Do beta-adrenergic blocking agents increase asthma exacerbation? A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Beta-adrenergic blocking agents (abbreviated as beta-blockers) have been used for treating various cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential for asthma exacerbation is one of the major adverse effects of beta-blockers. This study aimed to compare the level of risk for an asthma attack in patients receiving various beta-blockers. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of either placebo-controlled or active-controlled design. The current network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted under a frequentist model. The primary outcome was the incidence of asthmatic attack. A total of 24 RCTs were included. Overall NMA revealed that only oral timolol [risk ratio (RR) = 3.35 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-10.85)] and infusion of propranolol [RR = 10.19 (95% CI 1.29-80.41)] were associated with significantly higher incidences of asthma attack than the placebo, whereas oral celiprolol [RR = 0.39 (95% CI 0.04-4.11)], oral celiprolol and propranolol [RR = 0.46 (95% CI 0.02-11.65)], oral bisoprolol [RR = 0.46 (95% CI 0.02-11.65)], oral atenolol [RR = 0.51 (95% CI 0.20-1.28)], infusion of practolol [RR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.03-25.14)], and infusion of sotalol [RR = 0.91 (95% CI 0.08-10.65)] were associated with relatively lower incidences of asthma attack than the placebo. In participants with a baseline asthma history, in addition to oral timolol and infusion of propranolol, oral labetalol, oxprenolol, propranolol, and metoprolol exhibited significantly higher incidences of asthma attack than did the placebo. In conclusion, oral timolol and infusion of propranolol were associated with a significantly higher risk of developing an asthma attack in patients, especially in those with a baseline asthma history, and should be avoided in patients who present a risk of asthma.Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42020190540.

Microdosing clinical study: pharmacokinetic, pharmacogenomic (SLCO2B1), and interaction (grapefruit juice) profiles of celiprolol following the oral microdose and therapeutic dose.

The authors evaluated the contribution of the SLCO2B1 polymorphism to the pharmacokinetics of celiprolol at a microdose (MD) and therapeutic dose (TD) and compared pharmacokinetic proportionality between the 2 dose forms in 30 SLCO2B1 genotype-matched healthy volunteers. Three drugs (celiprolol, fexofenadine, and atenolol) were orally administered as a cassette dosing following the MD (totally 97.5 µg) and then a TD (100 mg) of celiprolol, with and without grapefruit juice. The mean AUC(0-24) of celiprolol was lower in SLCO2B1*3/*3 individuals (775 ng·h/mL) than in *1/*3 (1097 ng·h/mL) and *1/*1 (1547 ng·h/mL) individuals following the TD, and this was confirmed in population pharmacokinetic analysis with statistical significances; however, SLCO2B1 genotype-dependent differences disappeared following the MD. Dose-normalized AUC of celiprolol at the MD was much lower than that at the TD, explained by the saturation of the efflux transporter. Thus, the effect of SLCO2B1 polymorphism on the AUC of celiprolol clearly observed only at the TD may be due to the saturation of the efflux transport systems.

Positive influence of AT(1) receptor antagonism upon the impaired celiprolol-induced vasodilatation in aorta from spontaneously hypertensive rats.

