-
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2022Among cardiovascular diseases, hypertension is one of the main risk factors predisposing to fatal complications. Oxidative stress and chronic inflammation have been... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Among cardiovascular diseases, hypertension is one of the main risk factors predisposing to fatal complications. Oxidative stress and chronic inflammation have been identified as potentially responsible for the development of endothelial damage and vascular stiffness, two of the primum movens of hypertension and cardiovascular diseases. Based on these data, we conducted an open-label randomized study, first, to evaluate the endothelial damage and vascular stiffness in hypertense patients; second, to test the effect of supplementation with a physiological antioxidant (melatonin 1 mg/day for 1 year) in patients with essential hypertension vs. hypertensive controls. Twenty-three patients of either gender were enrolled and randomized 1:1 in two groups (control and supplemented group). The plasmatic total antioxidant capacity (as a marker of oxidative stress), blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and peripheral endothelial function were evaluated at the beginning of the study and after 1 year in both groups. Our results showed that arterial stiffness improved significantly ( = 0.022) in supplemented patients. The endothelial function increased too, even if not significantly ( = 0.688), after 1 year of melatonin administration. Moreover, the supplemented group showed a significative reduction in TAC levels ( = 0.041) correlated with the improvement of arterial stiffness. These data suggest that melatonin may play an important role in reducing the serum levels of TAC and, consequently, in improving arterial stiffness.
Topics: Humans; Antioxidants; Cardiovascular Diseases; Essential Hypertension; Hypertension; Melatonin; Oxidative Stress
PubMed: 36430967
DOI: 10.3390/ijms232214489 -
Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal 2022Hypertension is one of the leading causes of disability-adjusted life years and mortality, with approximately 15% prevalence worldwide. Most patients with hypertension... (Review)
Review
Hypertension is one of the leading causes of disability-adjusted life years and mortality, with approximately 15% prevalence worldwide. Most patients with hypertension from low- to high-income countries do not receive treatment. Among those who receive treatment, the majority remain undertreated and do not achieve their blood pressure goals. Therefore, new hypertension guidelines introduce more conscientious treatment strategies to maximize the probability of achieving the new strict blood pressure goals compared with the previous guidelines. Who should receive treatment for hypertension? Which antihypertensive medications have the strongest supporting data? Are generic and more affordable medications as effective as expensive brand medications? What are the different treatment strategies to maximize success in controlling blood pressure? Here, we briefly review pharmacotherapy for hypertension and provide answers to these questions as well as some other common questions regarding treatment of hypertension.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Calcium Channel Blockers; Antihypertensive Agents; Hypertension; Essential Hypertension; Diuretics; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists
PubMed: 36561082
DOI: 10.14797/mdcvj.1175 -
Cardiovascular Research Jul 2021Obesity contributes 65-75% of the risk for human primary (essential) hypertension (HT) which is a major driver of cardiovascular and kidney diseases. Kidney dysfunction,... (Review)
Review
Obesity contributes 65-75% of the risk for human primary (essential) hypertension (HT) which is a major driver of cardiovascular and kidney diseases. Kidney dysfunction, associated with increased renal sodium reabsorption and compensatory glomerular hyperfiltration, plays a key role in initiating obesity-HT and target organ injury. Mediators of kidney dysfunction and increased blood pressure include (i) elevated renal sympathetic nerve activity (RSNA); (ii) increased antinatriuretic hormones such as angiotensin II and aldosterone; (iii) relative deficiency of natriuretic hormones; (iv) renal compression by fat in and around the kidneys; and (v) activation of innate and adaptive immune cells that invade tissues throughout the body, producing inflammatory cytokines/chemokines that contribute to vascular and target organ injury, and exacerbate HT. These neurohormonal, renal, and inflammatory mechanisms of obesity-HT are interdependent. For example, excess adiposity increases the adipocyte-derived cytokine leptin which increases RSNA by stimulating the central nervous system proopiomelanocortin-melanocortin 4 receptor pathway. Excess visceral, perirenal and renal sinus fat compress the kidneys which, along with increased RSNA, contribute to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation, although obesity may also activate mineralocorticoid receptors independent of aldosterone. Prolonged obesity, HT, metabolic abnormalities, and inflammation cause progressive renal injury, making HT more resistant to therapy and often requiring multiple antihypertensive drugs and concurrent treatment of dyslipidaemia, insulin resistance, diabetes, and inflammation. More effective anti-obesity drugs are needed to prevent the cascade of cardiorenal, metabolic, and immune disorders that threaten to overwhelm health care systems as obesity prevalence continues to increase.
