-
PloS One 2023Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often have exercise intolerance. The prevalence of hypertension in COPD patients ranges from 39-51%, and...
BACKGROUND
Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often have exercise intolerance. The prevalence of hypertension in COPD patients ranges from 39-51%, and β-blockers and amlodipine are commonly used drugs for these patients.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to study the impact of β-blockers and amlodipine on cardiopulmonary responses during exercise.
METHODS
A total 81 patients with COPD were included and the patients underwent spirometry, cardiopulmonary exercise tests, and symptoms questionnaires.
RESULTS
There were 14 patients who took bisoprolol and 67 patients who did not. Patients with COPD taking ß-blockers had lower blood oxygen concentration (SpO2) and more leg fatigue at peak exercise but similar exercise capacity as compared with patients not taking bisoprolol. There were 18 patients treated with amlodipine and 63 patients without amlodipine. Patients taking amlodipine had higher body weight, lower blood pressure at rest, and lower respiratory rates during peak exercise than those not taking amlodipine. Other cardiopulmonary parameters, such as workload, oxygen consumption at peak exercise, tidal volume at rest or exercise, cardiac index at rest or exercise were not significantly different between patients with or without bisoprolol or amlodipine. Smoking status did not differ between patients with or without bisoprolol or amlodipine.
CONCLUSIONS
COPD is often accompanied by hypertension, and β-blockers and amlodipine are commonly used antihypertensive drugs for these patients. Patients with COPD taking bisoprolol had lower SpO2 and more leg fatigue during peak exercise. Patients taking amlodipine had lower respiratory rates during exercise than those not taking amlodipine. Exercise capacity, tidal volume, and cardiac index during exercise were similar between patients with and without bisoprolol or amlodipine.
Topics: Humans; Bisoprolol; Amlodipine; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Hypertension; Exercise Test
PubMed: 37262049
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286302 -
Cardiology and Therapy Dec 2021Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular condition arising from complex aetiologies. Progression is strongly associated with functional and structural abnormalities... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular condition arising from complex aetiologies. Progression is strongly associated with functional and structural abnormalities that lead to multi-organ dysfunction. Stroke and myocardial infarction are two of the major complications of hypertension in India. Various anti-hypertensive drugs, such as calcium channel blockers (CCBs), beta-blockers, diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, have been the medications of choice for disease management and are known to be effective in reducing the complications of hypertension. CCBs, such as amlodipine, are also currently being used and proven to be effective, although their beneficial effects in the management of complications of hypertension like stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) have yet to be proven. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of amlodipine on stroke and MI in hypertensive patients.
METHODS
A systematic search of English electronic databases was performed for studies with sufficient statistical power that were published between 2000 andl 30 August 2020, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. A total of 676 papers were screened, and 13 were found eligible to be included in the meta-analysis. Studies that included patients who suffered from MI or stroke and were under amlodipine treatment were included in the analysis. The odds ratio and the risk ratio of amlodipine compared to active control/placebo were noted from the studies and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS
Amlodipine had a significant effect in reducing stroke and MI in hypertensive patients. Similar to results published in reports, this systematic review proved that the hazard ratio for amlodipine was < 1 for stroke (0.69-1.04) and MI (0.77-0.98), showing that amlodipine accounted for better prevention of stroke and MI.
CONCLUSION
In the pooled analysis of data from 12 randomised controlled trials and one double-blinded cohort study measuring the effect of CCBs, we found that the CCB amlodipine reduced the risk of stroke and MI in hypertensive patients. Superior results for amlodipine were found in ten of the 13 studies included in this meta-analysis.
PubMed: 34480745
DOI: 10.1007/s40119-021-00239-1 -
Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health 2021Several recent studies have provided evidence that use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs), especially amlodipine and nifedipine, can reduce mortality from coronavirus... (Review)
Review
Several recent studies have provided evidence that use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs), especially amlodipine and nifedipine, can reduce mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Moreover, hypocalcemia (a reduced level of serum ionized calcium) has been shown to be strongly positively associated with COVID-19 severity. Both effectiveness of CCBs as antiviral therapy, and positive associations of hypocalcemia with mortality, have been demonstrated for many other viruses as well. We evaluate these findings in the contexts of virus-host evolutionary conflicts over calcium metabolism, and hypocalcemia as either pathology, viral manipulation or host defence against pathogens. Considerable evidence supports the hypothesis that hypocalcemia represents a host defence. Indeed, hypocalcemia may exert antiviral effects in a similar manner as do CCBs, through interference with calcium metabolism in virus-infected cells. Prospective clinical studies that address the efficacy of CCBs and hypocalcemia should provide novel insights into the pathogenicity and treatment of COVID-19 and other viruses.
