The Evolving Role of Calcium Channel Blockers in Hypertension Management: Pharmacological and Clinical Considerations.

Worldwide, hypertension is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease and death. An estimated 122 million people, per the American Heart Association in 2023, have been diagnosed with this common condition. It is generally agreed that the primary goal in the treatment of hypertension is to reduce overall blood pressure to below 140/90 mmHg, with a more optimal goal of 130/80 mmHg. Common medications for treating hypertension include calcium channel blockers (CCBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and diuretics. CCBs are one of the most widely studied agents and are generally recommended as first-line therapy alone and in combination therapies. This is largely based on the vast knowledge of CCB mechanisms and their minimal side effect profile. CCBs can be separated into two classes: dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine. Non-dihydropyridine CCBs act on voltage-dependent L-type calcium channels of cardiac and smooth muscle to decrease muscle contractility. Dihydropyridine CCBs act by vasodilating the peripheral vasculature. For many patients with only mild increases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (e.g., stage 1 hypertension), the medical literature indicates that CCB monotherapy can be sufficient to control hypertension. In this regard, CCB monotherapy in those with stage 1 hypertension reduced renal and cardiovascular complications compared to other drug classes. Combination therapy with CCBs and angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors has been shown to be an effective dual therapy based on recent meta-analyses. This article is a review of calcium channel blockers and their use in treating hypertension with some updated and recent information on studies that have re-examined their use. As for new information, we tried to include some information from recent studies on hypertensive treatment involving calcium channel blockers.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers are associated with improved amputation-free survival in chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

BACKGROUND: In the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study, investigators found that ramipril was associated with improved survival as well as decreased MI and stroke rates in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Nonetheless, their effect on chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI)-specific outcomes is unclear. We aim to assess the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on amputation-free survival in patients with CLTI undergoing peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) in a Medicare-linked database. METHODS: Patients undergoing PVI in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database were included. Primary outcomes included amputation-free survival. Kaplan-Meier survival and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to assess 1-year outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 34,284 patients were included, 46.3% of whom were discharged on ACEIs/ARBs. Patients discharged on ACEIs/ARBs were more likely to be smokers, have diabetes, and have hypertension. They were also more likely to present with rest pain. The overall 1-year survival rate for patients on ACEIs/ARBs vs those who are not was (79.1% vs 69.4%; P < .001). Freedom from amputation was 87.8% for patients on ACEIs/ARBs vs 84.2% for those who were not (P < .001). Amputation-free survival was 70.5% vs 59.5% for ACEIs/ARBs vs no ACEIs/ARBs (P < .001). After adjusting for potential confounders, ACEIs/ARBs use was associated with lower 1-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-0.8; P < .001), amputation (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9; P < .001), and amputation or death (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76-0.8; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ACEIs/ARBs were associated independently with lower amputation, improved survival, and amputation-free rates survival at 1 year in patients with CLTI undergoing PVI. The fact that more than one-half the patients were not discharged on these medications presents an area for potential quality improvement.

Role of antihypertensive medicines in prostate cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is associated with the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and its progression, however, it remains unclear whether antihypertensive medicines alter PCa risk or prognosis. This systematic review evaluated the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors in the risk and prognosis of PCa. This review was performed in line with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. METHODS: Eligible studies comprised peer-reviewed observational studies which reported the role of CCBs and RAS inhibitors in PCa, had accessible full texts, and were written in English. Using a combination of keywords, 5 electronic bibliographic databases which included Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus were searched. RESULTS: A total of 1,346 studies were retrieved and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies reported reduced or no associated risk, improved prognosis, and survival with the use of RAS inhibitors. Studies on CCBs showed evidence of associated risk of PCa. Data extraction from retrieved studies focused on included study characteristics, setting, authors, year, outcomes of interest, and risk ratios. The quality assessment of included studies by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute study assessment tools, showed that all studies had good quality. CONCLUSIONS: The use of RAS inhibitors was mostly associated with lower risks or improved prognosis of PCa. CCBs may also be associated with risks of PCa. This suggests that high-risk patients managed with CCBs should be actively monitored for PCa. However, there is need for further evidence from large-scale prospective, controlled cohort studies to determine any influence of CCBs on PCa.

