Pharmacokinetic and Bioequivalence Study of Lisinopril/Hydrochlorothiazide Tablet Under Fasting and Postprandial Conditions in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

The objective of this research was to evaluate and compare the pharmacokinetic profiles and safety of lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide (10 mg/12.5 mg) tablets in the test and reference formulations administered to participants in both fasting and postprandial states and to evaluate the bioequivalence of the 2 products in healthy Chinese volunteers. This study employed a single-center, randomized, open-label, single-dose dosing trial involving a cumulative 96 healthy adult participants (60 in the fasting group and 36 in the postprandial group). Each group comprised 2 sequence sets, and a 2-week washout period was implemented. There were no statistically significant differences in time to maximum concentration and terminal elimination half-life between the test and control groups under fasting and postprandial conditions (P > .05), and the 90% CIs for area under the plasma concentration-time curve and maximum plasma concentration were within the bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. Pharmacokinetic results indicate a large food effect for lisinopril, meaning that there is a loss of approximately 20%-25% of systemic exposure from fasting to postprandial administration for both preparations. The study demonstrated that a single oral dose of generic lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide is bioequivalent to the reference product and well tolerated, with no significant adverse events observed, and that both products are similarly safe in a cohort of healthy Chinese male and female participants, following administration under fasting and postprandial conditions.

Population pharmacokinetics of lisinopril in hypertensive children and adolescents with normal to mildly reduced kidney function.

AIMS: Lisinopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, is a frequently prescribed antihypertensive drug in the paediatric population, while being used off-label under the age of 6 years in the USA and for all paediatric patients globally. The SAFEPEDRUG project (IWT-130033) investigated lisinopril pharmacokinetics in hypertensive paediatric patients corresponding with the day-to-day clinical population. METHODS: The dose-escalation pilot study included 13 children with primary and secondary hypertension who received oral lisinopril once daily in the morning; doses ranged from 0.05 to 0.2 mg kg-1 . Patients were aged between 1.9 and 17.9 years (median 13.5 years) and weight ranged between 9.62 and 97.2 kg (median 53.2 kg). All data were analysed using Monolix version 2020R1 (Lixoft, France) and R version 3.6.2. RESULTS: A 1-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination optimally describes the data. Parameter estimates of absorption rate constant (0.075 h-1 [0.062, 0.088], typical value [95% confidence interval]), volume of distribution (31.38 L 70 kg-1 [10.5, 52.3]) and elimination clearance (24.2 L h-1 70 kg-1 [19.5, 28.9]) show good predictive ability. Significant covariate effects include total body weight on elimination clearance, and distribution volume and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) on elimination clearance. The effects of eGFR on the elimination clearance are optimally described by a linear effect centred around 105 mL min-1  1.73 m-2 . The effects of body weight were implemented using fixed allometric exponents centred around an adult weight of 70 kg. CONCLUSION: Lisinopril dose and regimen adjustments for paediatric patients should include eGFR on top of weight adjustments. An expanded model characterizing the pharmacodynamic effect is required to identify the optimal dose and dosing regimen.

