Search

We compared three benidipine-based regimens-that is, benidipine plus angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), β-blocker (BB) or thiazide-and found that the benidipine-BB combination was less beneficial in reducing the risk of stroke than the benidipine-thiazide combination. This sub-analysis sought to compare the effects of reaching a target blood pressure (BP) (<140/90 mm Hg) on the cardiovascular outcomes among the three benidipine-based treatment groups in the Combination Therapy of Hypertension to Prevent Cardiovascular Events trial. This sub-analysis included 3001 subjects to evaluate the achievement of target BP at a minimum of three points at 6-month intervals of clinical BP measurements during the study period. After randomization, the patients were categorized into two groups on the basis of achieved on-treatment target BP: a good control (GC) group achieving a BP⩾66.7% of the target and a poor control (PC) group with a BP <66.6% of the target. For each of the two control groups, outcomes were compared among the three treatment groups. The event rates for cardiovascular composite endpoints, stroke and hard cardiovascular events were higher in the PC group than the GC group (P=0.041, P=0.042 and P=0.038, respectively). Within the PC group, hazard ratios for the incidence of cardiovascular events were lower in the benidipine-thiazide group than in the benidipine-BB group (composite cardiovascular events: 2.04, P=0.033; stroke: 4.14, P=0.005; and hard cardiovascular events: 3.52, P=0.009). Within the GC group, the incidence of cardiovascular events was not different among the three treatment regimens. The benidipine-thiazide combination may provide better cardiovascular outcomes than the benidipine-BB combination even in patients with poor BP control.

Our aim was to assess optimal on-treatment blood pressure (BP) at which cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality risks are minimized in Japanese older adults with isolated systolic hypertension. We used data from the VALISH study (Valsartan in Elderly Isolated Systolic Hypertension) that recruited older adults (n=3035; mean age, 76 years) with systolic BP (SBP) of ≥160 mm Hg and diastolic BP of <90 mm Hg. Patients were treated by valsartan. Patients were also categorized into 3 groups based on achieved on-treatment SBP of <130 mm Hg (n=317), 130 to <145 mm Hg (n=2025), or ≥145 mm Hg (n=693). The primary outcome was composite CVD (coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, cardiovascular deaths, other vascular diseases, and kidney diseases) with secondary outcome being all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the CVD risk for each group. Over a median 3-year follow-up (8022 person-years), 93 CVD events and 52 deaths occurred. Using the on-treatment SBP of 130 to <145 mm Hg as reference stratum, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of CVD and all-cause mortality risks for those with SBP<130 mm Hg were 2.08 (1.12-3.83) and 2.09 (0.93-4.71) and for those with SBP≥145 mm Hg were 2.29 (1.44-3.62) and 2.51 (1.35-4.66), respectively. On-treatment diastolic BP yielded no relationships with CVD or all-cause mortality risk. In conclusion, among Japanese older adults with isolated systolic hypertension, SBP in the range between 130 and 144 mm Hg was associated with minimal adverse outcomes and a reduction in CVD and all-cause mortality. The BP range will need to be confirmed in randomized controlled trials., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00151229., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

The cardiovascular effects of combined therapy with the angiotensin receptor blocker (olmesartan) and a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB) or a diuretic were compared in high-risk elderly Japanese hypertensive patients by performing a randomized, open label, blinded-endpoint study of morbidity and mortality (the COLM study). Here we report the results obtained with respect to safety and tolerability. High-risk hypertensive patients aged 65-84 years were enrolled and were randomized to receive olmesartan combined with either a CCB (amlodipine or azelnidipine) or a low-dose diuretic for at least 3 years. The primary endpoint was a composite of fatal and non fatal cardiovascular events, whereas adverse events (AEs) and the percentage of patients who discontinued the allocated treatment were evaluated as secondary endpoints. A total of 5141 patients were randomized. Both combination regimens achieved a similar reduction of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The incidences of AEs, serious AEs, drug-related serious AEs and discontinuation due to serious AEs were lower in the olmesartan plus CCB group than in the olmesartan plus diuretic group. Serum levels of uric acid and creatinine were significantly higher in the olmesartan plus diuretic group than in the olmesartan plus CCB group. Olmesartan combined with a CCB was significantly superior to olmesartan plus a diuretic with regard to the frequency of AEs and discontinuation of treatment.

Combination of OLMesartan and a calcium channel blocker or a diuretic in Japanese elderly hypertensive patients (COLM) trial demonstrated that olmesartan combinations with a CCB or diuretic have similar effects on reducing cardiovascular risk in elderly hypertensive patients. However, the safety profiles suggest that olmesartan combined with CCB may be preferable to olmesartan combined with diuretic. In this subgroup analysis, we further evaluated the effects and safety of these combinations in elderly (65-74 years old (y.o.)) and very elderly (75-84 y.o.) hypertensive patients. In the COLM trial, 5141 patients (2918 elderly and 2223 very elderly) were randomly assigned to receive olmesartan-based therapy with either CCB or diuretic. The hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals, respectively, in the elderly age group and in the very elderly group were: 1.04 (0.72-1.50; olmesartan plus CCB vs. olmesartan plus diuretic, P = 0.85) and 0.71 (0.51-0.99, P = 0.045) for the primary composite end point, and 1.07 (0.67-1.72, P = 0.77) and 0.64 (0.42-0.98, P = 0.036) for the composite of hard end points. The hazard ratios for stroke (fatal and non-fatal) were 1.48 (0.88-2.48; olmesartan plus CCB vs. olmesartan plus diuretic, P = 0.13) and 0.63 (0.39-1.02, P = 0.059) (interaction-P = 0.019). Withdrawal rates from the trial, withdrawal due to serious adverse event and the incidence of any adverse event were higher in the olmesartan plus diuretic group than in the olmesartan plus CCB group in both age groups. In conclusion, angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and CCB combination may be preferable to an ARB and diuretic combination in the very elderly hypertensive patients for the reduction of cardiovascular risk, particularly for the reduction in stroke risk.

Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the cardiovascular effects of olmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, combined with a calcium channel blocker (CCB) or a diuretic, in a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint trial., Methods: Japanese hypertensive patients aged at least 65 to less than 85 years with SBP at least 140 mmHg and/or DBP at least 90 mmHg with antihypertensive treatment, or SBP at least 160 mmHg and/or DBP at least 100 mmHg without antihypertensive treatment were randomized to receive olmesartan with either a dihydropyridine CCB or a low-dose diuretic. If SBP and/or DBP remained at least 140 and/or at least 90 mmHg, the other antihypertensive drug was added. The primary endpoint was a composite of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. The median follow-up time was 3.3 years., Results: Blood pressure decreased similarly in both groups. The primary endpoint occurred in 116/2568 patients (4.5%) in the olmesartan plus CCB group and in 135/2573 patients (5.3%) in the olmesartan plus diuretic group [hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-1.07, P = 0.16]. Rates of all-cause death and cardiovascular deaths were similar. Among patients aged at least 75 years, the incidence of stroke tended to be lower in the olmesartan plus CCB group than in the olmesartan plus diuretic group (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.38-1.02, P = 0.059, interaction P = 0.019). Fewer patients in the olmesartan plus CCB group (8.2%, 211/2568) than in the olmesartan plus diuretic group (9.8%, 253/2573; P = 0.046) experienced serious adverse events., Conclusion: Despite no significant difference in cardiovascular events, the different safety profiles suggest that the combination of olmesartan and CCB may be preferable to that of olmesartan and diuretic.

