolic BP, change in home systolic BP adjusted for baseline BP and medications, and safety., Results: A total of 65 of 69 participants in the uRDN group and 64 of 67 participants in the sham group (mean [SD] age, 52.4 [8.3] years; 104 male [80.6%]) with a mean (SD) eGFR of 81.5 (22.8) mL/min/1.73 m2 had 6-month daytime ambulatory BP measurements. Fewer medications were added in the uRDN group (mean [SD], 0.7 [1.0] medications) vs sham (mean [SD], 1.1 [1.1] medications; P = .045) and fewer patients in the uRDN group received aldosterone antagonists at 6 months (26 of 65 [40.0%] vs 39 of 64 [60.9%]; P = .02). Despite less intensive standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment, mean (SD) daytime ambulatory BP at 6 months was 138.3 (15.1) mm Hg with uRDN vs 139.0 (14.3) mm Hg with sham (additional decreases of -2.4 [16.6] vs -7.0 [16.7] mm Hg from month 2, respectively), whereas home SBP was lowered to a greater extent with uRDN by 4.3 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.5-8.1 mm Hg; P = .03) in a mixed model adjusting for baseline and number of medications. Adverse events were infrequent and similar between groups., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, in patients with RHTN initially randomly assigned to uRDN or a sham procedure and who had persistent elevation of BP at 2 months after the procedure, standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment escalation resulted in similar BP reduction in both groups at 6 months, with fewer additional medications required in the uRDN group., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02649426.

Background: While the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of renal denervation (RDN) has been established, long-term durability is a key prerequisite for a broader clinical implementation., Aims: Our aims were to assess the long-term durability of the office BP (OBP)-lowering efficacy, antihypertensive medication (AHM) use, and safety of ultrasound RDN (uRDN)., Methods: Four weeks after withdrawal of AHM, patients with untreated daytime ambulatory BP ≥135/85 mmHg and <170/105 mmHg were randomised to uRDN (n=74) or sham (n=72) in the RADIANCE-HTN SOLO trial. Initiation of AHM was encouraged for home BP >135/85 mmHg following primary endpoint ascertainment at 2 months. Patients and physicians were unblinded at 6 months.  Results: Fifty-one of 74 patients (age: 53.9±11 years; 67% men) originally randomised to uRDN completed the 36-month follow-up. Initial screening OBP upon study entry was 145/92±14/10 mmHg on a mean of 1.2 AHM (range: 0-2.0). Baseline OBP after AHM washout was 154/99±13/8 mmHg. At 36 months, patients were on an average of 1.3 AHM (range: 0-3.0) with 8 patients on no AHM. OBP decreased by 18/11±15/9 mmHg from baseline to 36 months (p<0.001 for both). Overall, OBP control (<140/90 mmHg) improved from 29.4% at screening to 45.1% at 36 months (p=0.059). For patients uncontrolled at screening (n=36), systolic OBP decreased by 10.8 mmHg (p<0.001) at 36 months on similar AHM (p=0.158)., Conclusions: The safety and effectiveness of uRDN was durable to 36 months, with reduced OBP and improved OBP control despite a similar starting medication burden. No new uRDN-related long-term safety concerns were identified.

Background: Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) faces the highest rate of hypertension worldwide. The high burden of elevated blood pressure (BP) in black people has been emphasized. Guidelines recommend two or more antihypertensive medications to achieve a BP control. We aimed to identify factors associated with prescription of up-titrated antihypertensive strategies in Africa., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study on outpatient consultations for hypertension across 12 SSA countries. Collected data included socioeconomic status, antihypertensive drugs classes, BP measures, cardiovascular risk factors and complication of hypertension. We used ordinal logistic regression to assess factors associated with prescription of up-titrated strategies., Results: The study involved 2123 treated patients with hypertension. Patients received monotherapy in 36.3 vs. 25.9%, two-drug in 42.2 vs. 45% and three and more drugs strategies in 21.5 vs. 29.1% in low (LIC) and middle (MIC) income countries, respectively. Patients with sedentary lifestyle [OR 1.4 (1.11-1.77)], complication of hypertension [OR 2.4 (1.89-3.03)], former hypertension [OR 3.12 (2.3-4.26)], good adherence [OR 1.98 (1.47-2.66)], from MIC [OR 1.38 (1.10-1.74)] and living in urban areas [OR 1.52 (1.16-1.99)] were more likely to be treated with up-titrated strategies. Stratified analysis shows that in LIC, up-titrated strategies were less frequent in rural than in urban patients (P for trend <0.01) whereas such difference was not observed in MIC., Conclusion: In this African setting, in addition to expected factors, up-titrated drug strategies were associated with country-level income, patient location and finally, the interplay between both in LIC. These results highlight the importance of developing policies that seek to make multiple drug classes accessible particularly in rural and LIC., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Nonadherence to antihypertensive medication is common, especially in those with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (true treatment-resistant hypertension requires exclusion of nonadherence), and its routine detection is supported by clinical guidelines. Chemical adherence testing is a reliable and valid method to detect adherence, yet methods are unstandardized and are not ubiquitous. This article describes the principles of chemical adherence testing for hypertensive patients and provides a set of recommendations for centers wishing to develop the test. We recommend testing should be done in either of two instances: (1) in those who have resistant hypertension or (2) in those on 2 antihypertensives who have a less than 10 mm Hg drop in systolic blood pressure on addition of the second antihypertensive medication. Furthermore, we recommend that verbal consent is secured before undertaking the test, and the results should be discussed with the patient. Based on medications prescribed in United Kingdom, European Union, and United States, we list top 20 to 24 drugs that cover >95% of hypertension prescriptions which may be included in the testing panel. Information required to identify these medications on mass spectrometry platforms is likewise provided. We discuss issues related to ethics, sample collection, transport, stability, urine versus blood samples, qualitative versus quantitative testing, pharmacokinetics, instrumentation, validation, quality assurance, and gaps in knowledge. We consider how to best present, interpret, and discuss chemical adherence test results with the patient. In summary, this guidance should help clinicians and their laboratories in the development of chemical adherence testing of prescribed antihypertensive drugs.