Influence of Weight and Body Size on the Pharmacokinetics of Heart Failure Pharmacotherapy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a review of studies evaluating the influence of body size and weight (WT) on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of drugs recommended for heart failure (HF) treatment. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of the MEDLINE (1946 to April 2023) and EMBASE (1974 to April 2023) databases was conducted for articles that focused on the impact of WT or body size on the PK of drugs of interest used in HF patients. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles written in English or French related to the aim of our study were retained for analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 6493 articles, 20 were retained for analysis. Weight was associated with the clearance of digoxin, carvedilol, enalapril, and candesartan as well as the volume of distribution of eplerenone and bisoprolol. There was no documented direct impact of WT on the PK of furosemide, valsartan, and metoprolol, although these studies were limited or confounded by the small sample size, adjustment of PK factors by WT, or the use of the Cockroff-Gault equation for the evaluation of creatinine clearance, which includes WT. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review highlights and summarizes the available data on the importance of WT on the PK of HF treatment. CONCLUSION: Considering the significant impact of WT on most HF drugs in this review, it may be important to further investigate it in the context of personalized therapy, particularly in patients presenting extreme WTs.

Density functional theory and enzyme studies support interactions between angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme-2: Relevance to coronavirus 2019.

The binding affinities and interactions between eight drug candidates, both commercially available (candesartan; losartan; losartan carboxylic acid; nirmatrelvir; telmisartan) and newly synthesized benzimidazole-N-biphenyltetrazole (ACC519T), benzimidazole bis-N,N'-biphenyltetrazole (ACC519T(2) and 4-butyl-N,N-bis([2-(2H-tetrazol-5-yl)biphenyl-4-yl]) methyl (BV6), and the active site of angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) were evaluated for their potential as inhibitors against SARS-CoV-2 and regulators of ACE2 function through Density Functional Theory methodology and enzyme activity assays, respectively. Notably, telmisartan and ACC519T(2) exhibited pronounced binding affinities, forming strong interactions with ACE2's active center, favorably accepting proton from the guanidinium group of arginine273. The ordering of candidates by binding affinity and reactivity descriptors, emerged as telmisartan > ACC519T(2) > candesartan > ACC519T > losartan carboxylic acid > BV6 > losartan > nirmatrelvir. Proton transfers among the active center amino acids revealed their interconnectedness, highlighting a chain-like proton transfer involving tyrosine, phenylalanine, and histidine. Furthermore, these candidates revealed their potential antiviral abilities by influencing proton transfer within the ACE2 active site. Furthermore, through an in vitro pharmacological assays we determined that candesartan and the BV6 derivative, 4-butyl-N,N0-bis[20-2Htetrazol-5-yl)bipheyl-4-yl]methyl)imidazolium bromide (BV6(K+)2) also contain the capacity to increase ACE2 functional activity. This comprehensive analysis collectively underscores the promise of these compounds as potential therapeutic agents against SARS-CoV-2 by targeting crucial protein interactions.

The role of angiotensin receptor blockers in treating epilepsy: a review.

Epilepsy is a chronic brain disease with a global prevalence of 70 million people. According to the World Health Organization, roughly 5 million new cases are diagnosed every year. Anti-seizure drugs are the treatment of choice. However, in roughly one third of the patients, these drugs fail to produce the desired effect. As a result, finding novel treatments for epilepsy becomes inevitable. Recently, angiotensin receptor blockers have been proposed as a treatment to reduce the over-excitation of neurons in epilepsy. For this purpose, we conducted a review using Medline/PubMed and Google Scholar using the relevant search terms and extracted the relevant data in a table. Our review suggests that this novel approach has a very high potential to treat epilepsy, especially in those patients who fail to respond to conventional treatment options. However, more extensive and human-based trials should be conducted to reach a decisive conclusion. Nevertheless, the use of ARBs in patients with epilepsy should be carefully monitored keeping the adverse effects in mind.