The Combination Therapy of Hypertension to Prevent Cardiovascular Events (COPE) trial compared the dihydropyridine T/L-type calcium channel blocker benidipine-based therapies when combined with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), a β-blocker (BB) or a thiazide diuretic (TD). The results suggested that benidipine combined with a BB appeared to be less beneficial in reducing the risk of stroke compared with the benidipine-TD combination (hazard ratio (HR): 2.31, P=0.0109). We further evaluated the treatment effects on different stroke subtypes among the three benidipine-based regimens. The COPE trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter study with PROBE design. Patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter were excluded from the study. All stroke events were subclassified with the Trial of Org 10,172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) criteria. The total incidence of stroke was 4.7, hemorrhagic stroke was 1.6 and ischemic stroke was 2.5 per 1000 person-years. The incidence of lacunar stroke was 1.1, large-artery stroke was 0.6, cardioembolic stroke was 0.3, unknown ischemic type was 0.6 and transient ischemic attack was 0.6 per 1000 person-years. Although few differences in stroke subtypes were observed among the three treatment groups, multi-adjusted HRs for the incidence rates of all types of stroke, hemorrhagic stroke and ischemic stroke were significantly higher with the benidipine-BB regimen than with the benidipine-TD regimen. The incidence of both hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in the benidipine-ARB regimen was not different compared with the other two treatment regimens. This prespecified sub-analysis suggested that a blood pressure-lowering therapy with a benidipine-TD regimen might be beneficial for hypertensive patients to prevent both hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke.

The Combination Therapy of Hypertension to Prevent Cardiovascular Events (COPE) trial was a multicenter, randomized, three-arm comparative study (N=3293) undertaken to determine the optimal combination therapy, based on the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients treated with an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), a β-blocker (BB) or a thiazide diuretic (TD) in addition to the calcium antagonist benidipine as baseline medication. This subanalysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of three combination therapies in a subset of 834 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) (287 patients treated with benidpine-ARB, 283 patients treated with benidipine-BB and 264 patients treated with benidipine-TD). The incidence of composite cardiovascular events as the primary end point did not differ among these three groups. The incidence of hard end points and cerebrovascular events among these groups did not differ either, although the incidence among all patients in the COPE trial was lower in the benidipine-TD group than in the benidipine-BB group. The incidence of new-onset diabetes mellitus was higher in the benidipine-TD group than in the benidipine-ARB group among patients with CKD. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was maintained even after 12 months of treatment in patients with a baseline eGFR <60 ml min(-1) per 1.73 m(2) regardless of the treatment group, although the eGFR decreased over time in all patients in the three groups. In conclusion, in patients with CKD, all of the tested combination therapies demonstrated comparable efficacy in terms of prevention of cardiovascular events as well as maintenance of eGFR.

There are limited clinical trials examining the efficacy of antihypertensive drug combinations aimed at preventing cardiovascular events. Therefore, we designed a randomized controlled trial using amlodipine as the base drug of a multi-drug regimen, the Optimal Combination of Effective ANtihypertensives (OCEAN) Study, to determine the drug combination that is most efficacious in the prevention of cardiovascular events, such as stroke. The OCEAN Study is a collaborative study between Japan and China, enrolling 20 000 patients and following them for 3 to 4 years. A pilot study was conducted before the full-scale study to confirm the feasibility of the protocol and that the study groups and infrastructures could function properly. A total of 279 Japanese patients were enrolled from 57 participating medical institutions between June and December 2004. Two hundred and sixty-six patients (mean age: 65.9 years) were treated with amlodipine alone. One hundred and fifty-four of these patients (57.9%) did not reach the treatment targets (<140/90 mm Hg for the elderly and patients with cerebrovascular disease, <130/80 mm Hg for those with diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease or prior myocardial infarction) and a second agent was added. They were randomly allocated into three different treatment groups using a diuretic, a β-blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor antagonist. The pilot study showed that the protocol was appropriate, and the inclusion of patients with slightly higher blood pressures was necessary to increase the randomization rate. It also confirmed that we organized properly functioning study groups and infrastructures.

In the Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial, comparable efficacy was noted between candesartan and amlodipine in the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality during 3.2 years of follow up. Candesartan suppressed new-onset diabetes more effectively than amlodipine. In this observational study, we investigated whether or not the efficacy of the two drugs is sustainable for another 3 years beyond the experimental period of the CASE-J trial. Of the 4728 high-risk hypertensive patients initially enrolled in the CASE-J trial, 2232 agreed to further follow up. The primary endpoint was a composite of CV morbidity and mortality. The distribution of demographic characteristics for the 2232 patients in the CASE-J extension was similar to that in the initial 4703 patients in the CASE-J trial. Both drugs controlled blood pressure well over the relatively long period of time. The incidence of CV events was 15.5/1000 patient years in the candesartan group and 16.3/1000 patient years in the amlodipine group (Hazard ratio (HR)=0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.77-1.18; P=0.650). The incidence of new-onset diabetes was significantly lower in the candesartan group (9.5/1000 patient years) than in the amlodipine group (13.3/1000 patient years), representing a 29% risk reduction for new-onset diabetes (HR=0.71, 95% CI=0.51-1.00, P=0.0495). In conclusion, candesartan and amlodipine showed comparable efficacy against CV events beyond the experimental period of the CASE-J trial in high-risk hypertensive patients. In addition, the effects of candesartan on new-onset diabetes observed during the CASE-J trial were sustained in the CASE-J extension. The CASE-J extension, which covered a 3-year extension of follow-up from the original trial, corroborated the results of the CASE-J trial.

Whether the strict control of blood pressure (BP) of patients with hypertension who are aged 85 years or older is beneficial is unclear. The Japan's Benidipine Research on Antihypertensive Effects in the Elderly study is a prospective, observational 3-year study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of treatment with a calcium channel blocker benidipine in 8897 hypertensive patients aged 65 years or older as a post-marketing surveillance. We examined the relationship between the achieved BP and cardiovascular events (i.e., stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure) in a subgroup of 415 patients aged 85 years or older (mean age 88 years). BP decreased significantly from 165 ± 14/84 ± 10 mmHg to 130 ± 11/71 ± 10 mmHg during treatment in patients with a treated systolic BP (SBP) < 140 mmHg (n = 230) and BP decreased significantly from 169 ± 16/86 ± 12 mmHg to 143 ± 13/75 ± 10 mmHg in those with a treated SBP ≥ 140 mmHg (n = 185). There was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower rate of cardiovascular events and higher rate of total death in patients with a treated SBP < 140 mmHg. On-treatment SBP ≥ 160 mmHg is tended to associate with a higher incidence of cardiovascular events. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the controlled BP group (3.04%) and the less well controlled BP group (3.24%). In conclusion, although this study was not powered for definitive conclusion, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower rate of cardiovascular events and higher total death in patients aged 85 years or older with a treated SBP < 140 mmHg.

The achievement rate of blood pressure (BP) target and the relationship between on-treatment BP and development of cardiovascular events (i.e., stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure) were investigated in a total of 8,897 patients in the Japan's Benidipine Research on Antihypertensive Effects in the Elderly (J-BRAVE) study, a prospective, 3-year observational study of a calcium channel blocker-based treatment in hypertensive patients aged ≥65 years as a post-marketing surveillance. Blood pressure decreased significantly from 164.8 ± 14.1/88.2 ± 10.3 mmHg to 137.0 ± 13.5/75.6 ± 9.5 mmHg and the percentage of patients who achieved BP <140/90 mmHg was 57.2% after 3 years. The incidence of cardiovascular events was 7.54/1,000 patient-years. Subgroups of patients stratified by on-treatment systolic blood pressure (SBP) were analyzed. Baseline BP, body mass index (BMI), the dose of benidipine, the mean number of anti-hypertensive drugs, and the incidence of cardiovascular events were higher in patients with on-treatment SBP ≥160 mmHg than in those with an SBP of <130 mmHg. In patients aged 65 to 74 years (n = 5,092) and patients aged ≥75 years (n = 3,805), the percentages of patients who achieved the BP target of <140/90 mmHg were 57.5% and 56.6% after 3 years, respectively, and the incidence of cardiovascular events was higher in patients with on-treatment SBP ≥160 mmHg in both age subgroups. The results of the J-BRAVE study show that on-treatment SBP ≥160 mmHg is associated with a higher incidence of cardiovascular events in elderly hypertensive patients.

