Pharmacological Differences among Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists

References

• Gillis JC, Markham A. Irbesartan: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in the management of hypertension. Drugs 1997; 54: 885–902.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howerda NJ, Fogari R, Angeli P, et al. Valsartan, a new angiotensin II antagonist for the treatment of essential hypertension: efficacy and safety compared with placebo and enalapril. J Hypertens 1996; 14: 1147–51.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dahlof B, Keller SE, Markris L, Goldberg Al, Sweet CS, Lim NY. Efficacy and tolerability of losartan potassium and atenololin patients with mild to moderate essential hyper-tension. Am J Hypertens 1995; 8: 578–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corea L, Cardoni 0, Fogari R, et al. Valsartan, a new angiotensin II antagonist for the treatment of essential hypertension: a comparative study of the efficacy and safety against amlodipine. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1996; 60: 341–6.
   Google Scholar
• Chung 0, Unger T. Angiotensin II receptor blockade and end-organ protection. Am J Hypertens 1999; 12 Suppl: 150–65.
   Google Scholar
• Messerli FH, Feng Z, Golbourt U. Comparative antihyper-tensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). Am J Hypertens 2000; 13 (4 Pt 2): 139A. Abstract.
   Google Scholar
• Diovan® (valsartan) US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Atacand® (candesartan) US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cozaar® (losartan), US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Avapro® (irbesartan) US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Micardis® (tehnisartan) US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Teveten® (eprosartan) US Product Information, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Fierens FLP, Vanderheyden PML, De Backer JP, Vauquelin G. Insurmountable angiotensin ATI receptor antagonists: the role of tight antagonist binding. Eur J Pharmacol 1999; 372: 199–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oparil S. Newly emerging pharmacologic differences in angiotensin II receptor blockers. Am J Hypertens 2000; 13 (1 Pt 2): 18-24S.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs B, Breithaupt-GroglerK, Belz GG, etal. Comparative pharmacodynamics and phannacokinetics of candesartan and losartan in man. J Pharm Pharmacol 2000; 52: 1075–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maillard MP, Rossat J, Brunner HR, Burnier M. Tasosartan, enoltasosartan, and angiotensin II receptor blockade: the confounding role of protein binding. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2000; 295: 649–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ribstein J, Picard A, Armagnac C, Bouroudian M, Sissman J, Mimran A. Full antagonism of pressor response to exogenous angiotensin II (All) by single-dose irbesartan in normoten sive subjects. J Hypertens 1997; 15 Suppl 4: S117–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muller P, Cohen T, De Gasparo M, Sioufi A, Racine-Poon A, Howald H. Angiotensin II receptor blockade with single doses of valsartan in healthy, normotensive subjects. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 47: 231–45.
   Google Scholar
• Belz GG, Butzer R, Kober S. Mang C, Mutschler E. Time course and extent of angiotensin II antagonism following irbesartan, losartan and valsartan in humans assessed by angiotensin II dose response and radioligand receptor assay. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999; 66: 367–73.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzolai L, Maillard M, Rossat J, Nussberger J, Brunner HR, Burnier M. Angiotensin II receptor blockade in normotensive subjects: a direct comparison of three AT-1 receptor antagonists. Hypertension 1999; 33: 850–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soldner A, Spahn-Langguth H, Palm D, Mutschler E. A radioreceptor assay for the analysis of AT1-receptor antagonists: correlation with complementary LC data reveals a potential contribution of active metabolites. J Pharm Biomed Anal 1998; 17: 111–24.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Malerczyk C, Fuchs B, Belz GG, et al. Angiotensin II antagonism and plasma radioreceptor-kinetts of candesar-tan in man. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 45: 567–73.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maillard MP, Mazzolai L, Daven V, et al. Assessment of angiotensin II receptor blockade in humans using a standardized angiotensin II receptor-binding assay. Am J Hypertens 1999; 12: 1201–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kaplan, N. Clinical Hypertension, 6th ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1994, p. 65.
   Google Scholar
• Stroth U, Unger T. The renin-angiotensin system and its receptors. J Cardiovasc Phannacol 1999; 33 Suppl 1: S21–8.
   Google Scholar
• Richards AM, Nicholls MG. Aldosterone antagonism in heart failure. Lancet 1999; 354: 789–90.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pitt B, Zannad F, Renune WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure: Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 709–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kober S, Butzer R, Langguth P. etal. Extent and duration of angiotensin II antagonistic activity of irbesartan and candesartan cilexetil. Am J Hypertens 2000; 13 (Pt 2): 150A. Abstract.
   Google Scholar
• Belz GG Butzer R, Kober S, etal. Irbesartan results in more complete blockade of human renal AT1-receptor mediated effects than does candesartan cilexetil as evidenced by higher plasma renin levels. Am J Hypertens 2000; 13 (Pt 2): 151A. Abstract.
   Google Scholar
• Butzer R, Belz G, Kober P. Irbesartan results in more complete blockade of human adrenal AT1-receptor medi-cated effects than does candesartan cilexetil as evidenced by blunted plasma aldosterone levels. J Hypertens 2000; 18 Suppl 2: S209. Abstract.
   Google Scholar
• Morsing P, Adler G, Brandt-Elias son U, et al. Mechanistic differences of various AT1-receptor blockers in isolated vessels of different origin. Hypertension 1999; 33: 1406–13.
   Google Scholar