Association of ACEI/ARB therapy with total and cardiovascular death in coronary artery disease patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a large multi-center longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), and angiotensin­converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin­receptor blockers (ARB) can improve cardiac and renal function, but whether ACEI/ARB therapy improves long-term prognosis remains unclear among these high-risk patients. Therefore, this research aimed to investigate the relationship between ACEI/ARB therapy and long-term prognosis among CAD patients with advanced CKD. METHODS: CAD patients with advanced CKD were included in five hospitals. Advanced CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Cox regression models and competing risk Fine and Gray models were used to examine the relationship between ACEI/ARB therapy and all-cause and cardiovascular death, respectively. RESULTS: Of 2527 patients, 47.6% population of our cohort was discharged on ACEI/ARB. The overall all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were 38.6% and 24.7%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analyses indicated that ACEI/ARB therapy was found to be associated with lower rates of both all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR)=0.836, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.738-0.948, p = 0.005) and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.817, 95%CI: 0.699-0.956, p = 0.011). In the propensity-matched cohort, the survival benefit was consistent, and significantly better survival was observed for all-cause mortality (HR = 0.856, 95%CI: 0.752-0.974, p = 0.019) and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.830, 95%CI: 0.707-0.974, p = 0.023) among patients treated with ACEI/ARB. CONCLUSION: ACEI/ARB therapy showed a better survival benefit among high-risk CAD patients with advanced CKD at long-term follow-up, which manifested that strategies to maintain ACEI/ARB treatment may improve clinical outcomes among these high-risk populations.

What is the current knowledge on the topic? Advanced CKD is highly prevalent and strongly associated with higher mortality risk and worse outcomes among CAD patients, and patients with advanced CKD have often been excluded from randomized controlled trials, creating an evidence gap for these high-risk CAD patients. ACEI/ARB are beneficial for greater survival among CAD patients, but the effect of ACEI/ARB therapy on long-term prognosis is unclear among CAD patients with advanced CKD.What does this study add to our knowledge? ACEI/ARB treatment showed a better survival benefit among high-risk CAD patients with advanced CKD at long-term follow-up.How might this change clinical pharmacology or translational science? CAD patients with advanced CKD are not only have worse outcomes but also limited in their choice of therapy strategies. Our study may prompt an important reference for the subsequent improvement of long-term prognosis among these high-risk populations.

Decreased prevalence of new-onset adhesive capsulitis in patients prescribed angiotensin receptor blockers.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed antihypertensive agents that have well-known antifibrotic properties. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between ARB use and the rates of new-onset adhesive capsulitis as well as adhesive capsulitis requiring operative treatment. METHODS: Using a large national insurance database, a randomly generated cohort of patients with at least 3 continuous months of ARB use between January 2010 and December 2019 (n = 1,000,000) was compared to a separate randomly generated cohort without ARB use (n = 3,000,000). Rates of newly diagnosed adhesive capsulitis and associated manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) and/or arthroscopic capsulotomy were calculated over a 1- and 2-year period following the completion of at least 3 continuous months of ARB therapy. Rates were compared using multivariable logistic regression to control for demographics and comorbidities. Both unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and reported for each comparison. Statistical significance was set at P <.05. RESULTS: The mean age in the ARB cohort was 61.8 years (standard deviation [SD] = 10.0), whereas in the control cohort, it was 54.8 years (SD = 12.3) (P < .001). The ARB cohort had significantly lower rates of newly diagnosed adhesive capsulitis compared with the control cohort at both 1 year (0.15% vs. 0.55%, P < .001) and 2 years (0.3% vs. 0.78%, P < .001). Similar findings were observed for the arthroscopic capsular release/MUA cohort associated with adhesive capsulitis. After adjusting for confounding factors, the lower rates of adhesive capsulitis and arthroscopic capsular release/MUA associated with adhesive capsulitis in the ARB cohort remained statistically significant (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients prescribed ARBs experienced a decreased rate of newly diagnosed adhesive capsulitis, as well as adhesive capsulitis requiring surgical intervention when compared to a control cohort. These findings suggest a potential protective effect of ARBs against the development of adhesive capsulitis. Further investigations are warranted to elucidate the underlying mechanisms and establish a causal relationship.

The Effect of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on In-Stent Restenosis After Stent Implantation: A Meta-Analysis.