This study evaluated the impact of renal function on cardiovascular outcomes in elderly hypertensive patients enrolled in the Japanese Trial to Assess Optimal Systolic Blood Pressure in Elderly Hypertensive patients. The patients were randomly assigned to either a strict-treatment group (target systolic blood pressure (BP) <140 mm Hg, n=2212) or a mild-treatment group (target systolic BP, 140 to <160 mm Hg, n=2206), each with efonidipine (a T/L-type Ca channel blocker)-based regimens. Cardiovascular events (stroke, cardiovascular disease and renal disease) were evaluated during the 2-year follow-up period following the prospective randomized open-blinded end-point method. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was elevated throughout the trial period in both the strict-treatment (59.4-62 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m²) and the mild-treatment group (58.8-61.4 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m²). This tendency was also observed in diabetic patients and patients aged ≥75 years, with baseline eGFR<60 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m². Baseline eGFR (<60 vs. ≥60 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m²) had no definite relationship with the incidence of cardiovascular events, nor did the level of BP control. Proteinuria at the time of entry into the study, however, was significantly correlated with cardiovascular event rates (7.1%), an association that was more apparent in patients with eGFR<60 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m² (8.2%). Furthermore, the event rate was more elevated in patients with greater declines in eGFR and was amplified when the baseline eGFR was <60 ml min⁻¹ per 1.73 m². In conclusion, the rates of decline of renal function and proteinuria constitute critical risk factors for cardiovascular events in elderly hypertensive patients, trends that are enhanced when baseline eGFR is diminished. Furthermore, the fact that efonidipine-based regimens ameliorate renal function in elderly hypertensive patients with chronic kidney disease may offer novel information on the mechanisms of cardiovascular protection.

The Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial assessed cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients receiving either candesartan or amlodipine. The aim of this study was to examine the role of pre-existing diabetes or obesity on these outcomes as a sub-analysis of the trial. We examined the influence of pre-existing diabetes on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality using a multivariate Cox regression model. The cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of candesartan and amlodipine were compared between subgroups with or without pre-existing diabetes or by body mass index (BMI) category, and new-onset diabetes was compared by BMI category. Pre-existing diabetes greatly increased the cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, regardless of the allocated drugs. Furthermore, all-cause mortality was significantly higher with amlodipine than with candesartan among patients with BMI >or=27.5 kg m(-2) (adjusted hazard ratio (HR)=0.32; range=0.13-0.75; P=0.009). New-onset diabetes occurred significantly less frequently with candesartan than with amlodipine, with an adjusted HR of 0.66 (P=0.043). Furthermore, the increase in new-onset diabetes was dependent on BMI among patients receiving amlodipine, whereas no such dependency was observed for candesartan (interaction P=0.016). In conclusion, preexisting diabetes increased the risk of experiencing a cardiovascular event among high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients. Candesartan treatment may suppress all-cause death and reduce the incidence of new-onset diabetes in patients with obesity.

Objective: Hypertensive patients have an increased risk of developing diabetes. Accumulating evidence suggests a close relation between metabolic disturbance and increased arterial stiffness. Here, we examined the association between pulse pressure and the risk of new-onset diabetes in high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients., Research Design and Methods: The Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial examined the effects of candesartan and amlodipine on the incidence of cardiovascular events in 4,728 high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients. In the present study, we analyzed the relationship between pulse pressure at baseline and new-onset diabetes in 2,685 patients without diabetes at baseline (male 1,471; mean age 63.7 years; mean BMI 24.8 kg/m(2)) as a subanalysis of the CASE-J trial., Results: During 3.3 +/- 0.8 years of follow-up, 97 patients (3.6%) developed diabetes. In multiple Cox regression analysis, pulse pressure was an independent predictor for new-onset diabetes (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 SD increase 1.44 [95% CI 1.15-1.79]) as were male sex, BMI, and additional use of diuretics, whereas age and heart rate were not. Plots of HRs for new-onset diabetes considering both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) revealed that a higher pulse pressure with a lower DBP, indicating that the increased pulse pressure was largely due to increased arterial stiffness, was strongly associated with the risk of new-onset diabetes., Conclusions: Pulse pressure is an independent predictor of new-onset diabetes in high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients. Increased arterial stiffness may be involved in the development of diabetes.

Background: In a previously reported randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of the efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil (OLM) and azelnidipine (AZL) combination therapy compared with monotherapy with each agent in Japanese patients with essential hypertension (the REZALT study), the use of a combination of OLM, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, plus AZL, a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker, was associated with significantly greater reductions in office sitting blood pressure (BP) and 24-hour ambulatory BP compared with monotherapy with either agent, and was well tolerated., Objective: This article reports the results from an a priori planned analysis and post hoc analyses of the diurnal BP and pulse rate (PR) profiles of OLM/AZL versus monotherapy with either agent from the REZALT study., Methods: Male and female Japanese outpatients with essential hypertension were eligible if they met the following inclusion criteria: age > or = 20 years; systolic BP (SBP) > or = 140 to <180 mm Hg and diastolic BP (DBP) > or = 90 to <110 mm Hg; and 24-hour ambulatory SBP/DBP > or = 135/> or = 80 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned to receive OLM/AZL 10/8 mg, OLM/AZL 20/16 mg, OLM 20 mg, or AZL 16 mg, once daily for 12 weeks. The effectiveness of the treatments was assessed using 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and PR, analyzed by time period (BP and PR, 24 hours, daytime [7 AM-<10 PM], nighttime [10 PM-<7 AM], and early morning [6 AM-<9 AM]; PR, morning [6 AM -<11 AM]) and dipping status at baseline (dippers [(Daytime BP - Nighttime BP)/Daytime BP > or = 10%] or nondippers [(Daytime BP - Nighttime BP)/Daytime BP <10%])., Results: A total of 867 patients were enrolled, and 862 randomized patients were included in the full analysis set (590 men, 272 women; mean age, 56.6 years). A total of 839 patients had assessable ABPM data (213, 211, 206, and 209 patients in the OLM/AZL 10/8 mg, OLM/AZL 20/16 mg, OLM, and AZL groups, respectively). No clinically significant between-group differences were observed in baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Combination therapy was associated with significantly greater antihypertensive effects on 24-hour ABPM compared with either monotherapy in all of the time periods, as follows: SBP/DBP reductions with OLM/AZL 20/16 mg in the daytime, nighttime, and early morning were -22.6/-14.1, -21.2/-12.5, and -20.6/-11.9 mm Hg, respectively (all, P < 0.05 vs the other 3 treatment groups). The SBP/DBP reductions with OLM/AZL 10/8 mg (daytime, -18.2/-11.0 mm Hg; nighttime, -18.1/-10.0 mm Hg; and early morning, -15.6/-9.3 mm Hg) were also significantly greater than with OLM 20 mg (-11.8/-6.7, -12.8/-7.2, and -11.0/ -6.9 mm Hg, respectively; all, P < 0.01) and AZL 16 mg (-13.1/-7.8, -10.2/-5.5, and -9.9/-6.1 mm Hg; all, P < 0.001) in all of the time periods. The antihypertensive effects associated with OLM/AZL 10/8 mg or 20/16 mg were significantly greater than those with monotherapies regardless of dipping pattern at baseline (all, P < 0.05) in all of the time periods, with the exception of nighttime reduction with OLM/AZL 10/8 mg versus OLM in dippers. The numbers of patients who had any increase in BP were 12/213 (5.6%) with OLM/AZL 10/8 mg, 13/211 (6.2%) with OLM/AZL 20/16 mg, 35/206 (17.0%) with OLM, and 36/209 (17.2%) with AZL. The AZL-containing regimens were associated with reduced morning PR (mean [95% CI] changes from baseline to week 12: -1.5 beats/min [-2.5 to -0.4] with OLM/AZL 10/8 mg, -2.1 beats/min [-3.0 to -1.1] with OLM/AZL 20/16 mg, 0.4 beat/min [-0.5 to 1.3] with OLM, and -1.9 beats/min [-2.8 to -1.0] with AZL)., Conclusion: In this study in Japanese patients with essential hypertension, the reductions in daytime, nighttime, and early-morning BP assessed using 24-hour ABPM were significantly greater with combination OLM/AZL than with either monotherapy, regardless of dipping pattern at baseline. Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center registration number: JapicCTI-060286., (Copyright 2010 Excerpta Medica Inc. All rights reserved.)

