Biomedical subjects

Paulette A Lyle

Publications and source records attributed to Paulette A Lyle.

14 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Use of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers to prevent atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation, the most common cardiac arrhythmia in clinical practice, causes significant burden to patients and health care systems worldwide. Attention is being paid to prevention of atrial fibrillation using drugs that retard or prevent atrial fibrosis and arrhythmogenic remodeling, which lead to this arrhythmia. Agents that work through the renin-angiotensin-receptor system, the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, are showing promise in animal and human studies.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2006

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial of the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of a combination of once-daily losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg compared with losartan 100-mg monotherapy in the treatment of mild to severe essential hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Because patients with hypertension may require >1 antihypertensive agent to control blood pressure (BP), physicians often prescribe a fixed combination of antihypertensive medications. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of adding low-dose hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg (HCTZ12.5) to high-dose losartan 100 mg (L100) in patients with hypertension whose BP was inadequately controlled with L100 monotherapy. METHODS: Enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, filter study were patients aged > or =18 years with a mean trough sitting diastolic BP (SiDBP) of 95 to 120 mm Hg. Patients were treated with L100 QD for 4 weeks. Patients who did not achieve adequate BP control were randomly assigned to receive L100/HCTZ12.5 or L100 QD for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in trough SiDBP from baseline in the 2 groups. Responders were defined as patients with a mean trough SiDBP of <90 mm Hg or patients who had a > or =10-mm Hg decrease in mean trough SiDBP. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were similar between treatment groups. The patients randomized to the double-blind treatment period were mostly white (65.1%) and male (57.5%), with a mean age of 53.8 years. The mean (SD) duration of hypertension at baseline was 9.7 (8.5) years. The proportion of patients previously treated with antihypertensive therapy was 76.7%. Of the 367 patients enrolled in the L100 filter period, 292 patients had BP inadequately controlled with L100 monotherapy and were randomized to receive L100 (n = 145) or L100/HCTZ12.5 (n = 147). At week 6 after randomization, mean trough SiDBP was significantly lower in the L100/HCTZ12.5 group than in the L100 group (-8.3 vs -5.2, respectively; P < 0.001). The between-group difference was -3.0 mm Hg (95 % CI, -4.6 to -1.40; P < 0.001), and the proportion of responders was significantly greater in the L100/HCTZ12.5 group than in the L100 group (63.0% vs 44.4%; P < 0.001). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) occurring in >2% of patients during the double-blind period was similar for both groups. AEs occurring in the L100 group and the L100/HCTZ12.5 group included respiratory tract infection (6.2% vs 3.4%, respectively), dizziness (2.1% vs 0.7%), and headache (0.7% vs 3.4%). CONCLUSIONS: After 6 weeks of therapy, L100/HCTZ12.5 was associated with greater antihypertensive efficacy than L100, as measured by the change in mean trough SiDBP The percentage of responders was significantly greater in the L100/HCTZ12.5 group than in the L100 group.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Losartan: lessons learned from the RENAAL study.

Renal and cardiovascular diseases associated with Type 2 diabetes are increasing at rapid rates, and are significant burdens to patients and healthcare systems. The RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan) study was conducted from 1996 to 2001. This landmark clinical trial provided the opportunity to study renal and cardiovascular outcomes, as well as risk predictors, in a relatively large number of patients with Type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. The RENAAL study also provided information that will be valuable to those designing future clinical trials in this patient population. This review highlights key findings from the RENAAL study.

Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers↗

PubMed2006

Does albuminuria predict cardiovascular outcomes on treatment with losartan versus atenolol in patients with diabetes, hypertension, and left ventricular hypertrophy? The LIFE study.

OBJECTIVE: Our current aims were to investigate whether 1) baseline urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) predicted cardiovascular outcomes, 2) changes in UACR differed between treatments, 3) benefits of losartan were related to its influence on UACR, and 4) reduction in albuminuria reduced cardiovascular events. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In 1,063 patients with diabetes, hypertension, and left ventricular hypertrophy, UACR was measured for a mean of 4.7 years. The primary composite end point included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Cox models were run including and excluding baseline and time-varying UACR. RESULTS: Increasing baseline albuminuria related to increased risk for cardiovascular events. Reductions in UACR at years 1 and 2 were approximately 33% for losartan vs. 15% for atenolol (P < 0.001). Benefits of losartan seem to be most prominent in patients with the highest level of baseline UACR, although treatment by albuminuria interaction was only significant for total mortality. Approximately one-fifth of the superiority of losartan was explained by the greater reduction of albuminuria. Risk of the primary end point was related to the in-treatment UACR. CONCLUSIONS: Lowering of albuminuria in patients with hypertension and diabetes appears to be beneficial and should be the subject of additional study in future clinical trials.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Hospitalizations for new heart failure among subjects with diabetes mellitus in the RENAAL and LIFE studies.