AIM: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been shown to inhibit restenosis in vitro and in vivo, but the evidence found in humans is inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ARBs in preventing in-stent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHOD: Databases including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CNKI were searched to collect randomised controlled trials on ARBs inhibiting restenosis that were published before October 2022. A total of 1,056 patients enrolled in eight trials were included in the study. RESULTS: The ARBs group showed lower target lesion revascularisation than the control group (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.34-0.86; p=0.01), but the restenosis incidence between these two groups was not statistically significant (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.65-1.11; p>0.05). CONCLUSION: This study found that ARBs might have a potential effect on reducing target lesion revascularisation after PCI in coronary heart disease patients but has no impact on angiographic restenosis.

Gut microbiome and inflammation in cardiovascular drug response: trends in therapeutic success and commercial focus.

The intricate Gut microbiome is evolving as an important system and is hypothesized to be a "metabolic organ" within the host. Alterations in Gut microbiota and inflammation associated with several diseases play a crucial role in drug transformation through microbiota-host co-metabolism, modified pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics profiles, and may result in the formation of toxic metabolites with interference in drug response. In recent studies, a large number of drugs are reported that are co-metabolized by the host and the Gut microbial enzymes. we summarize the direct and indirect involvement of Gut microbiome promotion or inhibition of cardiovascular diseases, mechanisms on bioavailability, and therapeutic outcomes of cardiovascular drugs, particularly pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics profiles in light of AUC, Tmax, Cmax, and bioavailability and drug transportation via immune cells, inter-individual variations in intestinal microbial taxonomy, influence of drugs on diversity and richness of microflora, high lightening limitations and significance of in personalized medicine. Recent advances in target-drug delivery by nanoparticles with limitations and challenges in application are discussed. The cross-talk between Gut microbiota and cardiovascular drugs signifies a better understanding and rationale for targeting the Gut microbiota to improve the therapeutic outcome for cardiovascular diseases, with present-day limitations.

[Antihypertensive therapy in patients with arterial hypertension and concomitant diseases in real clinical practice (according to the National Registry of Arterial Hypertension, 2019-2022)].

BACKGROUND: Arterial hypertension (AH) remains the leading risk factor associated with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), cerebrovascular disease and chronic kidney disease. About 70% of patients with AH who are on monotherapy cannot achieve blood pressure (BP) targets, and therefore all quidelines for the management of AH have recently recommended prescribing combination therapy (PCT). In real clinical practice (RCP), there remains significant uncertainty in the effectiveness and rationality of therapy, despite the wide availability of antihypertensive drugs (AHD) and the presence of recommendations for a stepwise approach to prescribing combinations of specific groups of AHD in different clinical situations. AIM: Analyze the real ongoing antihypertensive therapy, including the PCT; international nonproprietary names of drugs and their dosages in RCP; compliance of therapy with clinical recommendations; changing trends in the PCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An analysis was carried out of the data from the register of AH, the compliance of treatment in different clinical groups of patients and the achievement of BP and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets in the sample of 2019-2022 (n=5012). The prescription of AHD and achievement of targets values were assessed in accordance with current clinical guidelines for the management of AH and hypercholesterolemia. Data from 2010 (n=7782) and 2020 (n=3061) were analyzed to assess the dynamics of prescription of monotherapy and PCT. RESULTS: The greatest increase in the number of AHD was observed in patients with hypertension in combination with coronary heart disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. In a small group of patients with hypertension without other CVDs, the recommended combinations of AHD were not prescribed; preference was given to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and ß-adrenoblocker (ß-AB). PCT mainly differed from the recommended combinations by the wider use of drugs from the ß-AB group. The PCT of recommended drugs was highest in patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease - more than 90%, hypertension and heart failure in 56.2%, hypertension and atrial fibrillation - 33.3%, hypertension and chronic kidney desease - 19.6%. Achievement of BP and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets was insufficient in all analyzed groups. Among the international nonproprietary names of drugs, the most frequently prescribed are the following: bisoprolol, metoprolol, lisinopril, perindopril, losartan, spironolactone, amlodipine, torasemide, indapamide, hypochlorothiazide, moxonidine. The prescribed daily dosages were closer to the initial recommended ones. By 2020, the prescription of PCT with ß-AB and a more uniform prescription of various combinations will come to the fore, while PCT in 2010 is characterized by the presence of one or two leaders combinations. CONCLUSION: The described features of prescribing AHD partially reproduce clinical recommendations for the management of AH. Differences in therapy provided in RCP may be associated with an attempt to intensify the treatment of hypertension in patients with other concomitant CVDs. At the same time, analysis of combinations and dosages of prescribed drugs suggests the presence of wide opportunities for further escalation of therapy. The presented data can provide insight into current patterns of antihypertensive therapy prescription in patients in RCP and lay the foundation for optimizing therapy in different categories hypertensive patients.