The objective of this Phase III double-blind parallel-group controlled study was to examine the superiority of amlodipine 10 mg once daily (the amlodipine 10 mg group) to amlodipine 5 mg once daily (the amlodipine 5 mg group) in 305 Japanese outpatients with essential hypertension whose systolic blood pressure (SBP) had not reached the therapeutic target levels (<130-140/80-90 mm Hg) when treated with amlodipine 5 mg once daily. This study consisted of the 1-week prescreening, 8-week screening and 8-week double-blind periods. Changes in trough SBP from baseline at week 8 of the double-blind period (week 8) were -7.0 mm Hg and -13.7 mm Hg in the amlodipine 5 and 10 mg groups, respectively; a significant difference (P<0.001) was found between the two groups. Changes in trough diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from baseline at week 8 were -2.7 mm Hg and -6.8 mm Hg in the amlodipine 5 and 10 mg groups, respectively, with a significant difference (P<0.001) between the two groups. At week 8, responder rates were 28.5 and 44.0% in the amlodipine 5 mg and 10 mg groups, respectively, with a significant difference (P=0.002) between the two groups. The amlodipine 10 mg group showed no significant difference in the incidences of adverse events against the amlodipine 5 mg group. The incidence of mild peripheral oedema was 4% only in the amlodipine 10 mg group. In conclusion, amlodipine 10 mg once daily was found to be superior to amlodipine 5 mg once daily, safe, well tolerated and useful for the relevant subjects.

The COLM study is an investigator-initiated trial comparing the combination therapy using an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), olmesartan, and a calcium channel blocker (CCB) with that using an ARB and a diuretic in high-risk elderly hypertensive patients. Here we describe the rationale and study design. Olmesartan was administered concomitantly with a long-acting dihydropyridine CCB (ARB/CCB group) or with a low-dose diuretic (ARB/diuretic group) to elderly hypertensive patients with a history of or risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality as a primary end point were compared between the two groups, with the target blood pressure (BP) being <140 mm Hg for systolic BP and <90 mm Hg for diastolic BP. Safety and tolerability will also be investigated. A total of more than 4000 patients were recruited and will be followed up for at least 3 years.

The Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial was a comparative study of the angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), candesartan, and a calcium channel blocker (CCB), amlodipine, regarding the incidence of cardiovascular events in high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients. The study design was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group comparison study with a response-dependent dose titration and blinded assessment of the end point. The CASE-J trial enrolled 4728 patients, with a mean age of 63.8 years and a mean BMI of 24.6 kg/m(2), who were randomly assigned to either candesartan- or amlodipine-based treatment regimens. Blood pressure was well controlled to the level of less than 140/80 mmHg in both of the treatment regimens. During 3.2 years of follow-up, primary cardiovascular events occurred in 134 patients in each of the two treatment-based regimens, resulting in no significant difference in the incidence of cardiovascular events between them (hazard ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.79-1.28; p = 0.969). In 404 patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, a significantly larger decrease in left ventricular mass index 3 years after enrollment was observed in candesartan-based (n = 205) than amlodipine-based (n = 199) regimens (-22.9 vs -13.4 g/m(2), respectively; p = 0.023). Furthermore, new-onset diabetes occurred in fewer patients taking candesartan than in those taking amlodipine, resulting in a 36% relative risk reduction (p = 0.030). The CASE-J trial demonstrated that both an ARB, candesartan, and a CCB, amlodipine, equally suppressed the incidence of cardiovascular events. The ARB may confer more beneficial effects to hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy or for those at-risk of diabetes than CCB.

For hypertensive patients, it has been recommended that antihypertensive treatment strategies be chosen on the basis of the patients' conditions and age. In this sub-analysis of the Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial, we aimed to compare the effects of candesartan and amlodipine on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in Japanese elderly patients with high-risk hypertension and to determine their optimal target blood pressures (BPs). The effect of the two drugs on cardiovascular events was compared across different age subgroups (<65, 65-74, and 75-84 years) by use of Cox regression analysis. We also evaluated the associations between the achieved BP and the incidence of cardiovascular events, irrespective of the allocated drugs in multiple Cox regression analyses. The incidence of cardiovascular events was independent of the assigned treatment for each of the age subgroups. For systolic BP (SBP), cardiovascular risk increased steeply when control of SBP was inadequate (higher than 140 mmHg) for patients younger than 65 years old and those between 65 and 74 years old. Patients aged 75 to 84 years old showed a significantly increased risk when their SBP was >or=150 mmHg. For diastolic BP (DBP), the risk significantly increased for the subgroup aged 75 to 84 years when the DBP was >or=85 mmHg. The present results show that candesartan and amlodipine are equally effective in Japanese elderly patients with high-risk hypertension. Moreover, it is important to control BP levels to less than 150/85 mmHg for patients 75-84 years old.

The objective of the present study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of lifetime antihypertensive therapy with angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy, calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapy, or ARB plus CCB (ARB+CCB) combination therapy in Japan. Based on the results of large-scale clinical trials and epidemiological data, we constructed a Markov model for patients with essential hypertension. Our Markov model comprised coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and progression of diabetic nephropathy submodels. Based on this model, analysis of the prognosis of each patient was repeatedly conducted by Monte Carlo simulation. The three treatment strategies were compared in hypothetical 55-year-old patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 160 mmHg in the absence and presence of comorbid diabetes. Olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/d was the ARB and azelnidipine 16 mg/d the CCB in our model. On-treatment SBP was assumed to be 125, 140, and 140 mmHg in the ARB+CCB, ARB alone, and CCB alone groups, respectively. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted by 3%/year. The ARB+CCB group was the most cost-effective both in male and female patients with or without diabetes. In conclusion, ARB plus CCB combination therapy may be a more cost-effective lifetime antihypertensive strategy than monotherapy with either agent alone.

Background/aims: We have previously shown that treatment of spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) during the 'critical period' from age 3 to 10 weeks confers protection against L-NAME-induced renal injury later in life. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of transient prepubertal exposure to ARB on the development of nephropathy in streptozotocin-induced diabetic SHR and to compare the results with other antihypertensive agents including a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MR-ant)., Methods: Male SHR (n = 43) were transiently treated with candesartan (ARB), potassium canreonate (the active metabolite of the MR-ant spironolactone) or hydralazine (vasodilator) between 3 and 10 weeks of age with untreated rats serving as controls. An additional group was treated continuously with candesartan throughout the study. Rats were injected with streptozotocin to induce diabetes at age 16 weeks and followed until age 8 months., Results: Diabetic control rats showed signs of diabetic nephropathy including albuminuria and mesangial expansion. These changes were significantly suppressed in rats exposed to ARB or MR-ant. Systolic blood pressure was significantly reduced compared to controls in the ARB (transient) and ARB (sustained) groups, but not in the MR-ant or vasodilator groups., Conclusion: Transient prepubertal exposure to ARB or MR-ant, but not vasodilator, confers protection against the later development of diabetic nephropathy and involves blood pressure-independent protective mechanisms., (Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the antihypertensive efficacy and safety of 8-week treatment with one of three fixed-dose combinations-losartan 50 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg, losartan 50 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 6.25 mg, or losartan 25 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 6.25 mg-in comparison with those of hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg alone, losartan 50 mg alone, or placebo in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Significant reductions in sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were seen in all three combination groups compared with the placebo group (each p<0.001). The greatest reductions in DBP and SBP were observed in the losartan 50 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg group (12.7 and 18.0 mmHg, respectively). The reductions in the losartan 50 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg group were significantly greater (each p<0.001) than those in the placebo group and each of the monotherapy groups. There were no significant differences in the incidences of clinical and laboratory drug-related adverse events between any of the combination groups and the placebo group. All combination groups showed improved hypokalemia and hyperuricemia compared to the hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg group. These results demonstrated that once-daily, fixed-dose combination therapy with losartan 50 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg is well tolerated and more efficacious in lowering DBP and SBP than monotherapy in Japanese hypertensive patients.