We evaluated celiprolol-induced vasodilatation in aorta taken from 12-week-old spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) and the effect of AT(1) angiotensin II receptor antagonism on the vasodilatory action of celiprolol in Wistar Kyoto (WKY) rats and SHR. In WKY rats, the celiprolol-induced relaxation was greatly decreased in denuded aorta, and completely abolished in intact aorta by N(omega)-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester (l-NAME, 100 microM). In SHR, celiprolol-induced relaxation was reduced compared to WKY rats (E(max) (value obtained for the highest concentration, 300 microM)=39.1+ or - 3.78%, n=21 vs. 80.4 + or - 3% in WKY rats, n=10; P<0.0001). Endothelium removal or pre-treatment with l-NAME did not alter celiprolol-induced relaxation in SHR. In both strains, relaxation to celiprolol was decreased in the presence of nadolol (a beta(1)/beta(2)-adrenoceptor antagonist, 10 microM). N-[[3-[(2S)-2-hydroxy-3-[[2-[4-[(phenylsulfonyl)amino] phenyl]ethyl]amino] propoxy]phenyl]methyl]-acetamide (L748337, a beta(3)-adrenoceptor antagonist, 7 microM) had no effect. A 12-day treatment with candesartan cilexetil (an AT(1) receptor antagonist, 0.37 or 1mg/kg/day) reduced systolic blood pressure in both strains, but only improved relaxation to celiprolol in SHR, and only at the highest dose (E(max)=64.2+/-3.9%, n=10, P<0.0001 vs. SHR control). In both strains, local aortic AT(1) receptor antagonism with candesartan CV11974 (100 microM) had no effect. The endothelial beta(1)/beta(2) relaxation induced by celiprolol was therefore impaired in SHR aorta and AT(1) receptor antagonism improved the response to celiprolol, in conjunction with a reduction in blood pressure. This work highlights the need to analyse the potential benefit of a combination of celiprolol/AT(1) receptor antagonist in the treatment of hypertension.

Mechanisms of combined treatment with celiprolol and candesartan for ventricular remodeling in experimental heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Both beta-adrenergic blockers and angiotensin-II receptor blockers were reported to improve the prognosis of patients with heart failure, but the efficacy of combination therapy with these agents has not been fully elucidated. Also the efficacy of celiprolol, a beta1-selective adrenoceptor antagonist with partial beta2-agonist properties, for heart failure treatment is still controversial. We examined the cardioprotective effects and mechanisms of the therapy with celiprolol or candesartan, an angiotensin-II receptor blockers and their combination in heart failure induced by isoproterenol (ISO). METHODS AND RESULTS: ISO 300 mg/kg was injected in rats to produce heart failure. Two months after the injection, the ISO-injected rats were divided into 4 groups (8 rats each) and treated for 4 weeks as follows: (a) vehicle; (b) celiprolol 10 mg/kg per day (BB); (c) candesartan 0.2 mg/kg per day (ARB); and (d) their combination BB+ARB. ISO significantly elevated left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic pressure, decreased peak-negative dP/dt and LV ejection fraction. BB and ARB similarly ameliorated cardiac dysfunction due to ISO, but BB+ARB were more potent than the individual therapies. Separately, ARB preserved the histological structure in LV myocardium. In contrast, BB ameliorated calcium handling, as shown by the increased ratio of SERCA2 to phospholamban protein, despite having little effect on the histology. CONCLUSION: Both celiprolol and candesartan showed cardioprotective effects in this heart failure model. The potential use of the combination treatment in heart failure might result in a synergistic effect through the different cardioprotective mechanisms of celiprolol and candesartan.

Itraconazole increases but grapefruit juice greatly decreases plasma concentrations of celiprolol.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate the effects of itraconazole and grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of the beta-adrenergic receptor-blocking agent celiprolol in healthy volunteers. METHODS: In a randomized 3-phase crossover study, 12 healthy volunteers took itraconazole 200 mg orally or placebo twice a day or 200 mL grapefruit juice 3 times a day for 2 days. On the morning of day 3, 1 hour after ingestion of itraconazole, placebo, or grapefruit juice, each subject ingested 100 mg celiprolol with 200 mL of water (placebo and itraconazole phases) or grapefruit juice. In addition, 200 mL of water or grapefruit juice was ingested 4 and 10 hours after celiprolol intake. The plasma concentrations of celiprolol, itraconazole, and hydroxyitraconazole and the excretion of celiprolol into urine were measured up to 33 hours after dosing. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures and heart rate were recorded with subjects in a sitting position before the administration of celiprolol and 2, 4, 6, and 10 hours later. RESULTS: During the itraconazole phase, the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 33 hours [AUC(0-33)] of celiprolol was 80% greater (P <.05) than in the placebo phase. During the grapefruit juice phase, the mean AUC(0-33) and peak plasma concentration values of celiprolol were reduced to about 13% (P <.001) and 5% (P <.001) of the respective placebo phase values. The cumulative excretion into urine of celiprolol was increased by 59% by itraconazole (P <.05) and decreased by 85% by grapefruit juice (P <.001). Hemodynamic variables did not differ between the phases. CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole almost doubles but grapefruit juice greatly reduces plasma concentrations of celiprolol. The itraconazole-celiprolol interaction most likely resulted from increased absorption of celiprolol possibly as a result of P-glycoprotein inhibition in the intestine. The reduced celiprolol concentrations during the grapefruit juice phase were probably caused by physicochemical factors that interfered with celiprolol absorption, although other mechanisms cannot be excluded. The grapefruit juice-celiprolol interaction is probably of clinical relevance.