Effect of sacubitril-valsartan on the incidence of atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Sacubitril/valsartan reduces all-cause mortality in heart failure (HF) patients compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). ACEIs/ARBs have been shown to decrease the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF). We hypothesized sacubitril-valsartan decreases the incidence of AF compared to ACEis/ARBs. METHODS: Clinicaltrials.gov was searched for trials by terms sacubitril/valsartan, entresto, sacubitril, valsartan. Randomized controlled human trials of sacubitril/valsartan reporting AF were included. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Data was pooled using a random effect model. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots. RESULTS: A total of 11 trials including 11,458 patients on sacubitril/valsartan and 10,128 patients on ACEI/ARBs were identified. A total of 284 AF events were reported in the sacubitril/valsartan group compared to 256 AF events in ACEIs/ARBs. Patients on sacubitril/valsartan were as likely as patients on ACEIs/ARBs to develop AF (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 1.091, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.917-1.298, p = .324). Six atrial flutter (AFl) events were reported in six trials; 48 out of 9165 patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group developed AFl compared to 46 out of 8759 in ACEi/ARBs group. There was no difference in AFl risk between the two groups (pooled OR = 1.028, 95% CI = 0.681-1.553, p = .894). Finally, sacubitril/valsartan did not reduce the risk of atrial arrhythmias (AF + AFl) compared to ACEi/ARBs (pooled OR = 1.081, 95% CI = 0.922-1.269, p = .337). CONCLUSION: Although sacubitril/valsartan reduces mortality compared to ACEIs/ARBs in HF patients, they do not reduce AF risk compared to these drugs.

Losartan alleviates renal fibrosis by inhibiting the biomechanical stress-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition of renal epithelial cells.

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been reported to be beneficial of renal fibrosis, but the molecular and cellular mechanisms are still unclear. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness and relevant mechanism of ARBs in alleviating renal fibrosis, especially by focusing on biomechanical stress-induced epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) of renal epithelial cells. Unilateral ureteral obstruction (UUO) renal fibrosis model was established in mice by ligating the left ureter, and then randomly received losartan at a low dose (1 mg/kg) or a regular dose (3 mg/kg) for 2 weeks. Compared to the control, histological analysis showed that losartan treatment at either a low dose or a regular dose effectively attenuated renal fibrosis in the UUO model. To further understand the mechanism, we ex vivo loaded primary human renal epithelial cells to 50 mmHg hydrostatic pressure. Western blot and immunostaining analyses indicated that the loading to 50 mmHg hydrostatic pressure for 24 h significantly upregulated vimentin, ß-catenin and α-SMA, but downregulated E-cadherin in renal epithelial cells, suggesting the EMT. The addition of 10 or 100 nM losartan in medium effectively attenuated the EMT of renal epithelial cells induced by 50 mmHg hydrostatic pressure loading. Our in vivo and ex vivo experimental data suggest that losartan treatment, even at a low dose can effectively alleviate renal fibrosis in mouse UUO model, at least partly by inhibiting the biomechanical stress-induced EMT of renal epithelial cells. A low dose of ARBs may repurpose for renal fibrosis treatment.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors improve the survival of cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a risk factor for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). The effect of anti-hypertensive drugs on the prognosis of CCA is not clear. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 102 patients (56.9% males, median age 66 years) diagnosed with CCA and hypertension concurrently and received radical surgery (R0), with a median follow-up of 36.7 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox regressions, and propensity score (PS) matching were applied for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Results of multivariable cox analysis showed that renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASis) usage was a protective factor for progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.32-0.96) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.20-0.79), respectively. Calcium channel blockers, diuretics, and ß-blockers didn't show significant associations. The association of RASis usage and PFS and OS was derived by PS matching, with a cohort of 28 RASis users and 56 RASis non-users. The median PFS and OS of RASis users (PFS, 17.6 months (9.2-34.4); OS, 24.8 months (16.5-42.3)) were longer than RASis non-users (PFS, 10.5 months (4.1-24.1); OS, 14.6 months (10.6-28.4)). The 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years' survival rates of RASis users (89.1%, 77.0%, and 65.5%) were higher than RASis non-users (70.9%, 54.0%, and 40.0%). CONCLUSIONS: RASis usage improves the survival of patients with CCA and hypertension concurrently.