This study was designed to compare the clinical efficacy of two calcium channel blocker-based combination therapies with an angiotensin receptor blocker in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. A 16-week, double-blind, parallel-arm, randomized clinical trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of controlled release nifedipine (nifedipine CR) plus valsartan vs. that of amlodipine plus valsartan. The primary endpoint was the target blood pressure achievement rate. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to nifedipine CR-based or amlodipine-based treatment groups. Patients were examined every 4 weeks to determine whether the blood pressure had reached the target level. When the target level was not achieved, the drug regimen was changed; when the target blood pressure was achieved, the same study medication was continued. A total of 505 patients were enrolled in the study (nifedipine CR group: 245 cases; amlodipine group: 260 cases). After 16 weeks of treatment, blood pressure was significantly reduced in both groups, but to a larger extent in the nifedipine CR group than in the amlodipine group (p < 0.01). The target blood pressure achievement rate was also significantly higher in the nifedipine CR group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of drug-related adverse events between the groups. These results indicate that the nifedipine CR-based combination therapy was superior to the amlodipine-based therapy for decreasing blood pressure and achieving the target blood pressure in patients with essential hypertension.

Clinic physicians' awareness of the Japanese hypertension guideline (JSH 2000) and compliance with its recommendations were assessed to derive policy implications for effective blood pressure control. Data were obtained from two postal questionnaire surveys conducted in 2000 and 2004, and subjects were 896 and 1425 clinic physicians, respectively, who were engaged in general internal medicine. Recognition rates of JSH 2000 were 63.1% (n = 822) before its announcement in 2000 and 94.4% (n = 1400) in 2004. Rates of access, familiarity and utilisation of JSH 2000 were 87.0, 81.6 and 68.9%, respectively (n = 1400) in 2004. As for major management strategies for low-risk hypertension: in 2000, for patients with 140-149/90-94 mmHg, 81.5% of 812 respondents performed lifestyle modification, and 11.2% prescribed medicines, whereas for patients with 150-159/95-99 mmHg, 71.7% of 807 respondents prescribed medicines, and 24.3% conducted lifestyle modification; in 2004, 90.0% of 1384 respondents conducted lifestyle modification, 22.6% prescribed medicines, 2.5% referred patients to other facilities, and 6.4% did nothing. In 2004, 68.9% of 1388 respondents agreed with the new definition of hypertension, whereas 17.1% preferred 160/95 mmHg. Respondents' age (P<0.05) and a percentage of hypertensives in daily patient load (P<0.0005) significantly associated with the choice of the old criteria. In conclusion, JSH 2000 achieved a substantial improvement in clinic physicians' awareness and their compliance to its recommendations on low-risk hypertension management. One of the strategies for further enhancement in their compliance with JSH 2004 would be its dissemination to those who are old and/or do not see hypertensive patients so frequently.

The essence of Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2000) was introduced. JSH 2004 is a revised edition of JSH 2000. In JSH 2004, the significance of lifestyle modification is also emphasized as the basic treatment of hypertension, in which salt intake per day is reduced to below 6g/day. In drug therapy, Ca channel blockers, AII receptor blockers, ACE inhibitors, diuretics, beta -blockers and alpha-blockers are recommended as the main anti-hypertensive drugs. To obtain target blood pressure, a combined therapy of those drugs is recommended. In the management of aged hypertensive patients over 65, target blood pressure is generally below 140/90mmHg, but in those over 75, transient target blood pressure is below 150/90 mmHg, if hypertension is moderate or severe.

To assess home blood pressure status in a Japanese urban population, we analyzed home blood pressure values in normotensive subjects determined by casual blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg), hypertensive subjects without medication (> or = 140/90 mmHg) and treated hypertensive patients. The subjects (468 male, 232 female; mean age 41 years old) were recruited from a company located in Tokyo. Home blood pressure was measured with a semi-automatic device (Omron HEM-759P). Subjects were instructed to perform triplicate morning and evening measurements on 7 consecutive days. In the treated hypertensive group (n = 70), there was a significant difference between morning (139 +/- 12/88 +/- 9 mmHg) and evening (130 +/- 12/79 +/- 8 mmHg) home blood pressure. In the normotensive group (n = 558), however, only the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) component of the home blood pressure was significantly different between morning (115 +/- 13/72 +/- 9 mmHg) and evening (114 +/- 12/68 +/- 8 mmHg). In the nontreated hypertensive group (n = 72), casual blood pressure (145 +/- 14/92 +/- 9 mmHg) was higher than morning (138 +/- 16/89 +/- 11 mmHg) and evening (134 +/- 16/83 +/- 11 mmHg) home blood pressure, but no difference was seen between morning and evening systolic blood pressure (SBP). According to the reference value of the Japanese Society of Hypertension 2004 (SBP > or = 135 mmHg and/or DBP > or = 85 mmHg), 7.2% (systolic) and 8.7% (diastolic) of subjects in the normotensive group were classified as hypertensive by home blood pressure. Casual blood pressure in the treated hypertensive group was normal in 64.3% for SBP and 70.0% for DBP. However, their morning SBP (32.9%), morning DBP (40.0%), evening SBP (10.0%), and evening DBP (17.1%) were classified as hypertensive by home blood pressure. Furthermore, patients who were taking antihypertensive drug(s) only in the morning (n = 52) showed higher morning SBP (6 mmHg, p = 0.086) and morning DBP (6 mmHg, p = 0.005) than patients taking drug(s) by other administration schedules (n = 18), but no difference in evening home blood pressure was observed. In conclusion, a proportion of the subjects defined as normotensive by casual blood pressure were classified as hypertensive by home blood pressure in the present urban population. Furthermore, morning home blood pressure control in the treated hypertensive group classified as under control by casual blood pressure was insufficient, especially in patients who were taking medication only in the morning.

A number of major clinical trials have demonstrated the clinical benefits of lowering blood pressure and have indicated that a majority of patients with hypertension will require more than one drug to achieve optimal blood pressure control. However, there is little data showing which antihypertensive combination best protects patients from cardiovascular events and which best achieves the target blood pressure with the fewest adverse events. The Combination Therapy of Hypertension to Prevent Cardiovascular Events (COPE) trial is the first large-scale investigator-initiated multicenter study with a prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint evaluation (PROBE) design to directly compare cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, incidence of adverse drug reaction, and degree of blood pressure reduction in Japanese hypertensive patients for a combination of angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers or thiazide diuretics in addition to a calcium antagonist, benidipine hydrochloride, with a response-dependent dose titration scheme. The COPE trial is being conducted with the cooperation of more than 100 centers and clinics in Japan and involves 3,000 patients, who will be followed for 3 years. Eligible patients are being enrolled from May 2003 until May 2006. Results from the COPE trial should provide new evidence for selecting optimal combination therapies for hypertensive patients.

Although antihypertensive therapy has been proven to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, it is unclear how much blood pressure should be decreased in elderly patients with hypertension. The Valsartan in Elderly Isolated Systolic Hypertension (VALISH) study is a multicenter parallel-group study comparing the incidence of cardiovascular events between two target systolic blood pressure levels, below 140 mmHg and below 150 mmHg, under treatment with valsartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, as an initial antihypertensive drug in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The number of patients to be recruited is 3,000 and the duration of follow-up is at least 2 years. This 3,000-patient trial was designed with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05 and 80% power to detect the difference in incidence of cardiovascular events between the target blood pressure levels based on estimation of the cardiovascular events ratio as 21.5/1,000 patient-years and 29.1/1,000 patient-years for the two blood pressure levels. The VALISH study, a large-scale investigator-initiated trial in Japan, will determine whether age should be considered in setting target blood pressure in treatment of isolated systolic hypertension in elderly patients.

