Preview

Системные гипертензии

Расширенный поиск

Реальные и потенциальные преимущества антагониста кальция III поколения лерканидипина

Аннотация

Рассмотрены особенности фармакокинетики дигидропиридинов III поколения (фармакокинетика, контролируемая мембраной). Сравнительные исследования показали наряду с большой продолжительностью действия высокую эффективность, не уступающую действию основных групп антигипертензивных препаратов. Для лерканидипина доказано нефропротективное действие, сопоставимое с таковым ингибиторов ангиотензинпревращающего фермента. Показана лучшая переносимость и безопасность в сравнении с антагонистами кальция II поколения.

Об авторе

Андрей Аполлонович Кириченко
ГБОУ ДПО Российская медицинская академия последипломного образования
Россия


Список литературы

1. Leenen F.H.H. Clinical relevance of 24 hour blood pressure control by 1,4-dihydropyridines. Am J Hypertens 1996; 9: S97–S104.

2. Epstein M. Role of a third generation calcium antagonists in the management of hypertension. Drugs 1999; 57 (Suppl. 1): 1–10.

3. McClellan K.J., Jarvis B. Lercanidipine. A review of its use in hypertension. Drugs 2000; 60 (5): 1123–40.

4. Van Zweiten P.A., Pfaffendorf M. Similarities and differences between calcium antagonists: Pharmacological aspects. J Hypertens 1993; 11 (Suppl. 1): S3–S11.

5. Van Zweiten P.A., Pfaffendorf M. Pharmacology of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists; Relatiomship between lipophilicity and pharmacodynamic response. J Hypertens 1993; 11 (Suppl. 6): S3–S11.

6. Sranchez M, Sobrino J, Ribera L. et al. Long - acting lacidipine versus short - acting nifedipine in the treatment of asymptomatic acute blood pressure increase. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1999; 33: 479–84.

7. Heber M.E., Broadhurst P.A., Bridgen G.S. et al. Effectiveness of the once - daily calcium antagonists, lacidipine, in controlling 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure. Am J Cardiol 1990; 66: 1228–32.

8. Gasser R, Koppel H, Klein W. Lercanidipine, a new third generation Ca - antagonist in the treatment of hypertension. J Clin Basic Cardiol 1999; 2: 169–74.

9. Leonardi A, Poggesi E, Tiiddei C et al. In vitro calcium antagonist activity of lercanidipine and its enantiomers. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1997; 29 (Suppl.1): S10–S18.

10. Triggle D.J. Mechanisms of action of calcium channel antagonists. In: Calcium antagonists in clinical medicine. Ed. by M.Epstein. Philadelphia, 1998: pp. 1–26.

11. Nayler W.G. Amlodipine. Berlin, 1995: p. 1–273.

12. Herbette L.G., Vecchiarelli M, Leonardi A. Lercanidipine: Short plasma half - life, long duration of action. J Cardiovascul Pharmacol 1997; 29 (Suppl.1): S19–S24.

13. Herbette L.G., Gaviraghi G, Tulenko T. et al. Molecular interaction between lacidipine and biological membranes. J Hypertens 1993; 11 (Suppl. 1): S13–S19.

14. Ahernethy D.R., Schwartz J.B. Calcium - antagonist drugs. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1447–57.

15. Specchia G, Saccaggi S.P., Ghezzi C. Cardiovascular safety of lercanidipine in patients with angina pectoris: a review of six randomized clinical trials. Curr Ther Res 2001; 62: 3–15.

16. Angelico P, Guarneri L, Leonardi A. et al. Vascular - selective effect of lercanidipine and other 1,4-dihydropyridines in isolated rabbit tissues. J Pharm Pharmacol 1999; 51: 709–14.

17. Policicchio D, Magliocca R, Malliani A. Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: a comparative study with slow - release nifedipine. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1997; 29 (Suppl. 2): S31–5.

18. Leonetti G, Salvi S. A long - term study comparing lacidipine and nifedipine SR in hypertensive patients: safety data. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994; 23 (Suppl. 5): S108–S110.

19. Lombardo D, Raimondi F. Efficacy and safety evaluation of lacidipine compared with amlodipine in mild - to - moderate hypertensive patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994; 23 (Suppl. 5): S98–S100.

20. United Kingdom Lacidipine Study Group. A double - blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of lacidipine with atenolol in the treatment of essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 17 (Suppl. 4): S27–S30.

21. Guedon J, Herrero G, Salvi S. Assessment of lacidipine, a new long - acting 1,4 dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, for the primary care of elderly hypertensive patients. Cardiol Eld 1993; 1: 141–8.

22. Romito R, Pansini M.I., Perticone F. et al. Comparative effect of lercandipine, felodipine and nifedipine GITS on blood pressure and heart rate in patients with mild to moderate arterial hypertension: the Lercandipine in Adults (LEAD) study. J Clin Hypertens 2003; 5 (4): 249–53.

23. Cavallini A, Terzi G. Effects of antihypertensive therapy with lercanidipine and verapamil on cardiac electrical activity in patients with hypertension: a randomized, double - blind pilot study. Curr Ther Res 2000; 61 (7): 477–87.

24. Packer M, O'Connor M, Ghali J.K. et al. Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 1107–14.

25. Barbagallo M, Barbagallo Sangiorgi G. Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in monotherapy in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Aging Clin Exp Res 2000; 12 (5): 375–9.

26. Kizer I.R., Kimmel S.E. Epidemiologic review of calcium channel blocker drugs. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 1145–58.

27. Fogari R, Mugellini A, Corradi L et al. Efficacy of lercanidipine vs losartan on left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients [abstract no. P1.191]. J Hypertens 2000; 18 (Suppl. 2): S65.

28. S’anchez A, Sayans R, Alvarez J.L. et al. Left ventricular hypertrophy regression after a short antihypertensive treatment with lercanidipine vs. enalapril [abstract no. 12]. Fourth European Meeting on Calcium Antagonists, 1999, оct 27–29. Amsterdam.

29. Peterson J.E., Adler S, Burkart L.M. et al. Blood pressure control, proteinuria and the progression of renal disease: the odification of diet in renal disease study. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123: 754–62.

30. Toto R.D., Mitchell N.C., Smith R.O. «Strict» blood pressure control and progression of renal disease in hypertensive ephrosclerosis. Kidney Int 1995; 48: 851–9.

31. Gansevoort R.T., Sluiter W.J., Hemrnelder M.H. et al. Antiproteinuric effect of blood pressure lowering agents: a metaanalysis of comparative trials. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1995; 10: 1963–74.

32. Pedrinelli R, Dell’Omo G, Nuti M et al. Heterogenous effect of calcium antagonists on leg oedema: a comparison of amlodipine versus lercanidipine in hypertensive patients. J Hypertens 2003; 21: 1969–73.

33. Cavallini A, Terzi G. Effects of antihypertensive therapy with lercanidipine and verapamil on cardiac electrical activity in patients with hypertension: a randomized, double - blind pilot study. Curr Ther Res 2000; 61 (7): 477–87.

34. Macchiarulo C, Pieri R, Mitolo D.C. et al. Antihypertensive effects of six calcium antagonists: evidence from Fourier analysis of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure recordings. Curr Ther Res 2001; 62 (4): 236–53.

35. Fogari R, Malamani G.D., Zoppi A. et al. Comparative effect of lercanidipine and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system on ankle volume and subcutaneous interstitial pressure in hypertensive patients: a double - blind, randomized, parallel group study. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 2000; 61: 850–62.

36. Paterna S, Licata A, Arnone S et al. Lercanidipine in two different dosage regimens as a sole treatment for severe essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1997; 29 (Suppl. 2): S50–3.

37. Barbagallo M, Barbagallo Sangiorgi G. Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in monotherapy in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Aging Clin Exp Res 2000; 12 (5): 375–9.

38. Brown M.J., Palmer C.R., Castaigne A. et al. Morbidity and mortality in patients randomized to double - blind treatment with a long - acting calcium - channel blocker or diuretic in the international nifedipine GITS study: intervention as a goal in hypertension treatment (INSIGHT). Lancet 2000; 356: 366–72.