Documented Adverse Drug Reactions and Discontinuation of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers in Chronic Kidney Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are frequently discontinued in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Documented adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in medical records may provide insight into the reasons for treatment discontinuation. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort of US veterans from 2005 to 2019, we identified individuals with CKD and a current prescription for an ACEi or ARB (current user group) or a discontinued prescription within the preceding 5 years (discontinued group). Documented ADRs in structured datasets associated with an ACEi or ARB were categorized into 17 pre-specified groups. Logistic regression assessed associations of documented ADRs with treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: There were 882,441 (73.0%) individuals in the current user group and 326,794 (27.0%) in the discontinued group. There were 26,434 documented ADRs, with at least one documented ADR in 7,520 (0.9%) current users and 9,569 (2.9%) of the discontinued group. ADR presence was associated with treatment discontinuation, aOR 4.16 (95% CI: 4.03, 4.29). The most common documented ADRs were cough (37.3%), angioedema (14.2%), and allergic reaction (10.4%). ADRs related to angioedema (aOR 3.81, 95% CI: 3.47, 4.17), hyperkalemia (aOR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.84, 2.24), peripheral edema (aOR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.33, 1.77), or acute kidney injury (aOR 1.32, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.51) were associated with treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: ADRs leading to drug discontinuation were infrequently documented. ADR types were differentially associated with treatment discontinuation. An understanding of which ADRs lead to treatment discontinuation provides an opportunity to address them at a healthcare system level.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers on cardiovascular outcomes in dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are recommended by guidelines as first-line antihypertensive therapies in the general population or in patients with earlier stages of kidney disease. However, the cardioprotective benefit of these agents among patients on dialysis remains uncertain. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases from inception through February 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of ACEIs/ARBs relative to placebo or no add-on treatment in patients receiving dialysis. RCTs were eligible if they assessed fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular events as a primary efficacy endpoint. RESULTS: We identified five RCTs involving 1582 dialysis patients. Compared with placebo or no add-on treatment, the use of ACEIs/ARBs was not associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events {risk ratio [RR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.11]}. Furthermore, there was no benefit in cardiovascular mortality [RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.59-1.14)] and all-cause mortality [RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.64-1.15)]. These results were consistent when the included RCTs were stratified by subgroups, including hypertension, ethnicity, sample size, duration of follow-up and quality. CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis showed that among patients on dialysis, the use of ACEIs/ARBs is not associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality as compared with placebo or no add-on treatment.

Heart failure and diabetes: Clinical significance and epidemiology of this two-way association.

People with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and those with prediabetes have an increased risk of heart failure (HF). Longer duration of T2DM correlates with a greater risk of HF, but HF is also seen in patients with recent-onset diabetes. Insulin resistance is more likely to be present in patients with HF. The risk of HF persists even in the face of standard-of-care preventive treatments for atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease. HF is commonly the presenting symptom of CV disease in people with diabetes and is the most expensive complication of diabetes because of the high cost of hospitalizations. Recently hospitalization for HF has been included in CV outcome trials (CVOTs), including for medications that are used to treat T2DM, which has led to new therapies for all HF patients. In addition, these CVOTs have shown that many drugs used in the therapy of diabetes are either neutral or detrimental in the HF patient and should be used with caution in patients with existing HF or those at high risk of HF. Most recently, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 receptor blockers have shown efficacy in both HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) and HF with preserved EF. The only other oral or injectable diabetes agent shown to improve outcomes in both is metformin.