[Use of selective long-acting beta-blocker with vasodilating activity celiprolol in patients with essential hypertension]. / Primenenie selektivnogo prolongirovannogo beta-blokatora s vazodilatiruiushchimi svoistvami tseliprolola u bol'nykh s éssentsial'noi gipertenziei.

Effects of 8 weeks therapy with long-acting selective b-blocker celiprolol (200 mg o.d.) on 24-hour blood pressure, central hemodynamics (oscillometry) and microcirculation (laser doppler flowmetry) were studied in 30 patients (17 women and 13 men, mean age 51.9 years), with stage I-II essential hypertension. Celiprolol lowered both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) during all periods of 24-hour BP monitoring and improved BP circadian rhythm. Treatment with celiprolol was not associated with considerable heart rate decrease or changes of stroke volume and cardiac output. 24 hour monitoring of parameters of central hemodynamics during treatment with celiprolol revealed existence of significant direct correlation between mean BP and total peripheral vascular resistance. Thus, hypotensive effect of celiprolol was mostly attributed to its vasodilatory action. This activity of celiprolol was confirmed by its beneficial influence on parameters of microcirculation. After therapy normalization of peripheral blood flow was observed in 50%, and tendency to its improvement--in 83,3 % of patients.

Comparison of the effects of single oral doses of nebivolol and celiprolol on airways in patients with mild asthma.

OBJECTIVE: The respiratory effects of nebivolol, a new selective ss(1)-adrenergic blocking agent, and celiprolol, a ss-blocker possessing strong ss(1)-adrenoceptor antagonist and mild ss(2)-agonist properties, were investigated in 12 patients with mild asthma. DESIGN: Changes in several spirometric indexes (FVC, FEV(1), and forced expiratory flow rate at 50% of FVC) were measured. The interaction with the bronchodilator effect of the ss(2)-adrenoceptor-selective agonist albuterol also was investigated. RESULTS: The effect of both nebivolol and celiprolol on FEV(1) was considered to be significant (p < 0.05). The administration of nebivolol and celiprolol, but not of placebo, elicited a decrease in FEV(1): mean maximum difference for nebivolol, -0.272 L (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.402 to -0.142); mean maximum difference for celiprolol, -0.193 L (95% CI, -0.316 to -0.071); mean maximum difference for placebo, -0.0001 L (95% CI, -0.087 to 0.085). The inhalation of albuterol, up to a dose of 800 microg, significantly (p < 0.05) improved FEV(1), but the values after nebivolol and celiprolol administration were lower than the initial values. Both ss-blockers caused equal changes in heart rate, systolic BP, and diastolic BP. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between the respiratory actions of the two active drugs.

Effect of celiprolol on cardiac hypertrophy in hypertension.