Objective: In Africa, the number of patients with hypertension is expected to reach 216.8 million by 2030. Large-scale data on antihypertensive medications used in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are scarce.Here, we describe antihypertensive drug strategies and identify treatment factors associated with blood pressure (BP) control in 12 Sub-Saharan countries., Setting: Outpatient consultations for hypertension in urban tertiary cardiology centres of 29 hospitals from 17 cities across 12 SSA countries between January 2014 and November 2015., Participants: Patients ≥18 years of age with hypertension were enrolled at any visit during outpatient consultations in the cardiology departments MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We collected BP levels, demographic characteristics and antihypertensive treatment use (including traditional medicine) of patients with hypertension attending outpatient visits. BP control was defined as seated office BP <140/90 mm Hg. We used logistic regression with a random effect on countries to assess factors of BP control., Results: Overall, 2198 hypertensive patients were included and a total of 96.6% (n=2123) were on antihypertensive medications. Among treated patients, 653 (30.8%) patients received a monotherapy by calcium channel blocker (n=324, 49.6%), renin-angiotensin system blocker (RAS) (n=126, 19.3%) or diuretic (n=122, 18.7%). Two-drug strategies were prescribed in 927 (43.6%) patients including mainly diuretics and RAS (n=327, 42% of two-drug strategies). Prescriptions of three-drugs or more were used in 543 (25.6%) patients. Overall, among treated patients, 1630 (76.7%) had uncontrolled BP, of whom 462 (28.3%) had BP levels ≥180/110 mm Hg, mainly in those on monotherapy. After adjustment for sociodemographic factors, the use of traditional medicine was the only factor significantly associated with uncontrolled BP (OR 1.72 (1.19 to 2.49) p<0.01)., Conclusion: Our study provided large-scale data on antihypertensive prescriptions in the African continent. Among patients declared adherent to drugs, poor BP control was significantly associated with the use of traditional medicine., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Sub-Saharan Africa is experiencing a rising burden of hypertension. Antihypertensive medications and diet are the cornerstone of effective hypertension control., Aims: To assess adherence to medication and salt restriction in 12 sub-Saharan countries, and to study the relationship between adherence and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in urban clinics in twelve sub-Saharan countries. Data were collected on demographics, treatment and adequacy of blood pressure control in patients with hypertension attending the clinics. Adherence was assessed by questionnaires completed by the patients. Hypertension grades were defined according to European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Association between adherence and blood pressure control was investigated using multilevel logistic regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex and country., Results: Among the 2198 patients, 77.4% had uncontrolled blood pressure, 34.0% were poorly adherent to salt restriction, 64.4% were poorly adherent to medication and 24.6% were poorly adherent to both. Poor adherence to salt restriction (odds ratio [OR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.72), medication (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.25-1.93) or both (OR 1.91 1.39-2.66) was related to uncontrolled blood pressure. Moreover, poor adherence to both medication and salt restriction was related to a 1.52-fold (95% CI 1.04-2.22), 1.8-fold (95% CI 1.22-2.65) and 3.08-fold (95% CI 2.02-4.69) increased likelihood of hypertension grade 1, 2 and 3, respectively., Conclusions: High levels of poor adherence to salt restriction and medication were noted in this urban sub-Saharan study; both were significantly associated with uncontrolled blood pressure, representing major opportunities for intervention to improve hypertension control in sub-Saharan Africa., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Resistant hypertension is defined as uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) despite three antihypertensive agents including a diuretic (thiazide diuretic if renal function is normal or loop diuretic in case of chronic kidney disease with eGFR<30mL/min), a renin-angiotensin system blocker (ARB or ACEI) and a calcium channel blocker, at optimal doses. Resistance must be confirmed by out-of-office measurements (ambulatory blood pressure monitoring or home blood pressure monitoring) and patients should be asked about treatment compliance and excessive salt or alcohol intake. If the diagnosis of resistant hypertension is confirmed, the patient should be referred to a hypertension specialist to screen for secondary causes of hypertension as they are frequent in this context. If essential resistant hypertension is confirmed, the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, spironolactone, should be added (25 to 50mg daily). In the event of a contraindication to spironolactone, or if adverse effects occur, a beta-blocker, an alpha-blocker, or a centrally acting antihypertensive drug should be prescribed., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Despite the availability of multiple antihypertensive drugs targeting the different pathways implicated in its pathophysiology, hypertension remains poorly controlled worldwide, and its prevalence is increasing because of the aging of the population and the obesity epidemic. Although nonadherence to treatment contributes to uncontrolled hypertension, it is likely that not all the pathophysiological mechanisms are neutralized by the various classes of antihypertensive treatment currently available, and, the counter-regulatory mechanisms triggered by these treatments may decrease their blood pressure-lowering effect. The development of new antihypertensive drugs acting on new targets, with different modes of action, therefore, remains essential, to improve blood pressure control and reduce the residual burden of cardiovascular risks further. However, the difficulties encountered in the conception, development, costs, and delivery to the market of new classes of antihypertensive agents highlights the hurdles that must be overcome to release and to evaluate their long-term safety and efficacy for hypertension only, especially because of the market pressure of cheap generic drugs. New chemical entities with blood pressure-lowering efficacy are thus being developed more for heart failure or diabetic kidney disease, 2 diseases pathophysiologically associated with hypertension. These include dual angiotensin II receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators, nonsteroidal dihydropyridine-based mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, as well as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, centrally acting aminopeptidase A inhibitors and endothelin receptor antagonists have a dedicated program of development for hypertension. All these emergent drug classes and their potential use in hypertension are reviewed here.

Objective: We evaluated the characteristics of patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) and the prevalence of TRH in a large multicountry sample of specialist tertiary centres., Methods: The Survey of PatIents with treatment ResIstant hyperTension (SPIRIT) study was a retrospective review of medical records of patients seen at tertiary centres located in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America, South America, Australia and Asia. Data on demographics, medical history and medication use were extracted from medical records. Prevalence and incidence of TRH were based upon estimated catchment populations., Results: On thousand, five hundred and fifty-five patients from 76 centres were included, mostly from centres that specialize in hypertension (55%), cardiology (11%) or nephrology (19%). Mean age was 64, 60% were men, 62% were Caucasian, 36% had chronic kidney disease, 41% had diabetes, 12% were smokers and 31% had a previous cardiovascular event. Daytime and night-time ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was the most frequently used measurement for diagnosis (82%). Ninety-five percent of patients were prescribed diuretics, 93% an inhibitor of the renin-angiotensin system, 86% a calcium channel blocker, 74% a beta-blocker and 36% an aldosterone antagonist. The overall estimated mean incidence of TRH was 5.8 per 100 000 per year (ranging between 2.3 and 14.0 across regions) and the corresponding estimated mean prevalence of TRH was 23.9 per 100 000 (ranging between 7.6 and 90.5 across regions)., Conclusion: Observed variation likely reflects real differences in patient characteristics and physician management practices across regions and specialities but may also reflect differences in patient selection and errors in estimation of catchment population across participating centres.

Objectives: We conducted a pilot multicenter double-blind randomized placebo-controlled crossover pharmacodynamic study to evaluate the blood pressure (BP) and the hormonal effects of firibastat, a first-in-class aminopeptidase A inhibitor prodrug, in patients with hypertension., Methods: Thirty-four patients with daytime ambulatory BP of at least 135/85 mmHg and less than 170/105 mmHg, after a 2-week run-in period were randomly assigned to receive either firibastat (250 mg b.i.d. for 1 week uptitrated to 500 mg b.i.d. for 3 weeks) and then placebo for 4 weeks each or vice versa, with a 2-week washout period on placebo., Results: At 4 weeks, daytime ambulatory systolic BP (SBP) decreased by 2.7 mmHg (95% confidence interval -6.5 to +1.1 mmHg) with firibastat versus placebo (P = 0.157). Office SBP decreased by 4.7 mmHg (95% confidence interval -11.1 to +1.8 mmHg) with firibastat versus placebo (P = 0.151). However, more the basal daytime ambulatory SBP was elevated, more the firibastat-induced BP decrease was marked. Firibastat did not influence 24h-ambulatory heart rate. Firibastat had no effect on plasma renin, aldosterone, apelin and copeptin concentrations. No major adverse events occurred. There was one episode of reversible skin allergy with facial edema., Conclusion: In patients with hypertension, a 4-week treatment with firibastat, tended to decrease daytime SBP relative to placebo. Firibastat did not modify the activity of the systemic renin-angiotensin system These results have justified designing a larger, powered trial of longer duration to fully assess its safety and effectiveness., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02322450.

