Olmesartan-associated Enteropathy / 中国医学科学院学报

Olmesartan,an angiotensin Ⅱ receptor blocker,is a commonly used antihypertensive drug.Several case reports and cohort studies in recent years have described a severe gastrointestinal adverse event with chronic diarrhea,intestinal malabsorption,and weight loss after the administration of olmesartan.In such cases,the patients recovered after discontinuing olmesartan.This adverse effect is called olmesartan-associated enteropathy(OAE).This article reviews the potential pathogenesis and clinical characteristics of OAE,which broadens the disease spectrum for the differential diagnosis of chronic diarrhea and intestinal malabsorption.

Safety and efficacy of fimasartan in Mexican patients with grade 1-2 essential hypertension / Seguridad y eficacia de fimasartán en pacientes mexicanos con hipertensión esencial de grados 1-2

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of 60 mg and 120 mg Fimasartan (FMS) alone or combined with 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in a Mexican population. Methods: A six month, treat-to-target, open study was conducted on subjects with grade 1-2 hypertension. The subjects were initially treated with 60 mg FMS once daily. In week 8, those with Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) <90 mmHg continued on the same FMS dose during the rest of the study, while those with DBP ≥90 mmHg were randomised to either 120 mg FMS or 60 mg FMS + 12.5 mg HCTZ once daily. In week 12, randomised subjects with DBP ≥90 mmHg received 120 mg FMS + 12.5 mg HCTZ, while those achieving target continued with their assigned treatment until the end of the study. Results: FMS 60 mg (n = 272) decreased both DBP and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) by 11.3 ± 8.9 (p<.0001) and 16.0 ± 14.1 (p<.0001) mmHg, respectively, with 75.4% of subjects reaching the treatment target. Subjects assigned to FMS 120 mg, FMS 60 mg + HCTZ 12.5 mg, or FMS 120 mg + HCTZ 12.5 mg once daily, showed significant reductions in DBP and SBP with their assigned treatment. At the end of the study, 237/272 subjects (87.1%) achieved a DBP < 90 mmHg and an SBP<140 mmHg. The most frequently reported adverse reactions included headache (3.7%), dry mouth (1.1%), transient liver enzyme increase (1.1%), and dizziness (0.7%). Conclusion: Fimasartan is safe and effective in Mexican subjects with grade 1-2 essential hypertension.

Resumen: Objetivo: Evaluar la eficacia y la seguridad de 60 y 120 mg de fimasartán (FMS) solo o combinado con 12.5 mg de hidroclorotiazida (HCTZ) en población mexicana. Métodos: Estudio abierto, de 24 semanas, con tratamiento escalado hasta el objetivo terapéutico en sujetos hipertensos grados 1-2. Tratamiento inicial: FMS 60 mg una vez al día; en la semana 8, los sujetos con presión arterial diastólica (PAD) <90 mmHg mantuvieron su tratamiento inicial durante el estudio, mientras que los sujetos con PAD ≥90 mmHg fueron aleatorizados a 120 mg de FMS o a 60 mg de FMS + 12.5 mg de HCTZ. En la semana 12, los sujetos aleatorizados con PAD ≥90 mmHg recibieron 120 mg de FMS + 12.5 mg de HCTZ; quienes alcanzaron el objetivo terapéutico mantuvieron su tratamiento asignado hasta finalizar el estudio. Resultados: FMS 60 mg (n = 272) disminuyó la PAD y la presión arterial sistólica (PAS) en 11.3 ± 8.9 (p < 0.0001) y 16.0 ± 14.1 (p < 0.0001) mmHg, respectivamente, con logro del objetivo de tratamiento en el 75.4% de los sujetos. Los sujetos asignados a 120 mg de FMS, a 60 mg de FMS + 12.5 mg de HCTZ 12.5 y a 120 mg de FMS + 12.5 mg de HCTZ mostraron reducciones significativas de PAD y PAS; al final del estudio, 237/272 sujetos (87.1%) lograron PAD <90 y PAS <140 mmHg. Las reacciones adversas más frecuentemente reportadas fueron: cefalea (3.7%), boca seca (1.1%), incremento de enzimas hepáticas (1.1%) y mareo (0.7%). Conclusión: FMS es seguro y eficaz en sujetos mexicanos con hipertensión esencial de grados 1-2.