The present study was undertaken to clarify whether celiprolol and atenolol, beta1-selective beta blockers with and without intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA), respectively, might improve ischemic damage in the isolated perfused hearts of spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), and whether long-term treatment with celiprolol may reduce left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with essential hypertension. Atenolol (50 mg/kg/day) or celiprolol (300 mg/kg/day) for 7 weeks significantly reduced the blood pressure in SHR to the same degree, and both drugs decreased the heart rate, but the magnitude of the fall in heart rate was significantly higher with atenolol treatment than with celiprolol treatment. Both treatments significantly reduced the ratio of LV weight to body weight in SHR and significantly improved the coronary reserve in SHR to the same extent. Both treatments significantly improved the extent of recovery of the pressure-rate product and the extent of percent recovery of the coronary flow after reperfusion following 30 min of ischemia in SHR. Celiprolol treatment in patients with essential hypertension for 12 months significantly decreased interventricular septal thickness (IVST)+LV posterior wall thickness (PWT) and LV mass index (LVMI), but there was no significant correlation between IVST+PWT or LVMI and blood pressure before and after treatment. IVST+PWT and LVMI were significantly decreased after 3 months of treatment and these LVH indices were significantly smaller after 6 and 12 months of treatment than after 3 months of treatment. In conclusion, both celiprolol and atenolol treatment reduced LVH and improved the ischemic damage in SHR. In essential hypertensive patients with LVH, celiprolol treatment effectively reduced blood pressure and achieved LVH regression.

Local pulse pressure and regression of arterial wall hypertrophy during long-term antihypertensive treatment.

BACKGROUND: Local pulse pressure (PP) is an independent determinant of carotid artery wall thickness, stronger than mean blood pressure (BP). The present study was designed to assess whether a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist-based or an ACE inhibitor-based treatment was able to reduce carotid artery wall hypertrophy through a reduction in carotid PP rather than by lowering mean BP and whether the influence of local PP reduction could also be detected at the site of a muscular artery, the radial artery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-eight essential hypertensive patients were randomized to 9 months of double-blind treatment with either celiprolol or enalapril. Arterial parameters were determined with high-resolution echo-tracking systems. PP was measured locally with applanation tonometry and independently of mean BP. After 9 months of treatment, mean BP, carotid PP, and intimal-medial thickness (IMT) decreased significantly, with no difference between the 2 groups. The reduction in carotid PP but not in mean BP was a major independent determinant of the reduction in carotid IMT. Radial artery IMT and PP decreased significantly with both treatments. However, the reduction in radial artery IMT was not related to the changes in radial artery PP. CONCLUSIONS: The regression of carotid artery wall hypertrophy during long-term antihypertensive treatment was dependent on the reduction in local PP rather than on the lowering of mean BP. The effect of PP lowering on IMT reduction was observed at the site of an elastic artery but not at the site of a muscular artery.

Daytime-selective antihypertensive activity of celiprolol.

Day-activity rhythms of heart rate and blood pressure are thought to be mediated mainly through the sympathetic nervous system and may have greater amplitudes in patients with hypertension owing to increased daytime and largely normal nighttime values. Drug-induced nighttime hypotension in patients with chronic hypertension has been associated with the precipitation of cardiac failure and a fall in cerebral flow. The authors examined the effects of a single dose and of a 4-week treatment with different classes of antihypertensive drugs on ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) in 10 patients with mild hypertension. Data were assessed by polynomial analysis (Harvard Graphics 3). A single oral dose of enalapril 10 mg, amlodipine 5 mg, carvedilol 25 mg, and celiprolol 200 mg produced a mean reduction of 24-hour ABP compared to placebo of, respectively, 24/11, 11/5, 13/6, and 12/5 mm Hg (p values between <0.02 and <0.001). With enalapril, amlodipine, and carvedilol, between-subject variability contributed significantly to the overall variability in the measurements (p values between 0.05 and 0.01 versus zero), whereas with celiprolol this was not so. Although the beta blockers reduced daytime blood pressures similarly to the ACE inhibitor or the calcium channel blocker, they did not reduce nighttime blood pressures. These results were confirmed by an 8-week crossover trial comparing enalapril 10 mg daily with celiprolol 200 mg daily in the same group of patients. The authors conclude (1) that beta blockers produce a more stable reduction of blood pressure in patients with mild hypertension less affected by pressor effects through the sympathetic nervous system; (2) that beta blockers, unlike ACE inhibitors and calcium channel blockers, do not give rise to nighttime hypotension in this category of patients; and (3) that the selective beta blocker celiprolol may even perform better in these respects than the nonselective beta blocker carvedilol.