Topics: Adiposity; Animals; Blood Pressure; Essential Hypertension; Hormones; Humans; Inflammation; Inflammation Mediators; Insulin Resistance; Kidney; Kidney Diseases; Obesity; Renin-Angiotensin System; Risk Factors; Sympathetic Nervous System
PubMed: 33258945
DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvaa336 -
Clinical Cardiology Aug 2023This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Losartan; Hypertension; Telmisartan; Irbesartan; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Hydrochlorothiazide; Valine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Amlodipine; Valsartan; Tetrazoles; Blood Pressure; Essential Hypertension
PubMed: 37432701
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24082 -
Hypertension Research : Official... May 2022This phase III study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with those of olmesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
This phase III study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with those of olmesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Patients (n = 1161, aged ≥20 years) with mild to moderate hypertension (mean sitting systolic blood pressure [msSBP] ≥150 to <180 mmHg) were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg (n = 387), sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg (n = 385), or olmesartan 20 mg (n = 389) once daily for 8 weeks. The primary assessment was a reduction in msSBP from baseline with sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg vs. olmesartan 20 mg at Week 8. Secondary assessments included msSBP reduction with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg vs. olmesartan at Week 8 and reductions in mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP), mean sitting pulse pressure (msPP), and overall blood pressure (BP) control rate for all treatment groups at Week 8. Sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg provided a significantly greater reduction in msSBP from baseline than olmesartan at Week 8 (between-treatment difference: -5.01 mmHg [95% confidence interval: -6.95 to -3.06 mmHg, P < 0.001 for noninferiority and superiority]). Greater reductions in msSBP with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg vs. olmesartan, as well as in msDBP and msPP with both doses of sacubitril/valsartan vs. olmesartan (P < 0.05 for all), were also observed. Patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan achieved an overall higher BP control rate. The safety and tolerability profiles of sacubitril/valsartan were generally comparable to those of olmesartan. The adverse event rate with sacubitril/valsartan was not dose-dependent. Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan was effective and provided superior BP reduction, with a higher proportion of patients achieving target BP goals than treatment with olmesartan in Japanese patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.
Topics: Aminobutyrates; Antihypertensive Agents; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Double-Blind Method; Essential Hypertension; Humans; Hypertension; Imidazoles; Japan; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome; Valsartan
PubMed: 35058583
DOI: 10.1038/s41440-021-00819-7 -
Circulation Research Feb 2020Hypertension represents a major risk factor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure and affects 30% of the adult population. Mitochondrial dysfunction...
Mitochondrial Deacetylase Sirt3 Reduces Vascular Dysfunction and Hypertension While Sirt3 Depletion in Essential Hypertension Is Linked to Vascular Inflammation and Oxidative Stress.
RATIONALE
Hypertension represents a major risk factor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure and affects 30% of the adult population. Mitochondrial dysfunction contributes to hypertension, but specific mechanisms are unclear. The mitochondrial deacetylase Sirt3 (Sirtuin 3) is critical in the regulation of metabolic and antioxidant functions which are associated with hypertension, and cardiovascular disease risk factors diminish Sirt3 level.
OBJECTIVE
We hypothesized that reduced Sirt3 expression contributes to vascular dysfunction in hypertension, but increased Sirt3 protects vascular function and decreases hypertension.
METHODS AND RESULTS
To test the therapeutic potential of targeting Sirt3 expression, we developed new transgenic mice with global Sirt3OX (Sirt3 overexpression), which protects from endothelial dysfunction, vascular oxidative stress, and hypertrophy and attenuates Ang II (angiotensin II) and deoxycorticosterone acetate-salt induced hypertension. Global Sirt3 depletion in mice results in oxidative stress due to hyperacetylation of mitochondrial superoxide dismutase (SOD2), increases HIF1α (hypoxia-inducible factor-1), reduces endothelial cadherin, stimulates vascular hypertrophy, increases vascular permeability and vascular inflammation (p65, caspase 1, VCAM [vascular cell adhesion molecule-1], ICAM [intercellular adhesion molecule-1], and MCP1 [monocyte chemoattractant protein 1]), increases inflammatory cell infiltration in the kidney, reduces telomerase expression, and accelerates vascular senescence and age-dependent hypertension; conversely, increased Sirt3 expression in Sirt3OX mice prevents these deleterious effects. The clinical relevance of Sirt3 depletion was confirmed in arterioles from human mediastinal fat in patients with essential hypertension showing a 40% decrease in vascular Sirt3, coupled with Sirt3-dependent 3-fold increases in SOD2 acetylation, NF-κB (nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells) activity, VCAM, ICAM, and MCP1 levels in hypertensive subjects compared with normotensive subjects.