Tratamento da hipertensão arterial com olmesartana medoxomila em escalonamento / Based treatment algorithm for essencial hypertension with olmesartan medoxomil

FUNDAMENTO: As diretrizes nacionais e internacionais enfatizam a importância do tratamento eficaz da hipertensão arterial. Apesar disso, verificam-se baixos índices de controle e alcance das metas preconizadas, indicando que é importante planejar e implementar melhores estratégias de tratamento. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a eficácia de um tratamento, em escalonamento de doses, tendo como base a olmesartana medoxomila. MÉTODOS: Este é um estudo aberto, nacional, multicêntrico e prospectivo, de 144 pacientes com hipertensão arterial primária nos estágios 1 e 2, virgens de tratamento ou após período de washout de duas a três semanas para aqueles em tratamento ineficaz. Avaliou-se o uso da olmesartana medoxomila num algoritmo de tratamento, em quatro fases: (i) monoterapia (20 mg), (ii-iii) associada à hidroclorotiazida (20/12,5 mg e 40/25 mg) e (iv) adição de besilato de anlodipino (40/25 mg + 5 mg). RESULTADOS: Ao fim do tratamento, em escalonamento, 86 por cento dos sujeitos de pesquisa alcançaram a meta de pressão arterial (PA) < 130/85 mmHg. Ocorreram reduções na pressão arterial sistólica (PAS) e na pressão arterial diastólica (PAD) de, no máximo, -44,4 mmHg e -20,0 mmHg, respectivamente. A taxa dos respondedores sistólicos (PAS > 20 mmHg) foi de 87,5 por cento e diastólicos (PAD > 10 mmHg) de 92,4 por cento. CONCLUSÃO: O estudo se baseou em um esquema de tratamento semelhante à abordagem terapêutica da prática clínica diária e mostrou que o uso da olmesartana medoxomila, em monoterapia ou em associação a hidroclorotiazida e anlodipino, foi eficaz para o alcance de meta para hipertensos dos estágios 1 e 2.

BACKGROUND: The national and international guidelines emphasize the importance of the effective treatment of essenssial hypertension. Nevertheless, low levels of control are observed, as well as low attainment of the recommended goals, indicating that it is important to plan and implement better treatment strategies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of a based treatment algorithm with olmesartan medoxomil. METHODS: This is an open, national, multicentric and prospective study of 144 patients with primary arterial hypertension, stages 1 and 2, naïve to treatment or after a 2-to-3 week washout period for those in whom treatment was ineffective. The use of olmesartan medoxomil was assessed in a treatment algorithm divided into 4 phases: (i) monotherapy (20 mg), (ii-iii) associated to à hydrochlorothiazide (20/12.5 mg and 40/25 mg) and (iv) addition of amlodipine besylate (40/25 mg + 5 mg). RESULTS: At the end of the phased-treatment, 86 percent of the study subjects attained the goal of BP < 130/85 mmHg. Maximum reductions in SAP and DAP were -44.4 mmHg and -20.0 mmHg, respectively. The rate of systolic responders (SAP > 20 mmHg) and of diastolic responders (DAP > 10 mmHg) was 87.5 percent and 92.4 percent, respectively. CONCLUSION: The study was based on a treatment regimen that was similar to the therapeutic approach in daily clinical practice and showed that the use of olmesartan medoxomil in monotherapy or in association with hydrochlorothiazide and amlodipine was effective in the attainment of the recommended goals for hypertension stage 1 and 2 hypertensive individuals.

Effect of Ramipril, Valsartan, Candesartan and Lacidipine on inflammation and gastric ulcer in rats

The present study investigated and compared the effect of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril and the angiotensin II receptor blockers valsartan and candesartan and the calcium channel blocker lacidipine on inflammation and gastric ulcer in rats. The acute inflammation was induced by intraplantar injection of carrageenan [1%] in the rat hind paw. Gastric ulcer was evoked by s.c. indomethacin [20 mg/kg]. When given s.c. 30 min prior to induction of inflammation, ramipril [0.23 and 0.45 mg/kg], valsartan [7.5 and 15 mg/kg], candesartan [0.72 and 1.44 gm/kg] failed to reduce paw oedema response. Meanwhile, lacidipine at the lower dose of 0.18 mg/kg displayed mild anti-inflammatory activity up to 1 hr, reducing paw odema by 26.7% for 1 hr post-carrageenan, while a higher dose of 0.36 mg/kg inhibited oedema formation by 33.5, 31, 23.6 and 22.3% at 1, 2, 3 and 4 hr post-carrageenan, respectively. The acute gastric mucosal lesions evoked by indomethacin in the rat were aggravated by co-administration of ramipril 0.23 and 0.45 mg/kg, valsartan 7.5 and 15 mg/kg, lacidipne 0.18 and 0.36 mg/kg and candesartan 0.72 mg/kg, but reduced by candesartan 1.44 mg/kg. Findings in the present study do not favor an anti-inflammatory activity for ramipril, valsartan and candesartan, but indicates an antioedema effect for lacidipine at the doses employed. These agents are likely to adversely affect gastric mucosal integrity and enhance the indomethacin-induced gastric injury