The beta2-adrenergic modulator celiprolol reduces insulin resistance in obese Zucker rats.

Essential hypertension is associated with an increased incidence of insulin resistance of skeletal muscle glucose transport. The present study determined if celiprolol, an antihypertensive agent with selective beta1-adrenoceptor antagonist and additional beta2-agonistic properties, administered by gavage either acutely (3 hr) or chronically (14 d), had a direct effect on improving glucose tolerance and insulin-stimulated glucose transport activity (using 2-deoxyglucose (2-DG) uptake) in isolated epitrochlearis muscles of the insulin-resistant obese Zucker rat. The effects of a selective beta1-blocker, metoprolol, were also assessed. Acute administration of celiprolol, but not metoprolol, increased insulin-stimulated 2-DG uptake in muscle by 22% (p<0.05). Chronic celiprolol treatment significantly lowered fasting plasma insulin (22%) and free fatty acids (40%) in comparison to obese control values. Moreover, chronic celiprolol administration decreased the glucose-insulin index (calculated as the product of the glucose and insulin areas under the curve during an oral glucose tolerance test), by 32% (p<0.05) compared to obese controls, indicating that peripheral insulin action was increased. Indeed, insulin-stimulated skeletal muscle 2-DG uptake was enhanced by 49% (p<0.05) in these celiprolol-treated obese animals. Metoprolol was without significant effect on any of these variables following chronic administration. These findings indicate that, in this animal model of insulin resistance, the beta1-antagonist/beta2-agonist celiprolol has a specific effect of improving insulin-stimulated skeletal muscle glucose transport that is independent of any hemodynamic alterations.

Hemodynamic effects of celiprolol in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.

In this study, the effect of celiprolol (beta-1-antagonist with beta-2-agonistic activity) on hemodynamic and electrocardiographic parameters of patients with congestive heart failure due to ischemic (iCMP) and non-ischemic (niCMP) origin should be evaluated. Sixteen patients were included into the study, nine with iCMP, seven with niCMP. All patients were investigated by radionuclide ventriculography (99mTc), right heart floating catheterization, and late potential analysis and measurement of heart rate variability. All patients received 200 mg celiprolol after a 3-day period of 100 mg celiprolol/day. All patients showed, after a follow-up period of 3 months, a significant improvement of the left ventricular ejection fraction. The changes of hemodynamic parameters were more pronounced in patients with niCMP. Heart rate did not decrease in patients with niCMP. A 3-month therapy with celiprolol as an additional therapy to a preexisting heart failure therapy leads to a significant improvement of the ejection fraction in patients with congestive heart failure. Patients with niCMP seemed to profit more from this additional beta-blocking therapy.

In vivo non-linear intestinal permeability of celiprolol and propranolol in conscious dogs: evidence for intestinal secretion.

The objective of this study was to investigate the absorption mechanism of celiprolol as a potential source of the drug's non-linear oral pharmacokinetics by determining its intestinal permeability as a function of concentration in vivo in dogs. Solutions of different celiprolol concentrations containing propranolol as an internal absorption marker were perfused through an isolated jejunal segment and samples were analyzed by an enantioselective HPLC method (Hartmann et al., J. Chromatogr., 496 (1989) 387-396). Permeability (P(eff) x 10(4) cm/s) of celiprolol increased significantly from 1.9-2.1 for the lower concentrations to 3.2 for the highest concentration, while the variability decreased. No statistical differences in the uptake between the two enantiomers were observed. Permeability of propranolol also increased significantly with increasing celiprolol concentrations, suggesting that propranolol might be utilizing the same carrier protein. In conclusion, the non-linear and variable oral pharmacokinetics of celiprolol might be due to a non-linear saturable, possibly secretion component in its uptake mechanism.