Introduction: Over the past few decades, the prevalence of hypertension has dramatically increased in Sub-Saharan Africa. Poor adherence has been identified as a major cause of failure to control hypertension. Scarce data are available in Africa., Aims: We assessed adherence to medication and identified socioeconomics, clinical and treatment factors associated with low adherence among hypertensive patients in 12 sub-Saharan African countries., Method: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in urban clinics of both low and middle income countries. Data were collected by physicians on demographics, treatment and clinical data among hypertensive patients attending the clinics. Adherence was assessed by questionnaires completed by the patients. Factors associated with low adherence were investigated using logistic regression with a random effect on countries., Results: There were 2198 individuals from 12 countries enrolled in the study. Overall, 678 (30.8%), 738 (33.6%), 782 (35.6%) participants had respectively low, medium and high adherence to antihypertensive medication. Multivariate analysis showed that the use of traditional medicine (OR: 2.28, 95%CI [1.79-2.90]) and individual wealth index (low vs. high wealth: OR: 1.86, 95%CI [1.35-2.56] and middle vs. high wealth: OR: 1.42, 95%CI [1.11-1.81]) were significantly and independently associated with poor adherence to medication. In stratified analysis, these differences in adherence to medication according to individual wealth index were observed in low-income countries (p<0.001) but not in middle-income countries (p = 0.17). In addition, 26.5% of the patients admitted having stopped their treatment due to financial reasons and this proportion was 4 fold higher in the lowest than highest wealth group (47.8% vs 11.4%) (p<0.001)., Conclusion: This study revealed the high frequency of poor adherence in African patients and the associated factors. These findings should be useful for tailoring future programs to tackle hypertension in low income countries that are better adapted to patients, with a potential associated enhancement of their effectiveness., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Sex differences in antihypertensive treatment have often been highlighted, but whether there is truly a difference or whether this difference is mediated by confounding factors has yet to be deciphered., Patients and Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study on the first consultation in the Georges Pompidou Hospital Tertiary Hypertension Unit between July 2000 and June 2015 to explore sex differences in both patient and treatment characteristics over this period., Results: A total of 17 856 patients were included. We observed in both women and men an increase in blood pressure control over time despite having more comorbidities. In conjunction, there was an increasing number of treated patients and treatments per patient. The treatments previously selected by the referring physicians strongly differed by sex: women were more frequently treated with loop diuretics [odds ratio (OR) = 1.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-1.37)], thiazide diuretics [OR = 1.13 (95% CI: 1.03-1.23)], aldosterone-receptor blockers [OR = 1.41 (95% CI: 1.24-1.61)], and beta blockers [OR = 1.53 (95% CI: 1.41-1.66)] but less frequently with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [OR = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.84)], angiotensin II-receptor blockers [OR = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.86-1.0)], and calcium channel blockers [OR = 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78)] than men after adjusting for various patient-related confounding factors., Conclusion: Blood pressure control has greatly improved over the last 15 years in both men and women. Although the treatment choice remained strongly dependent on sex, this is not justified by a sex-related difference in cardiovascular benefit from antihypertensive treatment.

Background: Nonadherence to antihypertensive therapy is an important cause of poor blood pressure control. However, to date, few effective and accurate tools exist to routinely evaluate drug nonadherence., Methods: In this observational study, performed under conditions of routine clinical practice, we included 174 patients (aged 67 ± 11 years) with treated essential hypertension who attended the outpatient hypertension clinic of a university hospital. Adherence to antihypertensive treatment was measured by using ultraperformance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in spot urine at the time of clinical appointment and blood pressure measurement. Patients were also asked to report their adherence using a validated questionnaire (four-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale)., Results: The prevalence of directly measured nonadherence by urine drug detection was approximately 10%. Compared with adherent patients, those who did not adhere to their treatment (n = 15) had a higher number of antihypertensive pills and drugs (P = 0.02), cotreatment with cardiovascular drugs (P < 0.05), and total concurrent medications and pills (P < 0.01). After adjustment for age, SBP and DBP were higher in nonadherent than adherent group (SBP: 146 ± 18 vs. 131 ± 14, respectively, P < 0.01; and DBP: 77 ± 15 vs. 73 ± 9, respectively, P < 0.01). There was no significant association between four-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale score and directly measured nonadherence. A longitudinal analysis, performed in a subpopulation of 105 patients after a median follow-up of 11 months, showed that the adherence status remained unchanged in 88% of patients., Conclusion: These results indicate a good adherence to antihypertensive drugs in patients attending the outpatient clinics of a university hospital. They suggest that urine detection of antihypertensive drugs by ultraperformance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry is an accurate and practical tool for directly monitoring adherence. This direct information is not overlapping with self-report questionnaire.

: Adherence to treatment is now well recognized as a crucial key in the effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs; however, it is often overlooked in the management of hypertension because methodology to assess it is partly unreliable and limits its use in clinical practice. The available evidence suggests that nonadherence is highly prevalent in a chronic asymptomatic condition such as hypertension. It may undermine benefits expected from antihypertensive agents and therefore, may negatively impact cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal outcomes. In this review, we discuss the methodological issues related to the measurement of drug adherence in a research setting and clinical practice, the prevalence and the impact of drug nonadherence on blood pressure control and thus in apparent resistant hypertension, and on cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal outcomes.

The DENERHTN trial (Renal Denervation for Hypertension) confirmed the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy of renal denervation added to a standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment for resistant hypertension at 6 months. We report here the effect of denervation on 24-hour BP and its variability and look for parameters that predicted the BP response. Patients with resistant hypertension were randomly assigned to denervation plus stepped-care treatment or treatment alone (control). Average and standard deviation of 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime BP and the smoothness index were calculated on recordings performed at randomization and 6 months. Responders were defined as a 6-month 24-hour systolic BP reduction ≥20 mm Hg. Analyses were performed on the per-protocol population. The significantly greater BP reduction in the denervation group was associated with a higher smoothness index ( P =0.02). Variability of 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime BP did not change significantly from baseline to 6 months in both groups. The number of responders was greater in the denervation (20/44, 44.5%) than in the control group (11/53, 20.8%; P =0.01). In the discriminant analysis, baseline average nighttime systolic BP and standard deviation were significant predictors of the systolic BP response in the denervation group only, allowing adequate responder classification of 70% of the patients. Our results show that denervation lowers ambulatory BP homogeneously over 24 hours in patients with resistant hypertension and suggest that nighttime systolic BP and variability are predictors of the BP response to denervation., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01570777., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Blood pressure is a major determinant of cardiovascular risk. Blood pressure target to reach with antihypertensive therapy, and the population to whom it should apply, remain debatted. Blood pressure goals established by scientific societies may be revised after the publication of the US multicenter SPRINT study results (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) obtained in 2015. Analysis of the generalizability of the SPRINT results shows that they may not be directly applied to the french population which is at lower risk than the US population and would have major medical and economic implications., (© 2016 médecine/sciences – Inserm.)