Angiotensin receptor blockers might be protective against hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic steatosis is an increasing complication in liver transplant recipients. Currently, there is no pharmacologic therapy for treatment of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to determine the association between use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) and hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: We conducted a case-control analysis on data from Shiraz Liver Transplant Registry. Liver transplant recipients with and without hepatic steatosis were compared for risk factors including use of ARB. RESULTS: A total of 103 liver transplant recipients were included in the study. Thirty five patients treated with ARB and 68 patients (66%) did not receive these medications. In univariate analysis, ARB use (P = 0.002), serum triglyceride (P = 0.006), weight after liver transplantation (P = 0.011) and etiology of liver disease (P = 0.008) were associated with hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. In multivariate regression analysis, ARB use was associated with lower likelihood of hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients (OR = 0.303, 95% CI: 0.117-0.784; P = 0.014). Mean duration of ARB use (P = 0.024) and mean cumulative daily dose of ARB (P = 0.015) were significantly lower in patients with hepatic steatosis. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that ARB use was associated with reduced incidence of hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients.

Association between angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 gene polymorphism (rs2106809) with severity and outcome of COVID-19 infection.

PURPOSE: Genetic factors play important role in the severity of the COVID-19 infection since SARS-CoV-2 binds to the ACE2 receptor on the surface of host cells. ACE2 polymorphisms that may influence the expression of ACE2 can alter patients' susceptibility to COVID-19 infection or increase the severity of the disease. This study aimed to investigate the association between ACE2 rs2106809 polymorphism and the severity of the COVID-19 infection. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, ACE2 rs2106809 polymorphism was assessed in 142 COVID-19 patients. The disease was confirmed according to clinical symptoms, imaging, and laboratory findings. The severity of the disease was graded as severe versus non-severe based on the CDC. Genomic DNA was extracted from the whole blood and PCR- RFLP was performed to genotype the ACE2-rs2106809 with specific primers and Taq1 restriction enzyme. RESULTS: G/G genotype was significantly associated with COVID-19 severity (44.4% in severe vs. 17.5% in non-severe, OR: 4.1; 95%CI: 1.8-9.5, p = 0.0007). Patients with the G/G genotype need more mechanical ventilation (p = 0.021). ACE2 expression in patients carrying the A/G genotype was higher in the severe compared to the non-severe form of the disease (2.99 ± 0.99 vs. 2.21 ± 1.1), but it was not statistically significant (p = 0.9). CONCLUSION: The G allele and G/G genotype of ACE2 rs2106809 is associated with more severe COVID-19 and adverse disease outcomes.

A collaborative study of the impact of N-nitrosamines presence and ARB recall on ARB utilization - results from IQVIA™ Disease Analyzer Germany.

PURPOSE: Regulators are increasingly concerned with  the impact of recalls on drug adherence. In 2018, N-nitrosamines impurities were detected in valsartan containing medical products. Concerned products were immediately recalled in July 2018 by regulatory agencies internationally. In Germany, recalls were issued for valsartan, losartan and irbesartan from July 2018 to March 2019. This study examined angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) utilization trends and switching patterns in Germany before and after July 2018. METHODS: Patients prescribed ARBs from January 2014 to June 2020 in general practices in Germany were included in a collaborative framework common protocol drug utilization study led by the US Food and Drug Administration. Trends in monthly and quarterly proportions of total ARB prescribing were analysed for individual ARBs using descriptive statistics and interrupted time series analysis. The rate of switching to an alternative ARB was analysed before and after the recalls. RESULTS: The proportion of valsartan prescriptions immediately decreased from 35.9 to 17.8% following the first recalls in July 2018, mirrored by an increased proportion for candesartan. Increased switching from valsartan to candesartan was observed. No increased switching was observed after losartan recalls, whereas for irbesartan, increased switching was observed 6-12 months after the last recall. Increased switching from ARBs to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or ARB treatment discontinuations were not observed. CONCLUSION: This study showed that patients were able to continue ARB treatment despite the July 2018-March 2019 recalls, although many patients needed to switch to an alternative ARB. The duration of the impact of ARB recalls appeared to be limited.