Exercise metabolism in healthy volunteers taking celiprolol, atenolol, and placebo.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown that beta 1 selective agents have fewer adverse effects on exercise metabolism than nonselective beta blockers, and this has been attributed to their reduced blockade of beta 2 receptors. This study aimed at determining whether a beta blocker with partial agonist activity at beta 1 and beta 2 receptors (celiprolol) was better than a conventional beta 1 receptor-blocker (atenolol) in prolonging exercise capabilities. METHODS: After four days of treatment with celiprolol 200 mg, atenolol 50 mg, or placebo, 22 healthy volunteers exercised on a treadmill for two hours at 50% of their maximal oxygen uptake. Resting heart rate and blood pressure were recorded before and after exercise. During exercise, fat oxidation, plasma free fatty acids, glycerol, glucose, and ammonia were measured together with heart rate and perceived exertion. RESULTS: Mean exercising heart rate was significantly lower in those taking either of the beta blockers than in those taking placebo, and significantly lower for those taking atenolol rather than celiprolol. Fat oxidation was significantly lower for those taking celiprolol (38.8 (SD 12.2)%, P < 0.01) and atenolol (36.6 (15.9)%, P < 0.01) compared with placebo (45.6 (14.1)%). For the first 15 minutes of exercise, fat oxidation was significantly lower for those taking atenolol (24.6 (12.8)%, P < 0.01) than celiprolol (29.6 (14.3)%). The rise in plasma free fatty acids and glycerol during exercise was also significantly attenuated by both beta blockers in comparison with the rise in those taking placebo (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both celiprolol and atenolol reduced fat oxidation compared with placebo. For the first 15 minutes of exercise fat oxidation was preserved by celiprolol, but not atenolol. This preservation of fat oxidation during the early part of exercise may confer some small benefit to patients who take beta blockers and intend to exercise regularly. However, we did not detect significant differences between atenolol and celiprolol in overall mean fat oxidation or perceived exertion in this study.

Celiprolol: agonist and antagonist effects at cardiac beta 1- and vascular beta 2-adrenoceptors determined under in vivo conditions in the rat.

Celiprolol is a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist which has desirable ancillary properties since it is relatively cardioselective and can exert direct vasodilator and bronchodilator effects. Here agonist and antagonist effects of celiprolol at cardiac beta 1- and vascular beta 2-adrenoceptors were determined under in vivo conditions in the rat. All experiments were carried out in catecholamine-depleted, pentobarbital anesthetized and vagotomized rats, placed under artificial respiration. I.v. administrations were made via the femoral vein. Blood pressure was measured from the cannulated right carotid artery and heart rate was recorded with a cardiotachometer. Celiprolol (10 micrograms/kg to 1 mg/kg i.v.) produced dose-related increases in heart rate and decreases in mean carotid artery blood pressure which were of longer duration than those mediated by standard agonists of beta 1-(isoprenaline) or beta 2-(salbutamol) adrenoceptors respectively. Although the maximal increase in heart rate by celiprolol (110 +/- 4 beats/min, n = 7) was approximately half that of isoprenaline (198 +/- 1 beats/min, n = 5), isoprenaline acted at doses 200-fold lower than celiprolol. Betaxolol (0.03-0.3 mg/kg i.v.), a beta 1-adrenoceptor antagonist, inhibited strongly and with similar potency the tachycardiac effects of celiprolol (DR10 = 45 micrograms/kg i.v.) as well as isoprenaline (DR10 = 45 micrograms/kg i.v.). On the other hand, the hypotensive effects of celiprolol and salbutamol were antagonized markedly and with similar potency by ICI 118,551, a relatively selective beta 2-adrenoceptor antagonist (DR10 = 15 and 25 micrograms/kg i.v. respectively). In rats pretreated with celiprolol (0.03 to 0.3 mg/kg i.v.), the heart rate dose-response curves to isoprenaline were shifted to the right of those determined in matched groups of vehicle-pretreated animals. In this respect, celiprolol was half as potent as betaxolol in blocking cardiac beta 1-adrenoceptors. Furthermore, celiprolol also antagonized the hypotensive effects of salbutamol, but, in this respect, celiprolol was 90-fold less potent than ICI 118,551. In conclusion, these results clearly indicate that celiprolol has the ability of stimulating and blocking not only cardiac beta 1- but also vascular beta 2-adrenoceptors. The effects on cardiac beta 1-adrenoceptors as well as the agonism of beta 2-adrenoceptors are produced by similar doses of celiprolol. These doses are notably lower than those necessary to block beta 2-adrenoceptors. Thus, this pharmacological profile, which has also been demonstrated in humans, indicates that celiprolol is a modulator of cardiac beta 1-adrenoceptors with vascular beta 2-adrenoceptor agonist properties.