CONCLUSIONS
We suggest that Sirt3 depletion in hypertension promotes endothelial dysfunction, vascular hypertrophy, vascular inflammation, and end-organ damage. Our data support a therapeutic potential of targeting Sirt3 expression in vascular dysfunction and hypertension.
Topics: Angiotensin II; Animals; Desoxycorticosterone Acetate; Endothelium, Vascular; Essential Hypertension; Female; Heart; Inflammation; Male; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Mice, Knockout; Mice, Transgenic; Mitochondria, Heart; Mitochondrial Proteins; Myocardium; Oxidative Stress; Sirtuin 3
PubMed: 31852393
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.315767 -
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Jan 2020Mineralocorticoid receptors (MRs) are implicated in the pathology of hypertension. MR blockers are recommended for the treatment of salt-sensitive or resistant... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Mineralocorticoid receptors (MRs) are implicated in the pathology of hypertension. MR blockers are recommended for the treatment of salt-sensitive or resistant hypertension. However, use of currently available MR blockers is limited by adverse events. This phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of esaxerenone, a new selective nonsteroidal MR blocker, at 2.5 and 5 mg/day and eplerenone 50 mg/day in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. After a 4-week washout period, 1001 eligible adults with hypertension were randomized evenly to esaxerenone 2.5 or 5 mg/day or eplerenone 50 mg/day treatments, taken orally once daily for 12 weeks. Primary end points were changes in sitting systolic or diastolic blood pressure (BP) from baseline at the end of treatment. Esaxerenone 2.5 mg/day was noninferior to eplerenone for reductions in sitting and 24-hour BP. Reductions in BP with esaxerenone 5 mg/day were significantly greater than those with esaxerenone 2.5 mg/day. Changes in diurnal BP showed persistent 24-hour antihypertensive effects in all treatment groups. The proportions of patients achieving target sitting BP (<140/90 mm Hg) were 31.5%, 41.2%, and 27.5% with esaxerenone 2.5 and 5 mg/day and eplerenone 50 mg/day, respectively. Incidences of adverse events (all mild or moderate) were similar across treatment groups. These results indicate that esaxerenone is an effective and well-tolerated MR blocker in Japanese patients with essential hypertension, with BP-lowering activity at least equivalent to eplerenone. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02890173.
Topics: Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Double-Blind Method; Eplerenone; Essential Hypertension; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrroles; Sulfones; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31786983
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.13569 -
American Journal of Cardiovascular... Jul 2023Few data are available regarding the efficacy and safety of a single-pill combination (SPC) consisting of four medications in patients with concomitant hypertension and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Quadruple Combination of Amlodipine, Losartan, Rosuvastatin, and Ezetimibe in Patients with Concomitant Essential Hypertension and Dyslipidemia.
BACKGROUND
Few data are available regarding the efficacy and safety of a single-pill combination (SPC) consisting of four medications in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to determine the efficacy and tolerability of a fixed-dose SPC consisting of 5 mg amlodipine, 100 mg losartan, 20 mg rosuvastatin, and 10 mg ezetimibe (A/L/R/E) in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia.
METHODS
This was a 14-week, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III clinical trial. In total, 145 patients were randomized to receive A/L/R/E, A/L, or L/R/E. The primary endpoints were the average change in the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level in the A/L/R/E and A/L groups and the sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP) in the A/L/R/E and L/R/E groups. The numbers of patients with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were compared as safety variables.
RESULTS
The average percentage change in the LDL-C level as the least squares mean (LSM) from the baseline LDL-C level at the end of the 8-week treatment was - 59.0% in the A/L/R/E group and 0.2% in the A/L group (LSM difference - 59.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 68.1 to - 50.4; p < 0.0001). The average change in the sitSBP as the LSM was - 15.8 mmHg in the A/L/R/E group and -4.7 mmHg in the L/R/E group (LSM difference - 11.1, 95% CI - 16.8 to - 5.4; p = 0.0002). No ADRs occurred in the A/L/R/E group.