Background: The DENERHTN trial (Renal Denervation for Hypertension) confirmed the blood pressure-lowering efficacy of renal denervation added to a standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment for resistant hypertension at 6 months. We report the influence of adherence to antihypertensive treatment on blood pressure control., Methods: One hundred six patients with hypertension resistant to 4 weeks of treatment with indapamide 1.5 mg/d, ramipril 10 mg/d (or irbesartan 300 mg/d), and amlodipine 10 mg/d were randomly assigned to renal denervation plus standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment, or the same antihypertensive treatment alone. For standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment, spironolactone 25 mg/d, bisoprolol 10 mg/d, prazosin 5 mg/d, and rilmenidine 1 mg/d were sequentially added at monthly visits if home blood pressure was ≥135/85 mm Hg after randomization. We assessed adherence to antihypertensive treatment at 6 months by drug screening in urine/plasma samples from 85 patients., Results: The numbers of fully adherent (20/40 versus 21/45), partially nonadherent (13/40 versus 20/45), or completely nonadherent patients (7/40 versus 4/45) to antihypertensive treatment were not different in the renal denervation and the control groups, respectively (P=0.3605). The difference in the change in daytime ambulatory systolic blood pressure from baseline to 6 months between the 2 groups was -6.7 mm Hg (P=0.0461) in fully adherent and -7.8 mm Hg (P=0.0996) in nonadherent (partially nonadherent plus completely nonadherent) patients. The between-patient variability of daytime ambulatory systolic blood pressure was greater for nonadherent than for fully adherent patients., Conclusions: In the DENERHTN trial, the prevalence of nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs at 6 months was high (≈50%) but not different in the renal denervation and control groups. Regardless of adherence to treatment, renal denervation plus standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment resulted in a greater decrease in blood pressure than standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment alone., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01570777., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Objectives: We assessed the influence of medication adherence on blood pressure (BP) control and target organ damage in a pre-specified analysis of a published trial comparing sequential nephron blockade (SNB) or sequential renin-angiotensin system blockade (SRASB) in patients with resistant hypertension., Methods: Patients were randomized to SNB (n = 82) or SRASB (n = 82) and studied at baseline and after 12 weeks. BP was measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) was measured by applanation tonometry and left ventricular mass (LVM) by echocardiography. Low medication adherence was assessed through plasma irbesartan concentration below 20 ng/ml; urinary N-acetyl-seryl-aspartyl-lysyl-proline/creatinine ratio below 4  nmol/mmol; last medication intake before visit greater than 24 h and pill counting below 80% of theoretical intake. Medication adherence score (sum of items, max = 4) is defined as low (medication adherence score <2) or acceptable (medication adherence score ≥2)., Results: Among 164 patients, 134 (81.7%) had acceptable medication adherence and 30 (18.3%) low medication adherence, with similar proportions in the SNB and SRASB arms. After 12 weeks, in patients with acceptable medication adherence, BP was more frequently controlled in those treated with SNB (64%), than SRASB (18%; P < 0.001). The difference in daytime SBP was -11.5  mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -15.4 to -7.5, P < 0.0001] in patients with acceptable medication adherence. In contrast, in patients with low medication adherence, the difference between groups was smaller and not significant (-9.4  mmHg, 95% CI -20.4 to 1.7, P = 0.09). Independently of BP changes, PWV and LVM decreased more in the SNB than in the SRASB arm when medication adherence was acceptable (-0.52 m/s, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.007, P = 0.047; and -24 g/m, 95% CI -36 to -12, P = 0.0003), whereas no significant changes were observed in low medication adherence patients., Conclusion: Medication adherence contributes to BP-lowering and regression of target organ damage. The differential effects of SNB and SRASB is observed in patients with acceptable medication adherence, and not in patients with low medication adherence.

Background: Conflicting blood pressure-lowering effects of catheter-based renal artery denervation have been reported in patients with resistant hypertension. We compared the ambulatory blood pressure-lowering efficacy and safety of radiofrequency-based renal denervation added to a standardised stepped-care antihypertensive treatment (SSAHT) with the same SSAHT alone in patients with resistant hypertension., Methods: The Renal Denervation for Hypertension (DENERHTN) trial was a prospective, open-label randomised controlled trial with blinded endpoint evaluation in patients with resistant hypertension, done in 15 French tertiary care centres specialised in hypertension management. Eligible patients aged 18-75 years received indapamide 1·5 mg, ramipril 10 mg (or irbesartan 300 mg), and amlodipine 10 mg daily for 4 weeks to confirm treatment resistance by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring before randomisation. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either renal denervation plus an SSAHT regimen (renal denervation group) or the same SSAHT alone (control group). The randomisation sequence was generated by computer, and stratified by centres. For SSAHT, after randomisation, spironolactone 25 mg per day, bisoprolol 10 mg per day, prazosin 5 mg per day, and rilmenidine 1 mg per day were sequentially added from months two to five in both groups if home blood pressure was more than or equal to 135/85 mm Hg. The primary endpoint was the mean change in daytime systolic blood pressure from baseline to 6 months as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The primary endpoint was analysed blindly. The safety outcomes were the incidence of acute adverse events of the renal denervation procedure and the change in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline to 6 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01570777., Findings: Between May 22, 2012, and Oct 14, 2013, 1416 patients were screened for eligibility, 106 of those were randomly assigned to treatment (53 patients in each group, intention-to-treat population) and 101 analysed because of patients with missing endpoints (48 in the renal denervation group, 53 in the control group, modified intention-to-treat population). The mean change in daytime ambulatory systolic blood pressure at 6 months was -15·8 mm Hg (95% CI -19·7 to -11·9) in the renal denervation group and -9·9 mm Hg (-13·6 to -6·2) in the group receiving SSAHT alone, a baseline-adjusted difference of -5·9 mm Hg (-11·3 to -0·5; p=0·0329). The number of antihypertensive drugs and drug-adherence at 6 months were similar between the two groups. Three minor renal denervation-related adverse events were noted (lumbar pain in two patients and mild groin haematoma in one patient). A mild and similar decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline to 6 months was observed in both groups., Interpretation: In patients with well defined resistant hypertension, renal denervation plus an SSAHT decreases ambulatory blood pressure more than the same SSAHT alone at 6 months. This additional blood pressure lowering effect may contribute to a reduction in cardiovascular morbidity if maintained in the long term after renal denervation., Funding: French Ministry of Health., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Inhibition of brain aminopeptidase A (APA), which converts angiotensin II into angiotensin III, has emerged as a novel antihypertensive treatment, as demonstrated in several experimental animal models. QGC001 (originally named RB150) is a prodrug of the specific and selective APA inhibitor EC33, and as such it is the prototype of a new class of centrally acting antihypertensive agents. Given by the oral route in hypertensive rats, it enters the brain and generates EC33, which blocks the brain renin-angiotensin system activity and normalises blood pressure. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic effects of QGC001 in humans., Design and Methods: Fifty-six healthy male volunteers were randomly assigned to receive in double-blind and fasted conditions single oral doses of 10, 50, 125, 250, 500, 750, 1,000 and 1,250 mg of QGC001 (n = 6/dose) or placebo (n = 2/dose). We measured plasma and urine concentrations of both QGC001 and EC33 by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, plasma renin concentrations (PRC), plasma and free urine aldosterone (PAldo and UAldo), plasma copeptine (PCop), and plasma and urine cortisol (PCort and UCort) concentrations, and supine systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR) at various time points., Results: All doses of QGC001 were clinically and biologically well-tolerated. Peak plasma concentrations (Cmax) of QGC001 and EC33 increased linearly with the dose, with a median time to reach Cmax (tmax) of 1.5 h for QGC001 and 3.0 h for EC33. The median plasma elimination half-life of QGC001 was 1.6 h consistently throughout doses. Urinary excretion of QGC001 and EC33 was below 2% of the administered dose. When compared with placebo, QGC001 did not significantly change PRC, PAldo, UAldo, PCop, PCort or UCort. No significant change was observed for supine HR, SBP and DBP in any treatment group., Conclusion: Single oral administration of QGC001 up to 1,250 mg in healthy volunteers was well-tolerated. Following oral administration, QGC001 is absorbed via the gastrointestinal tract and converted partially into its active metabolite EC33 in plasma. As in animal experiments, in normotensive subjects QGC001 had no effect on the systemic renin-angiotensin-aldosterone parameters and on PCop concentrations, a marker of vasopressin release. In normotensive subjects, a single dose of QCG001 had no effect on SBP, DBP or HR. These data support further evaluation of multiple oral doses of QGC001 in human volunteers and its clinical efficacy in hypertensive patients.