Hypertension continues to be a major public health issue in the world. To combat this problem, many anti-hypertensive drugs have been developed and proven effective at controlling blood pressure in the last half century. In recent decades, antihypertensive drugs have been shown to have cardiovascular benefits beyond the reduction of blood pressure, and the focus has shifted to clarification of these effects. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists and calcium channel blockers are the most widely used antihypertensive drugs in Japan. However, these two classes of drugs have not yet been compared with respect to their efficacy for treating cardiovascular events. The Candesartan Antihypertensive Survival Evaluation in Japan (CASE-J) trial described herein is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, 2-arm parallel group comparison with a response-dependent dose titration and blinded assessment of endpoints in high-risk hypertensive patients treated with either an angiotensin II receptor antagonist (candesartan cilexetil) or a third-generation calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besilate). The eligibility criteria in this study were 1) age between 20 and 85 years; 2) systolic blood pressure (SBP) > or = 140 mmHg in those below 70 years of age or > or = 160 mmHg in those above 70 years of age or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > or = 90 mmHg on two consecutive measurements at clinic; and 3) at least one of the following high risk factors for cardiovascular events: a) SBP > or = 2180 mmHg or DBP > or = 110 mmHg on two consecutive visits, b) type 2 diabetes mellitus (fasting blood glucose > or = 126 mg/dl, casual blood glucose > or = 200 mg/dl, HbA1c > or = 6.5%, 2 h blood glucose on 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) > or = 200 mg/dl, or current treatment with hypoglycemic therapy), c) history of cerebral hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, or transient ischemic attack until 6 months prior to the screening, d) left ventricular hypertrophy on either echocardiography or ECG, angina pectoris, or history of myocardial infarction until 6 months prior to screening, e) proteinuria or serum creatinine > or = 1.3 mg/dl, and f) symptoms of arteriosclerotic artery obstruction. The therapeutic goals of blood pressure control were set as follows: SBP < 130 mmHg and DBP < 85 mmHg for patients below 60 years of age, SBP < 140 mmHg and DBP < 90 mmHg for those in their 60s, SBP < 150 mmHg and DBP < 90 mmHg for those in their 70s, and SBP < 160 mmHg and DBP < 90 mmHg for those in their 80s. A total of 3,200 patients, equally allocated to each of the two treatment arms, were required based on a two-sided alpha level 0.05 and 90% power. The CASE-J is also the first study to employ the newly developed Automatic Bar Code Data-Capturing/Allocation, Booking & Trial Coding, Data Management (ABCD) system for data collection and management. Enrollment of patients started in September 2001 and ended in December 2002. Follow-up data will be collected every 6 months until December 2005. The CASE-J trial will provide important evidence on the comparative effectiveness of candesartan cilexetil and amlodipine besilate on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among Japanese. In addition, the use of the ABCD system is expected to contribute to the development of more efficient data management systems for large-scale clinical trials.

Background: Aortic stiffness is assessed by pulse wave velocity (PWV) and predicts the cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of hypertensive patients. To determine the long-term effects of intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering by antihypertensive drug therapy on aortic stiffness assessed by PWV, a single-blind randomized prospective study was performed., Methods: One hundred forty nondiabetic hypertensive patients (67.6 +/- 0.9 years old; systolic/diastolic BP: 177 +/- 1/101 +/- 1 mm Hg) were assigned to an intensive control group (IC) with a target BP of <130/85 mm Hg (n = 71) or a moderate control group (MC) with a target BP of <140/90 mm Hg (n = 69), and aortic stiffness was assessed every 3 months by measuring aortic PWV with a pulse pressure analyzer., Results: During the 12-month treatment period, BP significantly decreased to 129 +/- 1/78 +/- 1 mm Hg and 152 +/- 2/87 +/- 1 mm Hg in the IC and MC, respectively. At the beginning of the study, PWV in the IC and MC was similar, averaging 1779 +/- 41 and 1885 +/- 50 cm/sec, respectively. By the end of the treatment period, however, PWV had decreased to 1621 +/- 34 cm/sec in the IC, but had not changed significantly in the MC. In the IC, the ratio of the change in PWV to the change in BP increased with the duration of BP lowering. Clinical and biological parameters were similar in both groups, except that higher doses of amlodipine were used in the IC., Conclusions: Long-term intensive BP lowering in the hypertensive patients was associated with a significant reduction in aortic stiffness distinct from its acute depressor effect.

Background: We previously reported that the angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist candesartan was effective in reducing blood pressure and microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients with diabetic nephropathy after angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors were replaced due to side effects. In the present study, the clinical effects of candesartan were investigated and compared with ACE inhibitors in patients with stage 2 or 3A diabetic nephropathy, mainly with respect to the effects on the urinary excretion of albumin and type IV collagen., Methods: Forty-nine patients (26 males/23 females) with diabetic nephropathy (stage 2 or 3A), including normotensive patients, were the study subjects. The patients were treated with either an ACE inhibitor (23 patients) or candesartan (26 patients) for 11 +/- 3 months. The urinary excretion of albumin and urinary type IV collagen was measured., Results: Posttreatment blood pressure tended to decrease, but such a decrease did not reach a statistically significant level, nor did it show any intergroup difference. The urinary albumin excretion was positively correlated with pretreatment mean blood pressure and left ventricular mass index, but the urinary type IV collagen excretion did not show such correlations. The urinary albumin excretion decreased significantly after treatment to a similar extent in both groups, whereas the urinary type IV collagen excretion decreased significantly only in the candesartan group., Conclusion: It was revealed that ACE inhibitors and candesartan reduced urinary albumin excretion to a similar extent in patients with diabetic nephropathy. From the results of the present study, it is inferred that the renoprotective effect of candesartan in diabetic nephropathy may partially differ from that of ACE inhibitors.

Although calcium antagonists are used as a first-line antihypertensive agent, controversy attends the renal microvascular effects of calcium antagonists. Since calcium antagonists elicit predominant vasodilation of the afferent arteriole, they might ostensibly aggravate glomerular hypertension. Recently, novel types of calcium antagonists have been developed, some of which are reported to dilate efferent as well as afferent arterioles. The present review attempted to characterize the renal microvascular action of calcium antagonists, and evaluated the consequences of renal injury following the treatment with these antagonists. In contrast to predominant afferent arteriolar action of conventional calcium antagonists (e.g. nifedipine, nicardipine, amlodipine and diltiazem), novel antagonists (e.g. manidipine, nilvadipine, benidipine and efonidipine) potently dilated both afferent and efferent arterioles. The vasodilator action on efferent arterioles appears to be mediated in part by the blockade of T-type calcium channels, particularly through the inhibition of the intracellular calcium release mechanism. The comparison of the anti-proteinuric action of calcium antagonists in subtotally nephrectomized rats showed that efonidipine and enalapril, both possessing vasodilator action on efferent arterioles, exerted more prominent action than other calcium antagonists. Finally, in patients with chronic renal disease, a 48-week treatment with efonidipine reduced proteinuria, and this effect was seen even when the mean arterial blood pressure failed to reach below 100 mm Hg. In conclusion, although calcium antagonists potently inhibit afferent arteriolar constriction, efferent arteriolar responses to these agents vary, depending on the types of calcium antagonists used. These divergent actions of these agents on the efferent arteriole may alter differently the glomerular hemodynamics, and could affect the final outcome of underlying renal diseases., (Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Sufficient persistence with therapy is important to achieve the desired benefits of antihypertensive therapy. This study was designed to describe the rates of persistence with antihypertensive therapy for 1 year and to assess the effect of patient education by a periodic newsletter on persistence rates in general practice in Japan. Information on 5,324 patients who received the newsletter once a month for 1 year (intervention group; 53.9% of those originally registered) and 666 patients who did not receive the newsletter (control group; 94.3% of those originally registered) was obtained from a physician questionnaire (response rate: 54.3%). The rate of persistence with antihypertensive therapy in the intervention group was similar to that in the control group (91.7% vs. 90.7%, respectively). The patient questionnaire (response rate: 28.2%) indicated that most patients consistently read the newsletter and found it useful in understanding the management of hypertension. The results of this 1-year study showed that about 90% of patients persisted with therapy for 1 year. Although most of them evaluated the newsletter favorably, no clear effect of the newsletter on their persistence with therapy was revealed. However, these results do not rule out a possible effect of education on persistence with therapy over the long-term, and thus there is need of a longer-term study employing follow-up questionnaires.