Acute effects of celiprolol on angiographically normal and stenotic coronary arteries.

Unselective and beta 1-selective beta-blockers may induce vasoconstriction of normal and stenotic epicardial coronary arteries. To analyze the influence of the "vasodilatory" beta-blocker celiprolol on coronary vasomotility, 0.4 mg celiprolol/kg were intravenously infused over 4 minutes in 13 patients with coronary artery disease. Coronary angiograms were taken before (control) and at 4, 6, 8, 10, 15, and 20 minutes after the onset of infusion and 4 minutes after final sublingual administration of 0.4 mg nitroglycerin. Quantitative analysis of cinefilms demonstrated no significant diameter changes in angiographically normal coronary segments and stenoses. The vasodilatory capacity of normal segments (18 +/- 12%; p < 0.001) and stenoses (17 +/- 14%; p < 0.01) was proven by nitroglycerin. Systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and pulmonary wedge pressure revealed no significant changes with celiprolol. Thus, celiprolol exerts no vasoconstricting effects on angiographically normal and stenotic coronary arteries.

Bioequivalence studies of celiprolol in healthy human volunteers.

Thus bioequivalence between the two products was established by undertaking this study. From table 1 it can be seen that the standard deviation at the various sampling points is high indicating varying absorption rates in individual volunteers, but this was observed in case of both the products. Also, since the study design was complete crossover, this high standard deviation was not due to any study design variable. As celiprolol shows non-linear1 dose related absorption kinetics this high value of standard deviation may be due to the intersubject variation during the absorption process. However all the pharmacokinetic parameters showed a comparable profile when statistically evaluated for any significant difference between the two products.

Effect of long-term celiprolol therapy on haemostasis in essential hypertension.

Undesirable changes of haemostasis induced by some anti-hypertensive drugs can encourage the acceleration of atherogenesis. Therefore, the changes of haemostasis parameters in 22 patients with essential hypertension under long-term celiprolol therapy (> 2 months) were of interest. In the placebo group of 15 essentially hypertensive patients there were no significant changes in platelet activity. On the other hand, the therapeutic dose of celiprolol was shown to reduce total platelet aggregation, without any harmful effects on fibrinolytic activity and coagulation inhibitors such as protein C and antithrombin III. The metabolic neutrality of celiprolol accompanied by the proven platelet-inhibitory tendency is desirable in the new approach to hypertension treatment. Potentially anti-thrombotic or at least neutral prothrombotic properties of celiprolol may be important in terms of the favourable role of anti-hypertensive drugs in cardiovascular morbidity.

A placebo controlled comparison of the effects of metoprolol and celiprolol on echo-Doppler measurements of cardiovascular function in normal volunteers.