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACEI) inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) has become a major therapeutic tool. Due to internal counter-regulation, however, this system cannot be fully blocked by targeting only one of its components. Instead of increasing the doses of an ACEI, an ARB or a renin inhibitor, blocking RAS at two successive levels neutralizes the consequences of internal counter-regulation and thus provides a more complete blockade with more pronounced biological effects. Additive effects on blood pressure lowering and on renin secretion during combined administration of RAS blockers were first demonstrated in normotensive subjects and in various experimental models of hypertension, heart failure and renal failure. Although combined RAS blockade provided an additional hemodynamic response and more complete neutralization of the cellular effects of angiotensin II, no benefit was observed in terms of cardiovascular or renal protection in heart disease (heart failure, post-myocardial infarction, high vascular risk) or kidney disease (diabetic nephropathy). Moreover, more complete RAS blockade is risky in conditions where blood pressure and renal perfusion are renin-dependent (renal failure and hypotension) and also in hypoaldosteronism (hyperkalemia). The European, French and US. health agencies have contraindicated combined RAS blockade because of its unfavorable risk-benefit balance, especially in patients with diabetes or renal failure.

There is a persistent need for the development of new antihypertensive drugs, because the control of blood pressure is still not achievable in a significant proportion of hypertensive patients. Since the approval in 2007 of aliskiren, no other new antihypertensive based on new mechanism(s) of action have been approved. In fact, the development of promising novel drugs has been stopped for safety, efficacy or marketing reasons. Despite these difficulties, the pipeline is not dry and different new antihypertensive strategies targeting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone pathway, are in clinical development stage. The dual angiotensin II receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696, a single molecule synthetized by cocrystallisation of valsartan and the neprilysin inhibitor prodrug AHU377 is in development for resistant hypertension and for heart failure. Daglutril is a dual neprylisin-endothelin converting enzyme inhibitor which was shown to decrease BP in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy. Aldosterone synthase inhibitors and the third and fourth generation non-steroidal dihydropyridine based mineralocorticoid receptors blockers are new ways to target the multiple noxious effects of aldosterone in the kidney, vessels and heart. Centrally acting aminopeptidase A inhibitors block brain angiotensin III formation, one of the main effector peptides of the brain renin angiotensin system. However, a long time will be still necessary to evaluate extensively the efficacy and safety of these new approaches. In the mean time, using appropriate and personalized daily doses of available drugs, decreasing physician inertia, improving treatment adherence, improving access to healthcare and reducing treatment costs remain major objectives to reduce the incidence of resistant hypertension.

Aldosterone synthase (CYP11B2) inhibition has emerged as a new option for the treatment of hypertension, heart failure and renal disorders, in addition to mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) blockade. The aim is to decrease aldosterone concentrations in both plasma and tissues, thereby decreasing MR-dependent and MR-independent effects in the cardiac, vascular and renal target organs. LCI699 was the first orally active aldosterone-synthase inhibitor to be developed for human use. Its structure is similar to that of FAD286, the dextroenantiomer of the aromatase inhibitor, fadrozole. It dose-dependently decreases plasma and urine aldosterone concentrations by up to 70 or 80% and increases plasma renin activity in healthy male subjects on a low-sodium diet. LCI699 does not decrease basal plasma cortisol concentrations at doses of 0.5-3 mg q.d., but it blocks the cortisol response to adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) at doses ≥ 3 mg q.d. In a proof-of-concept study in patients with primary aldosteronism (PA), LCI699 (0.5-1 mg b.i.d.) induced a dose-dependent and reversible 70-80% decrease in plasma and urinary aldosterone concentration accompanied by a massive dose-dependent accumulation of deoxycorticosterone (>+700%), the aldosterone precursor, in the plasma, thereby confirming the inhibition of the CYP11B2 gene product. This effect was associated with a rapid correction of hypokalaemia, a modest decrease in blood pressure (BP) and a mild increase in plasma renin concentration in patients with PA. LCI699 administration induced biological signs of partial inhibition of the glucocorticoid axis, such as dose-dependent increases in both plasma ACTH and 11-deoxycortisol (the precursor of cortisol) concentrations, consistent with the inhibition of the CYP11B1 gene product. An 8-week placebo-controlled dose-response study on patients with Stage 1 and 2 essential hypertension reported an optimal decrease in BP with a dose of 1 mg LCI699 q.d., which had an antihypertensive effect similar to that of 50 mg b.i.d. eplerenone. A blunted cortisol response to ACTH was observed in 20% of patients, but the clinical and biological safety and tolerability of LCI699 were similar to those of placebo and eplerenone. The discovery of this first orally active aldosterone synthase inhibitor, LCI699, has provided new opportunities to assess the feasibility and the haemodynamic, biological and safety consequences as well as the limitations of this new approach to block the aldosterone pathway in hypertensive patients. However, as the effects of LCI699 on the glucocorticoid axis limit the use of higher doses range because of the loss of selectivity for CYP11B2, this aldosterone synthase inhibitor cannot replace the MR blockade in patients with hypertension, other cardiovascular or renal disorders. The development of second-generation aldosterone synthase inhibitors with a higher selectivity index for CYP11B2 than LCI699 should make it possible to test this approach at much higher doses in these patients, after the necessary toxicology and Phase I studies.