PubMed: 33732462
DOI: 10.1093/emph/eoaa046 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Hyperhomocysteinemia with hypertension can synergistically increase the risk of stroke. The China stroke primary prevention trial showed that combining 0.8 mg folic... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Combined use of amlodipine and folic acid are significantly more efficacious than amlodipine alone in lowering plasma homocysteine and blood pressure among hypertensive patients with hyperhomocysteinemia and intolerance to ACEI: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled clinical...
Hyperhomocysteinemia with hypertension can synergistically increase the risk of stroke. The China stroke primary prevention trial showed that combining 0.8 mg folic acid (FA) with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) can effectively lower plasma total homocysteine (tHcy) and blood pressure (BP); and reduce first stroke risk by additional 21% compared to ACEI alone. However, intolerance to ACEI is common in Asians and amlodipine can be alternative. This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled clinical trial (RCT) which evaluated whether amlodipine combined with FA is more efficacious than amlodipine alone in lowering tHcy and BP among Chinese hypertensive with hyperhomocysteinemia and intolerance to ACEI. 351 Eligible patients were randomly assigned by 1:1:1 ratio to receive amlodipine-FA tablet daily (amlodipine 5 mg/FA 0.4 mg, A group); amlodipine 5 mg/FA 0.8 mg tablet daily (B group); amlodipine 5 mg daily (C group, control group). Follow-up was conducted at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks. The primary outcome was efficacy of lowering both tHcy and BP at the end of 8-week treatment. Compared with C group, A group had a significantly higher rate of lowering both tHcy and BP (23.3% vs. 6.0%; Odds Ratio [OR], 8.68; 95% CI, 3.04-24.78, P < .001); B group also had a higher rate of lowering both tHcy and BP (20.3% vs. 6.0%; OR: 5.90; 95% CI, 2.11-16.47, P < .001). This RCT showed amlodipine combined with FA compared with amlodipine alone, each had significantly higher efficacy of lowering both tHcy and BP. No difference was found in BP-lowering and occurrence of adverse events between the three groups.
Topics: Humans; Folic Acid; Hypertension; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Amlodipine; Blood Pressure; Hyperhomocysteinemia; Double-Blind Method; Stroke; Homocysteine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37433173
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14697 -
American Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2022The single-pill combination (SPC) of perindopril (PER)/indapamide (IND)/amlodipine (AML) is a valuable and convenient treatment option for patients with hypertension... (Review)
Review
The single-pill combination (SPC) of perindopril (PER)/indapamide (IND)/amlodipine (AML) is a valuable and convenient treatment option for patients with hypertension controlled with two-drug SPC of PER/IND + AML given as two separate pills at the same dose level. PER [an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor], IND (a thiazide-like diuretic) and AML (a calcium channel blocker) are well established antihypertensive agents, which have been available for a long time as monotherapies and dual SPCs and have complementary mechanisms of action. Once-daily PER/IND/AML provided effective BP control, with good tolerability, in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in clinical trials and in large observational prospective studies. The efficacy and tolerability of PER/IND/AML was similar to that of PER/IND + AML in a randomized clinical trial. The therapeutic effect of PER/IND/AML was associated with improved health-related quality of life. Thus, switching from the two-pill PER/IND + AML regimen to single-pill PER/IND/AML reduces pill burden and simplifies drug administration, which may improve adherence to treatment, leading to better BP control and clinical outcomes.
Topics: Amlodipine; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Drug Combinations; Humans; Hypertension; Indapamide; Perindopril; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35257306
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-022-00521-0 -
Open Heart Jan 2023Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However,...