1. This study used a continuous-wave echo-Doppler method (Exerdrop) to investigate the effects of beta-adrenoceptor antagonism and partial agonism on cardiovascular responses at rest and during dynamic exercise. 2. A double-blind, randomised, placebo controlled comparison of metoprolol (50 mg) and celiprolol (200 mg) was undertaken in nine normal volunteers; single oral doses of medication were administered at weekly intervals. Rest and exercise (supine bicycle) haemodynamics were assessed at 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h following dosing. 3. Before dosing and after placebo, the aortic flow velocity, acceleration and velocity integral increased progressively during exercise, as did heart rate, blood pressure and cardiac output. 4. Following metoprolol 50 mg, heart rate was significantly reduced without change in systolic or diastolic blood pressure. Echo-Doppler peak acceleration and velocity decreased at rest. On exercise, heart rate and systolic blood pressure fell significantly; the increase in acceleration was significantly blunted compared with placebo (a decrease of 15.2% at rest and 22.9% at 75 watts; P < 0.01 vs placebo). Peak velocity fell significantly by 75 watts exercise. 5. Celiprolol 200 mg at rest significantly increased systolic blood pressure, peak acceleration and velocity. On exercise celiprolol, in contrast to metoprolol, did not reduce peak acceleration or peak velocity; however exercise heart rate and systolic blood pressure were significantly reduced. The difference between celiprolol and metoprolol in respect of peak acceleration persisted over the 8 h of the study. 6. These differences between metoprolol and celiprolol are compatible with the partial agonism of celiprolol.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Interactions of a new beta-blocker, celiprolol, with the calcium antagonists, diltiazem and nifedipine, on atrioventricular conduction.

The influence of a new beta-blocker, celiprolol, on the direct dromotropic effects of the Ca antagonists, diltiazem and nifedipine, on atrioventricular (AV) conduction was estimated in the canine isolated, blood-perfused AV node preparation. Diltiazem (1-10 micrograms) and nifedipine (0.3-3 micrograms) injected i.a. into the AV node artery dose dependently prolonged the atrio-His (AH) interval (5-39 msec and 7-51 msec) in the AV mode preparation. When celiprolol (1 and 10 mg/kg) was given i.v. in the support dog, the AH interval in the AV node preparation was transiently shortened and then maintained constant as a control. These doses of i.v. celiprolol completely abolished the isoproterenol-induced decrease in the AH interval (28 msec at 0.03 microgram, i.a.) and AV nodal tachycardia. In the presence of celiprolol, the same doses of i.a. diltiazem and nifedipine increased the AH interval by the same amounts (6-43 msec and 8-53 msec) as the control. The incidence of second degree AV conduction block produced by diltiazem (2 in 5 AV node preparations at 10 micrograms) and nifedipine (2 in 6 preparations at 3 micrograms) was not changed by celiprolol. In the second experiments, diltiazem (30-300 micrograms/kg) and nifedipine (3-30 micrograms/kg), given i.v. in an open-chest in situ vagotomized dog, dose dependently increased AV conduction time (AVCT; 2-30 msec and 1-12 msec). Celiprolol 1 and 10 mg/kg i.v., which suppressed the isoproterenol-induced decrease in AVCT (32 msec at 0.3 mu/kg i.v.) and AV nodal tachycardia (4 in 6 in situ hearts), potentiated the prolongation of AVCT by the same doses of diltiazem (11-50 msec) and nifedipine (3-40 msec). The incidence of second degree AV conduction block produced by i.v., diltiazem (1 in 5 in situ hearts at 300 micrograms/kg) and nifedipine (0 in 6 in situ hearts at 30 micrograms/kg) was aggravated (4 in 5 and 3 in 6 in situ hearts) after i.v. celiprolol. These results indicate that although celiprolol does not affect the direct negative dromotropic effects of the Ca antagonists, AV block could easily be produced when celiprolol eliminates tonic adrenergic influences in vivo.