In the current context of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade, angiotensin (Ang) converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or their combination, have proved to be effective in providing cardiovascular and renal protection. However, renin inhibition has long been recognized as the preferred site for blockade of the RAAS because renin represents the first, highly-regulated and rate-limiting step of the system. Up to now, the first orally active renin inhibitors initially tested in humans did not meet the necessary all the criteria (specificity, potency, and pharmacokinetic profile) to become clinically useful drugs. The synthesis of aliskiren, a potent alkane carboxamide renin inhibitor, now provides an orally active compound which, according to its pharmacological profile in normotensive subjects and in patients with hypertension, diabetic nephropathy or heart failure suggests that this drug may be of value for the treatment of patients with cardiovascular and renal disorders. However, long-term studies are needed to demonstrate the efficacy of aliskiren in these clinical settings. The results of the Aliskiren Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Using Cardiorenal Disease Endpoints (ALTITUDE) trial which has already included 8600 patients with type 2 diabetes, proteinuria and a high cardiovascular risk and compared the effects of aliskiren vs. a placebo on a composite endpoint including renal and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality should be provided in 2012., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: Activation of the endothelin-1 (ET-1) pathway may be involved in hypoxia-induced pulmonary vasoconstriction, increase in pulmonary pressure and high altitude pulmonary oedema. Thus, we investigated the effect of the ETA/ETB receptor antagonist, bosentan, on pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) in healthy subjects (n = 10)., Design: We used a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, cross-over design to study the effects of a single oral dose of bosentan (250 mg) on PASP after 90-min-exposure to normobaric hypoxia (FiO(2) = 0.12). We measured PASP and cardiac output by echocardiography, systolic arterial blood pressure, arterial O(2) saturation (SaO(2)), and blood gases at rest and during a sub-maximal exercise., Results: PASP in normoxia at rest was 23.5 +/- 2.7 and during exercise 39.8 +/- 11.6 mmHg (P < 0.0001). During the placebo period, hypoxia induced a significant decrease in SaO(2), PaO(2) and PCO(2) and increase in pH. PASP at rest increased significantly: 32.1 +/- 3.5 mmHg (P < 0.001 vs. normoxia). Bosentan significantly blunted the hypoxia-induced increase in PASP: bosentan: 27.0 +/- 3.3 mmHg, P = 0.002 vs. placebo at rest, but not during exercise: bosentan 39.8 +/- 11.6 vs. placebo 43.0 +/- 8.5 mmHg, ns. Bosentan had no effect on the hypoxia-induced changes in blood gases, or on cardiac output and systolic arterial blood pressure, which were not modified by hypoxia., Conclusion: A single oral dose of bosentan blunted an acute hypoxia-induced increase in PASP in healthy subjects, without altering cardiac output or systemic blood pressure.

Aliskiren is the first direct renin inhibitor for the treatment of hypertension. Clinical experience from studies in over 14,000 patients has shown that aliskiren, alone or in combination with other antihypertensive therapies, provides effective blood pressure lowering with a good safety and tolerability profile.The ultimate aim of antihypertensive therapy, however, is to reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes.The effect of aliskiren on surrogate markers of organ damage and clinical outcomes is being assessed in the ongoing ASPIRE HIGHER programme, the largest clinical trials programme in the cardio-renal disease area. Results from the ALOFT, AVOID and ALLAY studies suggest that aliskiren has positive effects on markers of cardiovascular and renal damage in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy, heart failure and left ventricular hypertrophy.ASPIRE HIGHER also includes four large-scale studies assessing the potential outcome benefits of aliskiren, and the results of these trials will help define the clinical utility of aliskiren in the treatment of cardiovascular and renal diseases. In this article, we review the antihypertensive efficacy of aliskiren and explore its potential in the management of cardiovascular and renal risk.

1. Initial attempts to inhibit renin in humans have faced numerous difficulties. Molecular modelling and X-ray crystallography of the active site of renin have led to the development of new orally active renin inhibitors, such as aliskiren. 2. Aliskiren has a low bioavailability (between 2.6 and 5.0%) compensated by its high potency to inhibit renin (IC50: 0.6 nmol/L) and a long plasma half-life (23-36 h), which makes it suitable for once-daily dosing. 3. The once-daily administration of aliskiren to hypertensive patients lowers BP as strongly as standard doses of established angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor blockers (losartan, valsartan, irbesartan), hydrochlorothiazide, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ramipril and lisinopril) or long acting calcium channel blockers (amlodipine). In combination therapy, aliskiren further decreases blood pressure when combined with either hydrochlorothiazide, amlodipine, irbesartan or ramipril. 4. The biochemical consequences of renin inhibition differ from those of angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition and Ang II antagonism, particularly in terms of angiotensin profiles and interactions with the bradykinin-nitric oxide-cyclic guanosine monophosphate pathway and possibly the (pro)renin receptor. 5. Blockade of the renin angiotensin system (RAS) with ACE inhibitors, AT1 receptor blockers or a combination of these drugs has become one of the most successful therapeutic approaches in medicine. However, it remains unclear how to optimize RAS blockade to maximize cardiovascular and renal benefits. In this context, renin inhibition to render the RAS fully quiescent is a new possibility requiring further study.

Background: By blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) at its rate-limiting step, renin inhibition may provide improved RAAS suppression. We investigated the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects of the oral direct renin inhibitor aliskiren, alone or in combination with the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan., Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, 8-week trial, 1123 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension underwent a 3 to 4 week single-blind placebo run-in and were then randomized in a modified factorial study design to receive once-daily, double-blind oral treatment with placebo, aliskiren monotherapy (75, 150, or 300 mg), valsartan monotherapy (80, 160, or 320 mg), aliskiren and valsartan in combination, or valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide (160/12.5 mg). The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline in mean sitting diastolic BP (DBP) at endpoint., Results: Once-daily oral treatment with aliskiren 300 mg significantly (P < .0001) lowered mean sitting DBP and systolic BP (SBP) compared with placebo; aliskiren monotherapy demonstrated a safety and tolerability profile comparable to placebo. Changes in DBP and SBP were fitted to a first-order dose-response surface (lack-of-fit test, P = .65), which showed that aliskiren and valsartan alone and in combination produced dose-related reductions in DBP and SBP. Coadministration of aliskiren and valsartan produced a greater antihypertensive effect than either drug alone, comparable in magnitude to the effect of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide, with similar tolerability to the component monotherapies and to placebo., Conclusions: Aliskiren monotherapy provides antihypertensive efficacy and placebo-like tolerability in patients with hypertension. Aliskiren and valsartan in combination may provide additive BP-lowering effects with maintained tolerability.