CONCLUSIONS
A/L/R/E as an SPC could be an effective treatment for patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia without significant safety issues.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION
NCT04074551 (registered 30 August 2019).
Topics: Humans; Losartan; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Antihypertensive Agents; Ezetimibe; Cholesterol, LDL; Blood Pressure; Amlodipine; Hypertension; Essential Hypertension; Dyslipidemias; Double-Blind Method; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37395974
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-023-00590-9 -
Journal of the American Heart... Apr 2023Background Nighttime blood pressure (BP) and an abnormal nocturnal BP dipping profile are important cardiovascular risk factors in patients with hypertension. This post... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Twenty-Four-Hour Blood Pressure-Lowering Efficacy of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Olmesartan in Japanese Patients With Essential Hypertension Based on Nocturnal Blood Pressure Dipping Status: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From a Randomized, Double-Blind Multicenter Study.
Background Nighttime blood pressure (BP) and an abnormal nocturnal BP dipping profile are important cardiovascular risk factors in patients with hypertension. This post hoc analysis investigated the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on 24-hour BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension and in patient subgroups based on nocturnal BP dipping status. Methods and Results Data from a randomized clinical trial comparing the BP-lowering effects of 8 weeks of treatment with sacubitril/valsartan (200 or 400 mg/d) and olmesartan (20 mg/d) in Japanese patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension were analyzed. The primary end point was change in 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime BP in patient subgroups based on nocturnal BP dipping status (dipper, nondipper). Six hundred thirty-two patients with baseline and follow-up ambulatory BP data were included. Both sacubitril/valsartan dosages reduced 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime systolic BP, and 24-hour and daytime diastolic BP, to a significantly greater extent than olmesartan in the dipper and nondipper groups. However, between-group differences in nighttime systolic BP were more significant in the nondipper group (difference [95% CI] for sacubitril/valsartan 200 and 400 mg/d versus olmesartan 20 mg/d: -4.6 [95% CI, -7.3 to -1.8] and -6.8 [95% CI, -9.5 to -4.1] mm Hg, respectively; <0.01 and <0.001). Between-group differences in the BP control rate were greatest in the nondipper subgroup (systolic BP control rate of 34.4% and 42.6% with sacubitril/valsartan 200 and 400 mg/d versus 23.1% with olmesartan 20 mg/d). Conclusions This analysis highlights the value of sacubitril/valsartan therapy in patients with a nondipper profile of nocturnal BP and confirms this agent's potent 24-hour BP-lowering effect in Japanese populations with hypertension. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01599104.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; East Asian People; Essential Hypertension; Hypertension; Tetrazoles; Valsartan
PubMed: 37026551
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.027612 -
European Heart Journal Oct 2021Digital therapeutics is a new approach to facilitate the non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension using software programmes such as smartphone applications and/or... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
AIMS
Digital therapeutics is a new approach to facilitate the non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension using software programmes such as smartphone applications and/or device algorithms. Based on promising findings from a small pilot trial, the HERB Digital Hypertension 1 (HERB-DH1) pivotal trial investigated the efficacy of digital therapeutics in patients with hypertension not receiving antihypertensive medication.
METHODS AND RESULTS
This prospective, open-label, randomized controlled study was performed at 12 sites in Japan. Patients with hypertension [office systolic blood pressure (SBP) 140 to <180 mmHg and 24 h SBP ≥130 mmHg] were randomly assigned 1:1 to the digital therapeutics group (HERB system + standard lifestyle modification) or control group (standard lifestyle modification alone). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change in 24 h ambulatory SBP from baseline to 12 weeks; key secondary efficacy endpoints were mean changes in office and home blood pressure (BP) from baseline to 12 weeks. All analyses were conducted in the full analysis set population. Between December 2019 and June 2020, 390 patients were randomly assigned to the digital therapeutics group (n = 199) or control (n = 191) group. Between-group differences in 24-h ambulatory, home, and office SBPs at 12 weeks were -2.4 (95% confidence interval -4.5 to -0.3), -4.3 (-6.7 to -1.9), and -3.6 (-6.2 to -1.0) mmHg, respectively. No major programme-related safety events occurred up to 24 weeks.
CONCLUSION
The HERB-DH1 pivotal study showed the superiority of digital therapeutics compared with standard lifestyle modification alone to reduce 24-h ambulatory, home, and office BPs in the absence of antihypertensive medications.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Essential Hypertension; Humans; Hypertension; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34455443
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab559