COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF LERCANIDIPINE, FELODIPINE, AND NIFEDIPINE GITS ON BLOOD PRESSURE AND HEART RATE IN PATIENTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE ARTERIAL HYPERTENSION: THE LERCANIDIPINE IN ADULTS (LEAD) STUDY
Abstract
This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the effects of three dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (lercanidipine, felodipine, and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system, GITS) on blood pressure and heart rate in 250 patients with mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure ≥95 mm Hg and ≤109 mm Hg). Patients were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with once-daily doses of lercanidipine 10 mg, felodipine 10 mg, or nifedipine GITS 30 mg. After 4 weeks of treatment, the dose was doubled in nonresponding patients. At 8 weeks, no significant differences in blood pressure were observed among the three groups. Increases in heart rate in all three groups induced by stressful conditions before and after treatment were not exacerbated during active treatment. The incidence of adverse drug reactions was lower in the lercanidipine and nifedipine groups than in the felodipine group (р<0,05); in particular, the incidence of edema for lercanidipine was 5,5% vs. 13% for felodipine and 6,6% for nifedipine.
About the Authors
R. Romito
Университет Бари, Италия
Italy
Italy
M. I. Pansini
Университет Бари, Италия
Italy
Italy
F. Perticone
Italy
G. Antonelli
Университет Бари, Италия
Italy
Italy
M. Pitzalis
Университет Бари, Италия
Italy
Italy
P. Rizzon
Университет Бари, Италия
Italy
Italy
References
1. Kaplan NM. Calcium entry blockers in the treatment of hypertension // JAMA. 1989;262:817-823.
2. Opie LH. Clinical Use of Calcium Channel Antagonist Drugs / 2 nd ed. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1990.
3. Staessen JA, Fagard R, Thijs1, et at, fortheSystolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) TrialInvestigators. Randomised doubleblind comparisonof placebo and active treatment for olderpatients with isolated systolic hypertension // Lancet. 1997;350:757-764.
4. Morgan TO, Anderson AI, MacInnis RJ. ACE inhibitors, betablockers, calcium blockers, and diuretics for the control of systolic hypertension // Am. J. Hypertens, 2001;14:241-247.
5. Barchielli M, Dolfini E, FarinaP, et al.Clinical pharmacokinetics of lercanidipine // J Cardiovasc Phannacol. 1997;29(suppI2): S1-S15.
6. Meredith PA. Lercanidipine: a novel lipophilic dihydropiridine calcium antagonistwith long duration of action and high vascular selectivity // Exp. Opin. Invest. Drugs. 1999;8:1043-1062.
7. Pollcicchio D, Magliocca R, Malliani A.Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: a comparativestudywith slow-release nifedipine // J Cardiouasc Pharmacol. 1997;29(suppI2): S31-S35.
8. Blair J, McClellan KJ. Lercanidipine a review on its use in hypertension // Drugs. 2000;60:1123-1140.
9. Ambrosioni E, CirceA. Activity of Iercanidipine administeredin single and repeateddoses oncedaily as monitored over 24 hours in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension // J Cardiouasc Pharmacal. 1997;29(snppI2): SI6-S20.
10. CafieroM, GiasiM. Long term (12 month) treatment with lercanidipine in patients with mild to moderate hypertension // J Cardlouasc Pbarmacol. 1997;29(supp12): S4S-549.
11. Macchiarulo C, Pieri R, ChieppaMitolo D, et al, Antihypertensive effects of six calcium antagonists: evidence from Fourier analysis of 24-hourambulatoryblood pressurerecordings // Cur. Ther Res Clin Exp. 2001;62:236-253.
12. Leonetti G, Magnani B, Pessina AC, et al., on behalf of the Cohort study group. Tolerability of long-term treatment with lercanidipine versus amlodipine and lacidipine in elderlyhypertensives // Am J Hypertens. 2002;15:932-940.
13. FogariR, MalamaniGD, Zoppi A, et al. Comparative effect of lercanidipine and nifedipinegastrointestinal therapeutic system on ankle volume and subcutaneous interstitial pressure in hypertensive patients: a double-blind, randomized, parallelgroup study // CUlT Ther Res Clin Exp, 2000;61:850-862.
14. Messerli FH. Calciumantagonists in hypertension: from hemodynamics to outcomes // Am. J. Hypertens. 2002;15:945-97S.
15. Johnson DW; Anastasiades P, Vogele C, et al. The relationship between cardiovascular responses in the laboratory and in the field: the importance of “activecoping.” In: SchmidtTFH, Engel BT, Bliirnchen G, eds. Temporal Variations of the Cardiovascular System. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1992:127-144.
Review
For citations:
Romito R., Pansini M.I., Perticone F., Antonelli G., Pitzalis M., Rizzon P. COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF LERCANIDIPINE, FELODIPINE, AND NIFEDIPINE GITS ON BLOOD PRESSURE AND HEART RATE IN PATIENTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE ARTERIAL HYPERTENSION: THE LERCANIDIPINE IN ADULTS (LEAD) STUDY. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2010;(6):45-50. (In Russ.)
Views:
3699
Email this article 