39. Lewis E, Huncksicker L.G., Clarke W.R. et al. Renoprotective effect of the angiotensinreceptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 851–60.

40. Parving III-I, Lehnert I-I, Brochner-Mortenscn I. et al. For the study group Irbesartun in patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbumlnuria. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 870–8.

41. Agodoa L.Y., Appel L, Bakris G.L. et al. Effect of ramipril vs amlodipine on renal outcomes in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001; 285: 2719–28.

42. Epstein M. Calcium antagonists and renal protection: emerging perspectives. J Hypertens 1998; J8 (Suppl. 4): S17–25.

43. Sabbatini M, Leonardi A, Testa R et al. Effect of calcium antagonists on glomerular arterioles in spontaneously hypertensive rats. Hypertension 2000; 35: 775–9.

44. Bakris G.L., Weir M.R., De Quattro V. et al. The effects of an ACE inhibitor and a calcium antagonists on the progression of renal disease: the nephross study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; J6: 2158–66.

45. Robles N.R., Ocon J, Gomez C.F. et al. Лерканидипин у пациентов с хронической почечной недостаточностью: исследование ZAFRA. Кардиоваскулярная терапия и профилактика. 2010; 9 (4): 81–7.

46. Soma M.R., Natali M, Donetti E. et al. Effect of lercanidipine its (R)-enantiomer on atherosclerotic lesions induced in hypercholesterolemic rabbits. Br J Pharmacol 1998; 125: 1471–6.

47. Lozano J.V., Sanchis C, Llisterri J.L. Efficacy of lercanidipine in poorly controlled hypertensive patients who follow a home blood pressure measurement training program [abstract no. R190]. J Hypertens 2002; 20 (Suppl. 4): S376.

48. Barrios V, Navarro A, Esteras A et al. Antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in daily clinical practice. The ELYPSE study. Blood Press 2002; 11 (2): 95–100.

49. Schwinger R.H.G, Schmidt-Mertens A. The new lipophillic calcium channel blocker lercanidipine combines high antihypertensive efficacy with low side effects [abstract no. P1–7]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2002; 127 (Suppl. 1): S13.

50. Romito R, Pansini M.I., Perticone F. et al. Comparative effect of lercanidipine, felodipine and nifedipine GITS on blood pressure and heart rate in patients with mild to moderate arterial hypertension: the Lercandipine in Adults (LEAD) study. J Clin Hypertens 2003; 5 (4): 249–53.

51. Morisco C, Trimarco B. Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in comparison to and in combination with atenolol in patients with mild to moderate hypertension in a double blind controlled study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1997; 29 (Suppl. 2): S26–30.

52. Barbagallo M, Barbagallo Sangiorgi G. Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in monotherapy in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Aging Clin Exp Res 2000; 12 (5): 375–9.

53. Acanfora D, Gheorgiade M, Rotiroti D. et al. Acute dose - response, double - blind, placebo - controlled pilot study of Iercanidipine in patients with angina pectoris. Curr Ther Res 2000; 61: 255–65.

54. Leonetti G, Magnani B, Pessina A.C. et al. Tolerability of longterm treatment with lercanidipine versus amlodipine and lacidipine in elderly hypertensives. Am J Hypertens 2002; 15 (11): 932–40.

55. Borghi C, Prandin M.G., Dormi A. et al. Improved tolerability of the dihydropyridine calcium - channel antagonist lercanidipine: the lercanidipine challenge trial. Blood Press 2003; 12 (Suppl. 1): 1–8.


Рецензия

Для цитирования:


Кириченко А.А. Реальные и потенциальные преимущества антагониста кальция III поколения лерканидипина. Системные гипертензии. 2013;(1):57-61.

For citation:


Kirichenko A.A. Real and potential benefits of third-generation calcium antagonists. Systemic Hypertension. 2013;(1):57-61.

Просмотров: 1


Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2075-082X (Print)
ISSN 2542-2189 (Online)