We sought to study the risk factors for heart failure (HF) and the relation between antihypertensive treatment with losartan and the first hospitalization for HF in patients with diabetes mellitus in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) and Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) studies. We evaluated 1,195 patients with hypertension, left ventricular hypertrophy, and diabetes from the LIFE study and 1,513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy from the RENAAL study. The comparative treatments were atenolol in the LIFE study and placebo in the RENAAL study. Patients with a history of HF were excluded from this analysis. Losartan significantly reduced the incidence of first hospitalizations for HF versus placebo in the RENAAL study (hazard ratio 0.74, p=0.037) and versus atenolol in the LIFE study (hazard ratio 0.57, p=0.019). Patients enrolled in the RENAAL study were at a higher risk of developing HF (hazard ratio for RENAAL vs LIFE diabetics 3.0, p<0.0001). The significant, independent baseline risk factors for the development of HF in the RENAAL study were urinary albumin/creatinine ratio, age, peripheral vascular disease, the Cornell product, body mass index, and previous angina; in the LIFE study they were the Cornell product, previous myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, baseline atrial fibrillation, alcohol use (inverse relation), and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio. The beneficial effect of losartan on the reduction of risk for hospitalization for new HF was demonstrated in patients who were at high renal and/or high cardiovascular risk.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2005

Kidney disease and cardiovascular disease: implications of dyslipidemia.

Cardiovascular complications are common inpatients with kidney disease. Regulating the lipid levels in these patients is important so that the risks of kidney and cardiovascular complications can be minimized. Lipid regulation decreases the incidence of coronary vascular events and other vascular complications in patients with kidney disease; however, whether lipid regulation slows progression of kidney disease is not yet known. Additional studies of the implications of dyslipidemia in patients with kidney disease are needed.

Chronic Disease↗

PubMed2005

The effects of losartan compared to atenolol on stroke in patients with isolated systolic hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. The LIFE study.

The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study reported that a losartan-based antihypertensive regimen reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction) more than therapy based on atenolol in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). Patients aged 55-80 years with blood pressures 160-200/<90 mm Hg were followed for a mean of 4.7 years. Blood pressure was similarly reduced in the losartan (n=660) and atenolol (n=666) ISH groups. There were 88 (6.6%) patients who experienced a stroke, 18 of which were fatal. Of patients experiencing strokes, 72.7% had an ischemic stroke. ISH patients in LIFE compared to the non-ISH group had a higher incidence of any stroke and embolic stroke, and similar incidences of fatal, atherosclerotic, and hemorrhagic/other strokes. The incidence of any stroke (40% risk reduction [RR], p=0.02), fatal stroke (70% RR, p=0.035), and atherothrombotic stroke (45% RR, p=0.022) was significantly lower in losartan-treated compared to the atenolol-treated patients. The 36% RR for embolic strokes in the losartan group was not statistically significantly (p=0.33) different from the atenolol group. These data suggest that losartan-based treatment is more effective than an atenolol-based treatment for patients with ISH and a high risk for stroke.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Pulse pressure and effects of losartan or atenolol in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy.

In the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study, the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction was reduced by losartan versus atenolol in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to determine the influence of pulse pressure on outcome. Patients were divided into quartiles of baseline pulse pressure. Cox regression, including baseline Framingham risk score as a covariate, was used to compare risk in the quartiles. In the atenolol group, there were significantly higher risks in the highest versus lowest quartile for the composite end point 28% (confidence interval [CI], 2% to 62%; P=0.035), stroke 84% (CI, 32% to 157%; P<0.001), and total mortality 41% (CI, 7% to 84%; P=0.013). Risk for myocardial infarction was 44% higher (CI, -5% to 120%; P=0.089). The risks in the losartan group also increased with increasing quartile, but were lower than in the atenolol group, and differences between the highest and lowest quartiles were not significant: composite end point 12% (CI, -13% to 44%; P>0.2), stroke -5% (CI, -34% to 37%; P>0.2), myocardial infarction 30% (CI, -13% to 94%; P>0.2), and total mortality 32% (CI, -1% to 76%; P=0.062). In patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in the LIFE study, there were significantly higher risks, adjusted for the Framingham risk score, for the primary composite end point, stroke, and total mortality in the highest versus lowest quartile of pulse pressure with atenolol-based treatment. The risks in the losartan group also increased with increasing pulse pressure quartile, but were lower than those in the atenolol group, and were not significant.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Targeting the renin-angiotensin system for the reduction of cardiovascular outcomes in hypertension: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers.