Oral combined hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril vs nifedipine for postpartum hypertension: a comparative-effectiveness pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and diuretics may be underutilized for postpartum hypertension because of their teratogenicity during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether combined oral hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril therapy produced superior short-term blood pressure control when compared with nifedipine among postpartum individuals with hypertension requiring pharmacologic treatment. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a pilot randomized controlled trial (October 2021 to June 2022) that included individuals with chronic hypertension or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy with 2 systolic blood pressure measurements ≥150 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure measurements ≥100 mm Hg within 72 hours after delivery. Participants were randomized to receive either combined hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril therapy or nifedipine therapy after stratifying the participants by diagnosis (chronic hypertension vs hypertensive disorders of pregnancy). The primary outcome was stage 2 hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg) determined using a home blood pressure monitor on days 7 to 10 after delivery or at readmission to the hospital for blood pressure control. The secondary outcomes included severe maternal morbidity (any of the following: intensive care unit admission; hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet count syndrome; eclampsia; stroke; cardiomyopathy; or maternal death), need for intravenous medications after randomization, hospital length of stay, blood pressure during first clinic visit, medication compliance, and adverse events. A pilot trial with 70 individuals was planned given the limited available data on combined hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril therapy use in postpartum care. We calculated relative risks and 95% credible intervals in an intention-to-treat analysis. Finally, we conducted a preplanned Bayesian analysis to estimate the probability of benefit or harm with a neutral informative prior. RESULTS: Of 111 eligible individuals, 70 (63%) agreed and were randomized (31 in the hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril group and 36 in the nifedipine group; 3 withdrew consent after randomization), and the characteristics were similar at baseline between the groups. The primary outcome was unavailable for 9 (12.8%) participants. The primary outcome occurred in 27% of participants in the hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril group and in 43% of the participants in the nifedipine group (posterior adjusted relative risk, 0.74; 95% credible interval, 0.40-1.31). Bayesian analysis indicated an 85% posterior probability of a reduction in the primary outcome with combined hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril therapy relative to nifedipine treatment. No differences were noted in the secondary outcomes or adverse medication events. CONCLUSION: The results of the pilot trial suggest a high probability that combined hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril therapy produces superior short-term BP control when compared with nifedipine. These findings should be confirmed in a larger trial.

The effect of diminazene, an angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 activator, on adenine-induced chronic kidney disease in rats.

The present study investigated the effect of diminazene, lisinopril, or valsartan on adenine-induced chronic kidney disease (CKD) in rats. The animals were divided into five groups (n = 6). The first and second groups received normal diet and adenine in the feed at a dose of 0.25% w/w for 35 days, respectively. The third, fourth, and fifth groups were treated as the second group but also received diminazene (15 mg/kg/day), lisinopril (10 mg/kg/day), and valsartan (30 mg/kg/day), respectively, for 35 days. Adenine significantly increased plasma urea, creatinine, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), calcium, phosphorus, and uric acid. In addition, adenine increased urinary albumin/creatinine ratio and N-Acetyl-ß-D-glucosaminidase (NAG)/creatinine ratio and reduced creatinine clearance. Adenine also significantly increased the plasma concentrations of inflammatory cytokines (plasma tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α] and interleukin-1beta [IL-1ß]) and significantly reduced antioxidant indices (catalase, glutathione reductase [GR], and superoxide dismutase [SOD]). Histopathologically, renal tissue from adenine-treated rats showed necrosis of renal tubules, tubular casts, shrunken glomeruli, and increased renal fibrosis. All drugs ameliorated adenine-induced biochemical and histopathological changes. The protective effect of the three drugs used is, at least partially, due to their anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. Our results show that administration of diminazene, lisinopril, or valsartan had a comparable effect on the reversal of the biochemical and histopathological indices of adenine-induced CKD in rats.

Lisinopril-Induced Small Bowel Angioedema: An Unusual Cause of Severe Abdominal Pain.

BACKGROUND Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) are one of the most frequently prescribed classes of medications with the rare adverse effect of angioedema, and isolated small bowel angioedema is a small subset of these cases. Isolated angioedema of the small bowel is a rare adverse effect of this commonly prescribed medication, and it mimics, symptomatically and radiographically, several other illnesses and is often misdiagnosed. While ACE-I are thought to be safe, the risk of angioedema is approximately 0.7%. Isolated small bowel angioedema is often not diagnosed in a timely manner, and misdiagnosis leads to significant morbidity in afflicted patients. CASE REPORT We present the case of a 63-year-old woman with angioedema of the small bowel causing abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Computed tomography demonstrated small bowel edema and ascites. The patient had been taking lisinopril for 7 years prior to presentation and had previously been seen by multiple physicians for abdominal pain. A diagnosis of ACE-I-induced small bowel angioedema was made and lisinopril therapy was immediately stopped. Her symptoms improved with cessation of lisinopril, and follow-up imaging showed resolution of the angioedema 3 months later. CONCLUSIONS The course of ACE-I-induced angioedema is unpredictable and often overlooked as a cause of abdominal pain. It commonly presents soon after starting ACE-I therapy, but can present years after therapy initiation, as in this case. Significant morbidity, including unnecessary exploratory laparotomy, is associated with misdiagnosis of ACE-I-induced angioedema of the small bowel. Prompt recognition and cessation of the offending drug is crucial but often delayed.