Objective: To elucidate the mechanisms responsible for the adverse renal effects induced by dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and the role of salt therein., Methods: The effects of enalapril, losartan and their combination on blood pressure, renal haemodynamics, renal function and RAS were investigated over a wide range of doses in spontaneously hypertensive rats fed either a low-sodium or a high-sodium diet., Results: In rats fed the low-sodium diet, the losartan-enalapril combination induced the same dose-dependent haemodynamic and hormonal changes as did three- to 10-fold greater doses of enalapril or losartan alone. When a strong decrease (> 50%) in blood pressure was achieved (with 10 mg/kg enalapril plus 10 mg/kg losartan, 100 mg/kg enalapril or 100 mg/kg losartan), a massive renal vasoplegia occurred and renal insufficiency developed. In addition, because of the huge release of renin, angiotensinogen concentrations were reduced, leading to a decrease in intrarenal angiotensins. In rats fed the high-sodium diet, those treated with the enalapril 30 mg/kg plus losartan 30 mg/kg combination, despite complete functional RAS blockade, exhibited smaller decreases in blood pressure and renal resistance, lesser release of renin and angiotensinogen consumption, and a normal renal function. These effects were similar to those produced by 100 mg/kg of enalapril or losartan in rats fed the high-salt diet, or by 10 mg/kg of enalapril or of losartan in rats fed the low-salt diet., Conclusions: Dual RAS blockade could be either beneficial, when sodium intake is unrestricted, or dangerous, when sodium intake is restricted.

Background: Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS) is associated with progressive loss of renal function and is one of the most important causes of renal failure in the elderly. Current treatment includes restoration of the renal arterial lumen by endovascular stent placement. However, this treatment only affects damage caused by ARAS due to the stenosis and ensuing post-stenotic ischemia. ARAS patients have severe general vascular disease. Atherosclerosis and hypertension can also damage the kidney parenchyma causing renal failure. Medical treatment focuses on the latter. Lipid-lowering drugs (statins) could reduce renal failure progression and could reduce the overall high cardiovascular risk. The additional effect on preserving renal function of stent placement as compared to medical therapy alone is unknown. Therefore, the STAR-study aims to compare the effects of renal artery stent placement together with medication vs. medication alone on renal function in ARAS patients., Method: Patients with an ARAS of > or = 50% and renal failure (creatinine (Cr) clearance < 80 mL/min/1.73 m2) are randomly assigned to stent placement with medication or to medication alone. Medication consists of statins, anti-hypertensive drugs and antiplatelet therapy. Patients are followed for 2 yrs with extended follow-up to 5 yrs. The primary outcome of this study is a reduction in Cr clearance > 20% compared to baseline. This trial will include 140 patients.

Background: The prevailing sodium intake and renin-angiotensin system status influence the blood pressure response to an angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonist or an angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitor, which is known to be reinforced by a low sodium intake or administration of a diuretic., Objective: To investigate the possibility that combining both drugs might be more effective in conditions of high sodium intake than blocking the renin-angiotensin system in a single step., Methods: In a placebo-controlled, four-period crossover study in 12 normotensive volunteers who received a high sodium chloride intake (more than 250 mmol/day for 6 days), the haemodynamic and renin effects of a single oral dose of irbesartan 150 mg combined with fosinopril 20 mg were compared with those of a usual daily dose of fosinopril (20 mg) and a high dose of irbesartan (300 mg)., Results: The changes in blood pressure induced by fosinopril and irbesartan alone were not different from those of placebo, whereas the combination significantly decreased blood pressure. Simultaneously, it increased plasma active renin and prorenin concentrations to a greater extent than did each single-site blocker., Conclusion: In low-renin conditions, combined renin-angiotensin system blockade enables the demonstration of a persistent renin-dependency of the blood pressure. Through its more efficient blockade of the renin-angiotensin system, demonstrated by the increase in renin and prorenin, combined renin-angiotensin system blockade is more effective than doubling the usual dose of an AT1 receptor antagonist. This may offer an alternative strategy for treating patients with a range of renin concentrations, and may potentially increase the cardio- and nephrotective benefits through a more complete blockade of the renin-angiotensin system.

The development of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and selective angiotensin type 1 (AT1)-receptor antagonists has provided new insights into understanding the mechanism of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in the pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease. There is good evidence from meta-analyses that shows that inhibition of the RAS achieves organ protection features that go beyond blood pressure control. Candesartan cilexetil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, is characterised by its tight binding to and slow dissociation from the AT1 receptor, and high antagonistic potency, resulting in long-lasting antagonistic effects. It is anticipated that these pharmacological characteristics may bring additional benefits to patients, not only for the management of essential hypertension but also for the management of end-organ damage.

Background: Additive hemodynamic effects of combined blockade of the renin-angiotensin system by an angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitor and an angiotensin II antagonist have been observed in sodium-depleted normotensive volunteers and in patients with congestive heart failure., Objective: To investigate whether the same additive hemodynamic effects occur in patients with hypertension and to verify the safety of such an approach., Design: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, pilot study., Patients: 177 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension [diastolic blood pressure (DBP): 95-115 mmHg after a 4-week placebo run-in period] were included in the study., Intervention: Combination therapy consisting of 50 mg losartan daily and 10 mg enalapril daily was administered for 6 weeks. The effects of this therapeutic regimen was compared with similar groups of patients who received either 50 mg losartan daily or 10 mg enalapril daily., Main Outcome Measures: 24-hour ambulatory mean DBP and clinic DBP measured at trough after 6 weeks of treatment., Results: 24-hour ambulatory mean DBP did not significantly differ between treatment groups although the combination tended to lower BP more. The combination therapy was more effective on clinic DBP measured at trough than was losartan by 3.2 mmHg [confidence interval (95%, CI) 0.7-5.7 mmHg, P = 0.012], and more effective than enalapril by 4.0 mmHg (95% CI, 1.5-6.4 mmHg, P = 0.002). In a subgroup of 28 patients, higher plasma active renin and angiotensin I levels during blockade by the combination therapy were observed. This finding confirmed that the combination of the two agents inhibited the renin-angiotensin system to a greater extent than did either agent alone., Conclusion: A combination of 10 mg enalapril daily and 50 mg losartan daily safely induces a supplementary, although modest, fall in clinic DBP in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension.