A prospective, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-response trial was conducted to investigate the antiproteinuric effect of candesartan cilexetil, the angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker, in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis. Patients (n=280) were treated for 12 weeks with candesartan cilexetil 2, 4, or 8 mg given orally once-daily (o.d.). The improvement in urinary protein excretion observed at the end of the treatment period was 15.9% in the 2 mg group, 25.6% in the 4 mg group, and 34.6% in the 8 mg group, respectively, showing a clear dose-response (2 mg <4 mg <8 mg; p=0.003). The mean reduction in urinary protein excretion was 11.3% in the 2 mg group, 26.3% in the 4 mg group, and 26.0% in the 8 mg group, showing a dose-response pattern, in that the effect of 4 mg and 8 mg was greater than that of 2 mg (2 mg <4 mg asymptotically equal to 8 mg; p=0.010). As the observed reduction in urinary protein excretion failed to correlate with changes in mean blood pressure, it could not be attributed to the antihypertensive effect of the study drug alone. This suggests that candesartan cilexetil, 4 8 mg o.d., has antiproteinuric effects in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis.

Recently, we have shown that treatment of stroke-prone spontaneously hypertensive rats with angiotensin inhibitors for a limited time-window before puberty results in an attenuation of hypertensive nephrosclerosis in later life. The aim of this study was to examine the applicability of this therapeutic paradigm to a low-renin model. Dahl salt-sensitive (Dahl-S) rats were fed a high-salt diet from age 6 weeks. Some rats were treated with the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) candesartan cilexetil (2 mg/kg/d) from weaning to puberty (age 3-10 weeks), whereas other rats were treated continuously until overt renal damage was seen (age 3-16 weeks). Dahl-S rats on a high salt diet had increased blood pressure (207 +/- 3 vs. 125 +/- 2 mm Hg), proteinuria, and glomerular/vascular histological changes. The prepubertal treatment with ARB resulted in a continued suppression of blood pressure (153 +/- 2 mm Hg) at 16 weeks. Both proteinuria and renal histological changes were significantly (p < 0.05) attenuated, but not completely prevented by the treatment. No significant differences in plasma renin activity, renin mRNA, or AT1/AT2 mRNA were seen between groups. These results suggest that prepubertal treatment affords sustained renoprotection, even in an animal model with a suppressed renin-angiotensin system, and support the notion that appropriate prepubertal intervention may lead to a partial attenuation in the susceptibility to inherited renal diseases., (Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Proteoglycans are an important component of the extracellular matrix, and are thought to play multiple roles not only in kidney remodeling, but also in regulating glomerular permeability, and in modulating the activity of other cytokines and growth factors. The aim of this study was to examine the gene expressions of proteoglycan core proteins in hypertensive rat kidneys, and their modulation by AT1 receptor antagonist. SHRSP/Izm rats and normotensive control WKY/Izm rats on a normal salt diet were treated with or without the AT1 receptor antagonist candesartan cilexetil (1 mg/kg/day) from 10 weeks to 22 weeks. At the end of the treatment period, renal tissue was excised, and gene expressions of the proteoglycan core proteins versican, perlecan, decorin, and biglycan were examined by Northern blot analysis and RT-PCR. Treatment with candesartan cilexetil caused significant decreases in blood pressure and amelioration of proteinuria and renal histological scores in the SHRSP/Izm rats. Compared to WKY/Izm rats, expression of biglycan mRNA showed a small increase in SHRSP/Izm rats which did not attain statistical significance. On the other hand, treatment with candesartan caused significant reductions in biglycan and decorin mRNA in the SHRSP/Izm rats. In contrast, the level of versican mRNA appeared to be increased after candesartan treatment. These results suggest that treatment with AT1 receptor antagonist was associated with diverse changes in renal proteoglycan gene expression in SHRSP/Izm rats. These changes could contribute to the beneficial effects of AT1 receptor antagonist on tissue remodeling and inhibition of disease progression in hypertensive rat kidneys.

The important contribution of hypertension to the progression of renal failure is well realized. However, it have been less discussed which drugs are suitable for the different stages of progressive renal failure. The present study examined the effects of timing of antihypertensive therapy using calcium channel blocker and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor in 5/6 nephrectomized spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs). Forty male 6 week old SHRs were divided into 5 groups (n=8 in each group), and they were placed on a high salt diet after 5/6 nephrectomy. Group 1, high salt diet without any drug. Group 2 received 0.2 mg/kg/day of amlodipine and group 3 received 0.2 mg/kg/day of enalapril mixed in the high salt diet from week 6 respectively. Similarly group 4 received the same doses of amlodipine, and group 5 received the same doses of enalapril from week 10. Each drug protected from increasing blood pressure in 4 groups, and no significant difference was observed between the effects of amlodipine and enalapril. Proteinuria was reduced with both drugs. In histopathological evaluation, glomerulosclerosis was controlled only in group 2, and arterio/olosclerosis was significantly suppressed in all treated groups except group 5. From these results, both amlodipine and enalapril are renal protective in early stage of renal failure with hypertension. However, in advanced stage of renal failure, amlodipine is superior in its renal protective effect.

Pharmacological blockade of the renin-angiotensin system has been found to be a safe and efficacious way to treat hypertension and congestive heart failure. The success of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors has led to interest in alternative ways to block the renin-angiotensin system. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists are a new class of anti-hypertensive drugs that provide a specific blockade of the effects of angiotensin II. Losartan potassium, the first compound of this class, has recently been approved in Japan. It seems likely that the angiotensin receptor antagonists will be suitable to first-line therapy and use of this class for treatment of hypertension will dramatically increase in Japan because of the excellent clinical and laboratory safety profiles.

1. The effect of cicletanine, a novel antihypertensive agent with natriuretic activity, on blood pressure and progression of renal failure of 5/6 nephrectomized spontaneously hypertensive rats with salt loading was examined. 2. All nephrectomized rats were randomly assigned to one of four groups and their diet was changed from a normal- to a high-salt (5.5% NaCl) diet for the next 10 weeks. Either 10 or 50 mg/kg per day cicletanine (low- and high-dose cicletanine, respectively) or 10 mg/kg per day trichlormethiazide were administered to rats during this period once a day. During the experimental period, urine volume, urinary excretion of sodium, protein, prostaglandin (PG) E2 and 6-keto-PGF1 alpha and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were measured every 2 weeks. 3. Systolic blood pressure was significantly reduced by the administration of trichlormethiazide and the higher dose of cicletanine, but not by the lower dose of cicletanine. 4. In contrast with changes to SBP, levels of serum creatinine in rats treated with both doses of cicletanine were significantly lower than in controls (0.57 +/- 0.12, 0.78 +/- 0.12 and 1.68 +/- 0.26 mg/dL for high- and low-dose cicletanine and control, respectively). 5. Urinary excretion of both PGE2 and 6-keto-PGF1 alpha were significantly increased in groups treated with high and low doses of cicletanine compared with control. In rats treated with trichlormethiazide, PGE2 and 6-keto-PGF1 alpha levels were significantly decreased compared with control. 6. In contrast with changes in SBP, marked glomerular sclerosis with hyalinosis found in the control group was not ameliorated by trichlormethiazide treatment. These changes were not observed in rats treated with low- and high-dose cicletanine, particularly those treated with the higher dose of cicletanine. 7. These data suggest that administration of cicletanine has a beneficial protective effect regarding the progression of renal failure, regardless of the level of blood pressure, through a direct and/or indirect action on the glomerulus.

Calcium antagonists comprise the most popular drug class for treatment of hypertension in Japan. More than half of Japanese clinicians use calcium antagonists as initial drug treatment for mild-to-moderate hypertension and, despite recent controversies, their use continues to increase. Nearly a fourth of clinicians use angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and 9% use beta-receptor blockers. There are 12 dihydropyridine calcium antagonists and 1 benzothiazepine agent in clinical use. Amlodipine is the most widely used agent in the class. Efonidipine and cilnidipine, recently developed in Japan, both have a slow onset of action and long-lasting hypertensive effect and possess characteristics unique to the class. Efonidipine dilates the efferent as well as the afferent arterioles of the glomerulus; therefore, it appears to have a more pronounced renoprotective effect than other calcium antagonists. Cilnidipine is a dual-channel antagonist, acting on both the peripheral neuronal N-type and vascular L-type calcium channels. It depresses the pressor response to acute cold stress but does not induce tachycardia by hypotensive baroreflex.