Underreported Risk of Lisinopril-Induced Angioedema in a Veteran Population.

BACKGROUND: Lisinopril-induced angioedema (LIA) is a rare but serious adverse drug event (ADE) with a published incidence of 0.1% to 0.7%. It is well known that ADEs are widely underreported; however, LIA is one of the most reported ADEs within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of underreporting on the risk of LIA within VHA. METHODS: The reported risk of LIA was calculated from reports submitted to the Veterans Affairs (VA) Adverse Drug Event Reporting System (VA ADERS) and the number of veterans prescribed lisinopril. To estimate underreporting, local chart review identified cases of LIA that were compared to reports submitted. The underreporting rate was then applied to the national reported risk. RESULTS: Locally, 68 reports of LIA were submitted of the 21 262 patients prescribed lisinopril, for a reported risk of 0.32%. Nationwide, 14 289 reports of LIA were submitted of the 3 109 661 patients prescribed lisinopril, for a crude reported risk of 0.46%. Of the 324 patients identified for chart review, 240 patients were diagnosed with LIA, suggesting that at least 71.7% of cases were unreported. When this underreporting rate is extrapolated to the national reported risk, a better estimate of the risk of LIA within VHA could increase to 1.6%. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: When estimating the effect of underreporting, the risk of LIA increases to approximately 1.6% or 1 in 63 patients. Because this ADE may affect more patients than previously understood, providers may wish to take LIA into consideration when prescribing lisinopril.

Risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding in ALLHAT trial participants receiving diuretic, ACE-inhibitor, or calcium-channel blocker.

OBJECTIVES: This post-trial data linkage analysis was to utilize the data of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants linked with their Medicare data to examine the risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding associated with antihypertensives. SETTINGS: ALLHAT was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted in a total of 42,418 participants aged ≥55 years with hypertension in 623 North American centers. Data for ALLHAT participants who were aged at ≥65 have been linked with their Medicare claims data. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16,676 patients (4,480 for lisinopril, 4,537 for amlodipine, and 7,659 for chlorthalidone) with complete Medicare claims data were available for the final analysis. RESULTS: The cumulative incidences through March 31, 2002 of hospitalized GI bleeding were 5.4%, 5.8% and 5.4% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone arms, respectively, but were not statistically significant among the 3 arms after adjusting for confounders in Cox regression models. The cumulative incidences of non-hospitalized GI bleeding were also similar across the 3 arms (12.0%, 12.2% and 12.0% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone, respectively). The increased risk of GI bleeding by age was statistically significant after adjusting for confounders (HR = 1.04 per year, 95% CI: 1.03-1.05). Smokers also had a significantly higher risk of having hospitalized GI bleeding (1.45, 1.19-1.76). Hispanics, those who used aspirin or atenolol in-trial, had diabetes, more education, and a history of stroke had a significantly lower risk of having GI bleeding than their counterparts. Other factors such as gender, history of CHD, prior antihypertensive use, use of estrogen in women, and obesity did not have significant effects on the risk of GI bleeding. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences on the risk of hospitalized or non-hospitalized GI bleeding among the 3 ALLHAT trial arms (amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone) during the entire in-trial follow-up.

Impact of Lisinopril on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Men With Hypertension and Early-onset Androgenetic Alopecia: A Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: Women with polycystic ovary syndrome are at a high cardiometabolic risk. Early-onset male-pattern baldness is considered the phenotypic equivalent of polycystic ovary syndrome in men. The aim of this study was to assess whether early-onset androgenetic alopecia modifies cardiometabolic effects of lisinopril in men with arterial hypertension. The study population consisted of 62 young men with grade 1 hypertension, 31 of whom were diagnosed with early-onset male-pattern baldness (group A). Thirty-one blood pressure-matched men with normal hair growth (group B) served as a control group. All participants were treated with lisinopril (10-40 mg daily). Blood pressure, glucose homeostasis markers, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR), as well as plasma levels of uric acid, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), fibrinogen, homocysteine, total and calculated free testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, and estradiol were assessed before lisinopril treatment and 6 months later. At baseline, levels of all cardiometabolic risk factors were higher in group A than group B. Although lisinopril reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure, UACR, hsCRP, and fibrinogen in both study groups, these effects were stronger in group B than in group A. Only in group B, the drug decreased levels of uric acid and homocysteine, as well as improved insulin sensitivity. The impact of lisinopril on uric acid, hsCRP, fibrinogen, homocysteine, and UACR correlated weakly with its hypotensive properties, androgen levels, and insulin sensitivity. The obtained results suggest that cardiometabolic effects of lisinopril in men are less pronounced in case of coexisting early-onset androgenetic alopecia.