BACKGROUND
Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However, this can be prevented by calcium channel blockers (CCBs) which suppress Ca influx into the vascular muscle cells. Nevertheless, several CCBs adverse effects are harmful for these patients. Selecting the right CCBs would give the best clinical practice.
METHOD
The studies were obtained from four major medical databases by various keywords. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented as adult >18 years, observational study, English language and drug of interest. Duplicates were eliminated, and the remaining studies were reviewed. Final full-texts assessment was conducted independently by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Revised Cochrane.
RESULTS
The search found 1378 articles. However, six studies were selected after implementing the study criteria. Diltiazem was found to decrease angina and increase quality of life until 12th week of treatment; however, some adverse effects include atrioventricular block and recurrent angina up till 4th week were found. Meanwhile, nifedipine was found to decrease vasospastic angina (VSA) by the fourth and eighth weeks of treatment. Nevertheless, it caused excessive drop in BP and increase heart rate by eighth week. In addition, slow-release preparation of both CCBs were found to increase efficacy and compliance. Lastly amlodipine was also found to decrease VSA by 17%±140% and 33% after 6 weeks, but further studies needed.
CONCLUSION
Diltiazem, nifedipine and amlodipine are potent in decreasing VSA, however, tailoring specific CCBs adverse reactions to patient condition and the drug preparation would be substantially beneficial for the outcome.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diltiazem; Coronary Vasospasm; Nifedipine; Calcium; Quality of Life; Amlodipine; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36634997
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002179 -
Journal of Personalized Medicine May 2023(1) Background: This study was planned to assess the concentration of antihypertensive drugs (AHD) in the blood serum in patients with controlled and uncontrolled...
(1) Background: This study was planned to assess the concentration of antihypertensive drugs (AHD) in the blood serum in patients with controlled and uncontrolled arterial hypertension (AH). (2) Methods: We assessed 46 patients with AH. Based on the results of 24 h blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), the patients were randomized into two groups. The first group consisted of the patients with controlled AH; the second group consisted of the patients with uncontrolled AH. Venous blood was taken in both groups of patients in the morning before and 2 h after taking drugs to assess the concentration of lisinopril, amlodipine, valsartan, and indapamide. (3) Results. The first group included 27 patients, and the second group 19 patients. In patients with uncontrolled AH, the median concentrations of lisinopril, indapamide, amlodipine, and valsartan before and after taking the drugs did not differ from patients who reached the target BP values. ( > 0.05). In some patients with uncontrolled and controlled (shown for the first time) AH the concentration of AHD was below the limit of quantitative determination. (4) Conclusions. The obtained results indicate that the pharmacokinetics of AHD, apparently, does not play a significant role in the development of ineffectiveness of the ongoing therapy for AH. Therapeutic drug monitoring can be used to test adherence to the treatment.
PubMed: 37240985
DOI: 10.3390/jpm13050815 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2023Iron overload cardiomyopathy (IOC) is a major co-morbidity of genetic hemochromatosis and secondary iron overload with limited therapeutic options. We aim to investigate...
BACKGROUND
Iron overload cardiomyopathy (IOC) is a major co-morbidity of genetic hemochromatosis and secondary iron overload with limited therapeutic options. We aim to investigate mechanisms of rescue action of amlodipine in the murine model of iron overload, characterize changes in human cardiac tissue due to IOC, and compare them to the changes in the animal model of IOC.
METHODS AND RESULTS
As an animal model, we used male hemojuvelin knockout (HJVKO) mice, which lacked hemojuvelin (a co-receptor protein for hepcidin expression). The mice were fed a high-iron diet from 4 weeks to 1 year of age. As a rescue, iron-fed mice received the Ca channel blocker, amlodipine, from 9 to 12 months. Iron overload resulted in systolic and diastolic dysfunctions and changes in the cardiac tissue similar to the changes in the explanted human heart with IOC. An IOC patient (β-thalassemia) with left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25% underwent heart transplantation. The murine model and the explanted heart showed intra-myocyte iron deposition, fibrosis, hypertrophy, oxidative stress, remodeling of Ca cycling proteins, and metabolic kinases typical of heart failure. Single-myocyte contractility and Ca release were diminished in the murine model. The amlodipine-treated group exhibited normalization of cellular function and reversed fibrosis, hypertrophy, oxidative stress, and metabolic remodeling. We also report a clinical case of primary hemochromatosis successfully treated with amlodipine.