We investigated the effects of a calcium antagonist, efonidipine, which was reported to dilate not only afferent arterioles but also efferent alterioles, on progression of renal failure in salt-loaded partially nephrectomized spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). Forty-four SHR's with 5 of 6 nephrectomy were divided into four groups: group 1 as control (n=20); group 2, efonidipine-treated (n=8); group 3, enalapril-treated (n=8); and group 4, nifedipine-treated (n=8). The rats were given these drugs and a high-salt diet (5% NaCl) for 8 weeks. During the experiment, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and daily urinary protein excretion were measured every 2 weeks. At the end of the study, serum creatinine was determined, and renal tissues were obtained for light microscopic examination. SBP was markedly reduced by 8-week antihypertensive treatment. (control, 267+/-7 mmHg; efonidipine, 181+/-7 mmHg; enalapril, 200+/-12 mmHg; nifedipine, 184+/-6 mmHg). Glomerular sclerosis developed markedly in the control group, but was partially prevented in all treated groups. Similarly, urinary protein excretion (UPE) was suppressed by efonidipine (180+/-16 mg/day) and enalapril (186+/-16 mg/day vs. 301+/-28 mg/day for control). In contrast, nifedipine failed to prevent the increase in urinary protein excretion (258+/-22 mg/day). In conclusion, efonidipine attenuates SBP increase and ameliorates glomerular injury as well as nifedipine and enalapril. Furthermore, beneficial effects of efonidipine, but not nifedipine, on proteinuria suggest that different mechanisms mediate the improvement of proteinuria; one possible mechanism could be efferent arteriolar dilation, not reported in nifedipine.

Over the past few decades, numerous randomized controlled studies of the treatment of hypertension have been conducted in Western countries to determine whether blood pressure reduction reduces the risk of stroke and myocardial infarction. Diuretics and beta blockers, because they have been shown in clinical trials to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, are the preferred drugs of first choice. No direct evidence yet supports the theoretical advantages of calcium channel blockers and ACE inhibitors over diuretics and beta blockers. Because East Asian nations differ culturally from Western countries, it is very difficult to conduct a randomized trials, thus, there were no reports of large, long-term, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hypertension.

Impaired baroreflex function is a factor responsible for poor prognosis in myocardial infarction patients. Using logistic function curves, we calculated the maximal gain of the baroreflex control of renal sympathetic nerve activity (RSNA) and heart rate in conscious Wistar-Kyoto and spontaneously hypertensive rats whose left anterior descending artery had been ligated 4 weeks earlier. We further investigated whether 3-week oral treatment with the angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist TCV-116 would improve the baroreflex in rats with myocardial infarction. The maximal gain of the mean arterial pressure-RSNA relation in spontaneously hypertensive rats with myocardial infarction and treated with vehicle (1.7 +/- 0.1% control per mm Hg) was smaller than the gain in sham-operated hypertensive rats (2.3 +/- 0.1% control per mm Hg). After 3-week oral treatment with TCV-116, the maximal gain of the arterial pressure-RSNA relation in hypertensive rats with myocardial infarction was 2.3 +/- 0.1% control per mm Hg and significantly greater than the gain in infarcted and vehicle-treated hypertensive rats. In hypertensive rats, the maximal gain of the arterial pressure-heart rate relation of infarcted and TCV-116-treated rats was larger than in infarcted and vehicle-treated rats but significantly smaller than in sham-operated rats. These results demonstrate that oral treatment with an angiotensin receptor antagonist is effective in restoring the impaired baroreflex caused by myocardial infarction and that endogenous angiotensin II is one of the critical factors involved in the impaired baroreflex in myocardial infarction.

This study defines the nature of the renal protective effects of calcium channel blockers (Ca blockers) and the effects of the Ca blocker, amlodipine, compared to those of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), enalapril, on the progression of renal injury in 5/6 nephrectomized spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) fed a high-salt diet. Furthermore, we studied the effects of various Ca blockers on the glomerular afferent and efferent arterioles using the isolated perfused hydronephrotic kidneys of six-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats. In the first study, forty 6-week-old male SHRs which underwent 5/6 nephrectomy were equally divided into five groups. One group received no therapy. In two groups, therapy was started at four weeks post-nephrectomy, one with amlodipine and the other with enalapril. In the remaining two groups, amlodipine or enalapril therapy was started at eight weeks postnephrectomy. Amlodipine was more effective than enalapril in reducing proteinuria and glomerulosclerosis in the group that was started on drug therapy eight weeks after surgery. In the second study, at concentrations of 10(-6) to 10(-9) M, nifedipine, nicardipine and amlodipine dilated the afferent, but not the efferent, arteriole preconstricted with angiotensin II. On the other hand, efonidipine and manidipine clearly dilated angiotensin II-induced constriction of both the afferent and efferent arterioles. These results indicated that Ca blockers are effective at reducing renal injury in 5/6 nephrectomized SHR, and that they are more effective than ACEI in advanced stages of renal injury. The observation that only certain Ca blockers can dilate the efferent arteriole suggests that the renal protective effect of Ca blockers is not necessarily dependent on the dilation of the efferent arterioles.

Along with arterial blood pressure reduction, maintenance of the integrity of baroreceptor reflex function contributes to preserving end-organ function in the treatment of hypertensive patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of antihypertensive agents (trichlormethiazide, atenolol, nicardipine, and enalapril) on baroreceptor reflex function by comparing early and late starts of treatment. We administered each agent to spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) as early-start groups from 10 to 36 weeks of age and as late-start groups from 28 to 36 weeks of age. We evaluated the gain of the reflex control of renal sympathetic nerve activity and heart rate using ramp infusions of phenylephrine and nitroglycerin in untreated SHR at 10, 28, or 36 weeks of age and in treated SHR at 36 weeks of age. In 28- and 36-week-old untreated SHR, the renal sympathetic nerve activity gain was not altered and the heart rate gain was decreased (from -2.3 +/- 0.3 to -1.3 +/- 0.3 and -1.2 +/- 0.3 beats per minute [bm]/mm Hg, P < .05, respectively) compared with 10-week-old SHR. Early and late start of therapy produced arterial pressure reductions (-18 +/- 4 and -12 +/- 5 mm Hg, P < .05, respectively). In the early-start groups, the renal sympathetic nerve activity gain was improved markedly in nicardipine- and enalapril-treated SHR (-4.2 +/- 0.2% and -4.9 +/- 0.2% of control/mm Hg, P < .01, respectively), and the heart rate gain was improved markedly in atenolol- and enalapril-treated SHR (-4.1 +/- 0.2 and -4.4 +/- 0.2 bpm/mm Hg, P < .01, respectively). In the late-start groups, the renal sympathetic nerve activity gain was improved moderately in nicardipine- and enalapril-treated SHR (-3.8 +/- 0.2% and -2.9 +/- 0.2% of control/mm Hg, P < .05, respectively). The heart rate gain was improved slightly only in nicardipine-treated SHR (-1.9 +/- 0.2 bpm/mm Hg, P < .05). These results demonstrate that an early start of antihypertensive treatment improves baroreceptor reflex function markedly compared with a late start of treatment. This supports the hypothesis that a possible critical phase sensitive to intervention with antihypertensive treatment exists during the development of hypertension and indicates that the early start of antihypertensive treatment would be required in clinical practice.

The effects of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on blood pressure and the progression of renal dysfunction were compared in hypertensive patients with polycystic kidney disease (PKD). Twenty-six patients with PKD and hypertension who had been treated with other antihypertensive agents, such as diuretics, beta-blockers, or alpha-methyldopa, were followed up for two years, during which their blood pressure and renal function were monitored. Patients were divided into two groups classified according to the type of antihypertensive agents given. Group 1 (n = 14) received CCBs, while group 2 (n = 12) received ACE inhibitors. No significant differences were found in their blood pressure control and serum creatinine levels throughout the study. The creatinine clearances were decreased in both groups. However, the decreases in creatinine clearance were smaller (p < 0.05) in the group treated with CCBs. In addition, two patients in group 2 showed rapid increases in serum creatinine. Our data suggest that CCBs reduced blood pressure effectively and preserved renal function in PKD patients at least as well as ACE inhibitors.