Tranexamic acid for ACE inhibitor induced angioedema.

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent which inhibits conversion of plasminogen to plasmin, a key step in kallikrein activation and bradykinin formation. Tranexamic acid is used in prophylactic management of hereditary angioedema; however, evidence for TXA in angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor-induced angioedema (ACEI-AE) is limited. We describe a patient who presented to the emergency department with ACEI-AE who was successfully treated with TXA. This case suggests that TXA may be a beneficial treatment modality in the management of ACEI-AE and warrants further investigation.

Twice-daily versus once-daily lisinopril and losartan for hypertension: Real-world effectiveness and safety.

BACKGROUND: Lisinopril and losartan manufacturer labels recommend twice-daily dosing (BID) if once-daily (QDay) is insufficient to lower blood pressure (BP). METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective cohort study of patients taking QDay lisinopril and losartan who experienced a dose-doubling (index date). A text-processing tool categorized BID and QDay groups at the index date based on administration instructions. We excluded: pregnant/hospice, regimens other than BID/QDay, and without BP measurements -6 months/+12 months of the index date. The most proximal BP measurements -6 months and +2 weeks to 12 months of the index date were used to evaluate BP differences. Propensity scores were generated, and differences in BP and adverse events (angioedema, acute kidney injury, hyperkalemia) between BID/QDay groups were analyzed within dosing cohorts using inverse propensity of treatment-weighted regression models. Of 11,210 and 6,051 patients who met all criteria for lisinopril and losartan, 784 (7.0%) and 453 (7.5%) were taking BID, respectively. BID patients were older and had higher comorbidity and medication burdens. There were no differences in systolic/diastolic BP between BID and QDay, with absolute differences in mean systolic BP ranging from -1.8 to 0.7 mmHg and diastolic BP ranging from -1.1 to 0.1 mmHg (all 95% confidence intervals [CI] cross 0). Lisinopril 10mg BID was associated with an increased odds of angioedema compared to lisinopril 20mg QDay (odds ratio 2.27, 95%CI 1.13-4.58). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusted models do not support improved effectiveness or safety of BID lisinopril and losartan.

Oral Manifestations of Commonly Prescribed Drugs.

Drugs are being prescribed with more frequency and in higher quantities. A serious adverse drug event from prescribed medications constitutes 2.4% to 16.2% of all hospital admissions. Many of the adverse drug events present intraorally or periorally in isolation or as a clinical symptom of a systemic effect. Clinical recognition and treatment of adverse drug events are important to increase patient adherence, manage drug therapy, or detect early signs of potentially serious outcomes. Oral manifestations of commonly prescribed medications include gingival enlargement, oral hyperpigmentation, oral hypersensitivity reaction, medication-related osteonecrosis, xerostomia, and other oral or perioral conditions. To prevent dose-dependent adverse drug reactions, physicians should prescribe medications judiciously using the lowest effective dose with minimal duration. Alternatively, for oral hypersensitivity reactions that are not dose dependent, quick recognition of clinical symptoms associated with time-dependent drug onset can allow for immediate discontinuation of the medication without discontinuation of other medications. Physicians can manage oral adverse drug events in the office through oral hygiene instructions for gingival enlargement, medication discontinuation for oral pigmentation, and prescription of higher fluoride toothpastes for xerostomia.

67-year-old man • upper extremity pain & edema • recent diagnosis of heart failure • Dx?