Background: There is currently no clear evidence that dual neutral endopeptidase-angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have effects on angiotensin-converting enzyme, renin, or blood pressure that are different from specific angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in humans., Methods and Results: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, single oral doses of the dual neutral endopeptidase-angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, 10 mg BMS-186716 and the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor fosinopril (20 mg) were administered to 9 normotensive subjects with induced mild sodium depletion. Values for area under the time curve from 0 to 24 hours [AUC(0-24)] for the plasma angiotensin II/angiotensin I ratio and for angiotensin II were similar for 10 mg BMS-186716 and 20 mg fosinopril. Plasma atrial natriuretic peptide decreased significantly after 20 mg fosinopril (9+/-3 pg/mL; P < .05 versus 10 mg BMS-186716 and placebo) compared with 10 mg BMS-186716 (16+/-5 pg/mL) and placebo (16+/-5 pg/mL). BMS-186716, 10 mg, significantly increased urinary atrial natriuretic peptide from baseline by 2+/-1.3-fold (P < .05 versus placebo and 20 mg fosinopril). AUC(0-24) of plasma active renin did not differ significantly between 10 mg BMS-186716 (3898+/-333 pg x h x mL(-1)) and 20 mg fosinopril (4383+/-302 pg x h x mL(-1); difference not significant). Both drugs decreased blood pressure, but the AUC(0-24) of the changes in mean blood pressure differed significantly from placebo (79+/-84 mm Hg x h) only for 20 mg fosinopril (181+/-6 mm Hg x h; P < .05) but not for 10 mg BMS-186716 (118+/-7 mmHg x h)., Conclusions: In this model, single oral doses of 10 mg BMS-186716 and 20 mg fosinopril induced similar 24-hour in vivo angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. BMS-186716, 10 mg, increased urinary atrial natriuretic peptide and blunted the expected decrease in plasma atrial natriuretic peptide caused by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. BMS-186716, 10 mg, did not inhibit plasma active renin rise compared with 20 mg fosinopril. A single oral dose of 10 mg BMS-186716 had a shorter blood pressure-lowering effect than 20 mg fosinopril.

Background: The variability of the blood pressure response to blockade of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor is influenced by renin status and pharmacokinetics and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interactions., Objective: To compare the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interactions of two doses of an ester prodrug of a noncompetitive angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist, candesartan cilexetil, at 8 and 16 mg, with those of the reference angiotenisn II type 1 receptor blocker, losartan, at the standard dose (50 mg), in a human model that controls renin status., Design and Methods: In a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study, we compared the effects on renin and mean blood pressure over 24 h of single oral doses of candesartan cilexetil at 8 and 16 mg and losartan at 50 mg in 16 sodium-depleted normotensive subjects., Results: The area under the curve (0-24 h) for plasma active renin did not differ significantly between 8 mg candesartan cilexetil and 50 mg losartan, but was significantly higher for 16 than for 8 mg candesartan cilexetil or for 50 mg losartan. The area under the curve (0-24 h) for the fall in mean blood pressure with 16 mg candesartan cilexetil (-197 +/- 96 mmHg/h) was significantly greater than that for placebo (-112 +/- 81 mmHg/h; P< 0.05) but the difference was not statistically significant compared with either 8 mg candesartan cilexetil (-158 +/- 95 mmHg/h) or 50 mg losartan (-144 +/- 66 mmHg/h). The area under the curve (0-24 h) for the fall in mean blood pressure did not significantly differ between 8 mg candesartan cilexetil, 50 mg losartan and placebo. The area under the curve (0-24 h) for plasma active renin was significantly correlated to that for plasma levels of the active metabolite of losartan, EXP 3174 (r = 0.65, n = 16, P< 0.01). No such correlation was detected for each single dose of candesartan cilexetil but a dose-response relationship was present when both doses were combined., Conclusions: The pharmacodynamic effects of a single oral dose of 16 mg candesartan cilexetil are greater than those of 50 mg losartan and 8 mg candesartan cilexetil. The variability in the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction is less pronounced for candesartan than for EXP 3174, which could result in reduced variability of the blood pressure effects in patients.

The combination of single oral doses of an angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitor (captopril) and a type 1 angiotensin II receptor antagonist (losartan) has additive effects on blood pressure fall and renin release in sodium-depleted normotensive subjects. We planned the present study to determine whether the magnitude of the hemodynamic and hormonal consequences of renin-angiotensin system blockade by such a combination is larger than that obtained by doubling the dose of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor given alone. In a single-dose, double-blind, randomized, three-way crossover study, 10 mg enalapril, 20 mg enalapril, and the combination of 50 mg losartan and 10 mg enalapril were administered orally to 12 sodium-depleted normotensive subjects. The area under the time curve from 0 to 24 hours (AUC0-24) of the mean blood pressure fall after losartan-enalapril combination intake (-220 +/- 91 mm Hg.h) was significantly greater than that of either 10 or 20 mg enalapril (-124 +/- 91 and -149 +/- 85 mm Hg.h, respectively, P < .05 vs both doses). The combination significantly increased by 2.3 +/- 1.2-fold the AUC0-24 of plasma active renin compared with either 10 or 20 mg enalapril given alone (P < .05) but had no additive effect on plasma aldosterone fall. The losartan-enalapril combination is more effective in decreasing blood pressure and increasing plasma active renin than doubling of the enalapril dose.

The hemodynamic and myocardial effects of chronic treatment (5 months) with converting enzyme inhibitor (CEI, enalapril, group T1, n = 10) or a beta 1 blocker (atenolol, group T2, n = 13) of normotensive mature male Wistar rats were studied and compared to untreated younger rats (group C0, 11 months old, n = 14) and to untreated age-matched controls (group C1, 16 months old, n = 14). Heart rate was significantly decreased in T2 rats but unchanged in the T1 group. There was a significant decrease in systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure (BP) in both treated groups (systolic T1:90 +/- 17, T2: 87 +/- 10, vs. C1: 102 +/- 11 mm Hg, and diastolic T1: 60 +/- 17, T2: 59 +/- 9, vs. C1: 73 +/- 13 mm Hg). Cardiac output was unchanged by therapy but stroke volume was significantly increased in the T2 group (0.24 +/- 0.03 vs. 0.19 +/- 0.04 cm3 in C1). Total peripheral resistance was significantly decreased in T1 and T2 groups. Left ventricular weight to body weight ratio (LVW/BW) was significantly decreased in T1 (1.74 +/- 0.11 vs. 2.02 +/- 0.22 in C1) but unchanged in T2 (1.90 +/- 0.15 vs. 2.02 +/- 0.22). The left ventricular passive pressure-volume curve was significantly rightward shifted by beta-blocker therapy (T2) but unchanged by CEI (T1). This corresponds to a decrease of chamber stiffness k in the T2 group compared to C1 and T1 groups. A significant fibrosis was seen in group T2 (mean collagen fiber thickness of 3.03 +/- 0.24 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.15 micron) but not in the T1 group (2.94 +/- 0.14 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.15 micron). Thus, despite the similar decrease in BP induced by the CEI and the beta blocker, the cardiac effects of the two drugs were opposite: CEI decreased LVW/BW with no change in the left ventricular pressure-volume curve and myocardial fibrosis whereas beta blocker did not change the LVW/BW, but induced a left ventricular dilation associated with a decrease in chamber stiffness and an increase in subendocardial fibrosis.