CONCLUSIONS
The aged HJVKO murine model on the iron-rich diet reproduced many features of the human case of IOC. The use of amlodipine in the murine model and clinical case reversed IOC remodeling, demonstrating that amlodipine is effective adjuvant therapy for IOC.
PubMed: 37153462
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1129349 -
Pharmaceutics Jan 2023Amlodipine is an antihypertensive drug with unknown pharmacogenetic biomarkers. This research is a candidate gene study that looked for associations between amlodipine...
Amlodipine is an antihypertensive drug with unknown pharmacogenetic biomarkers. This research is a candidate gene study that looked for associations between amlodipine pharmacokinetics and safety and pharmacogenes. Pharmacokinetic and safety data were taken from 160 volunteers from eight bioequivalence trials. In the exploratory step, 70 volunteers were genotyped for 44 polymorphisms in different pharmacogenes. CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (PMs) showed higher half-life (t) (univariate -value () = 0.039, multivariate -value () = 0.013, β = -5.31, R = 0.176) compared to ultrarapid (UMs), normal (NMs) and intermediate metabolizers (IMs). rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with higher dose/weight-corrected area under the curve (AUC/DW) ( = 0.025; = 0.026, β = 578.90, R = 0.060) compared to the G/G genotype. In the confirmatory step, the cohort was increased to 160 volunteers, who were genotyped for , and . In addition to the previous associations, CYP2D6 UMs showed a lower AUC/DW ( = 0.046, = 0.049, β = -68.80, R = 0.073) compared to NMs, IMs and PMs and the rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with thoracic pain ( = 0.038) and dizziness ( = 0.038, = 0.014, log OR = 10.975). To our knowledge, this is the first work to report a strong relationship between amlodipine and and . Further research is needed to gather more evidence before its application in clinical practice.
PubMed: 36839726
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15020404 -
Circulation Jan 2024Angina with nonobstructive coronary arteries is a common condition for which no effective treatment has been established. We hypothesized that the measurement of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Angina with nonobstructive coronary arteries is a common condition for which no effective treatment has been established. We hypothesized that the measurement of coronary flow reserve (CFR) allows identification of patients with angina with nonobstructive coronary arteries who would benefit from anti-ischemic therapy.
METHODS
Patients with angina with nonobstructive coronary arteries underwent blinded invasive CFR measurement and were randomly assigned to receive 4 weeks of amlodipine or ranolazine. After a 1-week washout, they crossed over to the other drug for 4 weeks; final assessment was after the cessation of study medication for another 4 weeks. The primary outcome was change in treadmill exercise time, and the secondary outcome was change in Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score in response to anti-ischemic therapy. Analysis was on a per protocol basis according to the following classification: coronary microvascular disease (CMD group) if CFR<2.5 and reference group if CFR≥2.5. The study protocol was registered before the first patient was enrolled (International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN94728379).
RESULTS
Eighty-seven patients (61±8 years of age; 62% women) underwent random assignment (57 CMD group and 30 reference group). Baseline exercise time and Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary scores were similar between groups. The CMD group had a greater increment (delta) in exercise time than the reference group in response to both amlodipine (difference in delta, 82 s [95% CI, 37-126 s]; <0.001) and ranolazine (difference in delta, 68 s [95% CI, 21-115 s]; =0.005). The CMD group reported a greater increment (delta) in Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score than the reference group in response to ranolazine (difference in delta, 7 points [95% CI, 0-15]; =0.048), but not to amlodipine (difference in delta, 2 points [95% CI, -5 to 8]; =0.549).
CONCLUSIONS
Among phenotypically similar patients with angina with nonobstructive coronary arteries, only those with an impaired CFR derive benefit from anti-ischemic therapy. These findings support measurement of CFR to diagnose and guide management of this otherwise heterogeneous patient group.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Amlodipine; Coronary Artery Disease; Coronary Circulation; Cross-Over Studies; Microcirculation; Microvascular Angina; Myocardial Ischemia; Phenotype; Ranolazine; Middle Aged; Aged
PubMed: 37905403
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.066680