► Upper extremity pain ► Upper extremity edema ► Recent diagnosis of heart failure.

Standard headache and neuralgia treatments and SARS-CoV-2: opinion of the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group. / Tratamientos habituales utilizados en cefaleas, neuralgias y SARS-CoV-2. Posicionamiento del grupo de estudio de cefaleas de la Sociedad Española de Neurología.

INTRODUCTION: In recent months, doubts have arisen among patients, general practitioners, and neurologists as to whether some drugs commonly used in patients with headaches and neuralgia may favour or complicate the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We collected information on the opinions of scientific societies and medicines agencies (American, European, and Spanish) to clarify doubts regarding the use of drugs such as lisinopril, candesartan, ibuprofen, corticosteroids, carbamazepine, and monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We make recommendations about the use of standard headache treatments in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the current scientific evidence. CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is no robust scientific argument to formally contraindicate any of the standard treatments employed for headaches and neuralgias.

ACE inhibitor-induced angioedema causing small bowel obstruction.

Mucosal angioedema of the face, lips, tongue, and throat is a well-recognized adverse reaction to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors that is experienced by a minority of patients. Rarely, this angioedema can involve the small bowel, and patients commonly present with abdominal pain and small bowel obstruction. Due to the increasing number of patients being treated for hypertension, clinicians should consider the diagnosis of small bowel angioedema secondary to ACE inhibitor use in all patients with this presentation who are using this class of medications.

C1 esterase inhibitor use in the management of lisinopril-induced angioedema: A case series.

OBJECTIVE: Review 4 patients who presented with presumed lisinopril-induced angioedema and received C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH). CASE SUMMARY: Four patients received C1-INH for presumed lisinopril-induced angioedema. In all cases, angioedema was attributed to lisinopril use after the patients' symptoms did not resolve after receiving other interventions. The patients received either 1500 units or 2000 units of C1-INH. All patients' symptoms resolved after receiving a single C1-INH dose, and all were discharged home within 48 hours of receiving C1-INH. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: On the basis of the available literature and our study, C1-INH may effectively treat angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced angioedema (ACEi-AE). Owing to the low incidence of ACEi-AE and the high cost of C1-INH, physicians should consider limiting the use of C1-INH to patients who remain symptomatic after the initial interventions and are at risk of a compromised airway.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Angioedema.

Angioedema from angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) is a potential, emergent, and frightening problem that presents to the emergency department. This article focuses on angioedema caused by using ACEIs. The presentation, pathology, diagnostic testing, treatment, and patient education of angioedema are explored. This article explores using fresh frozen plasma as an initial approach to the treatment of ACEI angioedema.

The effects of antihypertensive class on gout in older adults: secondary analysis of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Gout is a common complication of blood pressure management and a frequently cited cause of medication nonadherence. Little trial evidence exists to inform antihypertensive selection with regard to gout risk. METHODS: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was a randomized clinical trial on the effects of first-step hypertension therapy with amlodipine, chlorthalidone, or lisinopril on fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction (1994-2002). Trial participants were linked to CMS and VA gout claims (ICD9 274.XX). We determined the effect of drug assignment on gout with Cox regression models. We also determined the adjusted association of self-reported atenolol use (ascertained at the 1-month visit for indications other than hypertension) with gout. RESULTS: Claims were linked to 23 964 participants (mean age 69.8 ±â€Š6.8 years, 45% women, 31% black). Atenolol use was reported by 928 participants at the 1-month visit. Over a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, we documented 597 gout claims. Amlodipine reduced the risk of gout by 37% (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% CI 0.51--0.78) compared with chlorthalidone and by 26% (hazard ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.58--0.94) compared with lisinopril. Lisinopril nonsignificantly lowered gout risk compared with chlorthalidone (hazard ratio 0.85; 95% CI 0.70--1.03). Atenolol use was not associated with gout risk (adjusted hazard ratio 1.18; 95% CI 0.78--1.80). Gout risk reduction was primarily observed after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Amlodipine lowered long-term gout risk compared with lisinopril or chlorthalidone. This finding may be useful in cases where gout risk is a principal concern among patients being treated for hypertension.This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number: NCT00000542.