Agents that counteract the negative impact of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) are effective antihypertensives and reduce the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. Contrary to common perception, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors do not share the apparent benefit of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing risk of cardiovascular-disease outcomes, particularly stroke, in randomised clinical trials. RAAS agents, especially ARBs, are well tolerated. Use of ARBs alone or in combination with other classes of antihypertensive agents to lower blood pressure and/or medications to control other conditions (e.g., insulin sensitivity) reduces risk of cardiovascular disease outcomes and Type 2 diabetes with excellent tolerability. Selected issues related to use of RAAS agents as antihypertensive therapies (e.g., Type 2 diabetes, global risk management, multiple drug therapy and coronary heart disease) are addressed.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists↗

PubMed2004

Losartan and the United States costs of end-stage renal disease by baseline albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study provided the opportunity to estimate costs associated with ESRD by baseline albuminuria from a United States perspective. METHODS: Costs for ESRD in patients with diabetes were estimated by baseline albuminuria using the U.S. Renal Data System by using the number of days each patient experienced ESRD and the daily estimated U.S. cost of ESRD. RESULTS: The losartan-based antihypertensive therapy group experienced a 28.6% (P=0.002) reduction in the risk of the development of ESRD compared with placebo-based conventional antihypertensive therapy. The previously estimated annual ESRD-related cost saving in the losartan group was 5,144 dollars (95% CI 1,701-8,586 dollars, P=0.003) at 3.5 years. With the cost of losartan, the net savings in the losartan group was estimated at 3,522 dollars (143-6,900 dollars, P=0.041) by 3.5 years. More ESRD-free days were observed and reduced ESRD costs estimated with losartan-based treatment over all levels of baseline albuminuria. CONCLUSION: Treatment with losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy in the RENAAL study not only reduces the incidence of ESRD, but is also estimated from a U.S. perspective to result in substantial cost savings over the 3.5-year duration of the trial across all levels of baseline albuminuria.

Albuminuria↗

PubMed2004

Losartan for the treatment of hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy: the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study.

Losartan is an orally active, selective, nonpeptide, angiotensin-II Type I-receptor antagonist, and was the first drug marketed in this class. It has been approved for the treatment of hypertension, and may be used alone or in combination with other antihypertensive agents. Based on the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study, losartan has been approved for the reduction of cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy, but there is evidence that this benefit does not apply to black patients. Based on the Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study, losartan is also indicated for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy with an elevated serum creatinine and proteinuria, in patients with Type 2 diabetes. The focus of this review is the LIFE study.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2003

An analysis of cholesterol control and statin use in the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension Study.

BACKGROUND: There is general agreement that patients who have elevated lipid levels and/or risk factors for or existing cardiovascular disease should receive aggressive cholesterol-lowering therapy. However, it is not clear whether patients are receiving the recommended treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated cholesterol control and statin use in the setting of a large, long-term cardiovascular end point trial. METHODS: The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study was conducted between 1995 and 2001 to compare the incidence of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality with losartan- or atenolol-based treatment in 9193 patients aged 55 to 80 years with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. The mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 4.8 (0.9) years. Use of lipid-lowering therapy was at the discretion of the investigator. In the present study, analyses of baseline and end-of-study mean total cholesterol (TC) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and statin use were performed for the combined treatment groups. Based on generally accepted guidelines, achievement of a TC level <5.0 mmol/L (193.5 mg/dL) was used as the treatment target for the purpose of these analyses. The proportions of patients with TC levels above this cutoff were calculated at baseline and at the final visit. RESULTS: A total of 8653 patients had baseline and end-of-study cholesterol measurements and were included in this analysis. At baseline, 528 (6.1%) patients were receiving statins; TC levels were above the cutoff in 381 (72.2%) of these patients, who had a mean TC level of 6.07 mmol/L (234.7 mg/dL). Of 8125 (93.9%) patients who were not receiving statins at baseline, TC levels were above the cutoff in 6859 (84.4%), with a mean TC level of 6.37 mmol/L (246.4 mg/dL). At the end of the study, 1892 (21.9%) patients were receiving a statin; TC levels were above the cutoff in 1096 (57.9%) of these patients, who had a mean TC level of 5.99 mmol/: (231.6 mg/dL). Of 6761 (78.1%) patients who were not receiving statins at the end of the study, TC levels were above the cutoff in 5316 (78.6%), with a mean TC level of 6.24 mmol/L (241.4 mg/dL). CONCLUSIONS: In this long-term cardiovascular end point study in patients with moderate to severe hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy, statins were not optimally administered and cholesterol levels were poorly controlled.

Aged↗

PubMed2003

Recent advances in management of type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: lessons from the RENAAL study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic nephropathy has become the single most important cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) worldwide. Strategies to slow the rate of loss of renal function in these patients recently have been developed. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system has proven to be an important target for intervention. METHODS: The Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study was a randomized, double-blind, multinational, clinical trial that studied 1,513 patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy for a mean of 3.4 years. Patients were administered either losartan or placebo, each in addition to conventional antihypertensive therapy, with dosage adjustments as necessary to achieve a target blood pressure of less than 140/less than 90 mm Hg. RESULTS: The study showed a significant benefit of losartan, beyond the effects of lowering blood pressure, on the primary composite end point of doubling serum creatinine level, ESRD, or death (-16%; P = 0.02). Losartan reduced the incidence of serum creatinine level doubling (-25%; P = 0.006) and ESRD (-28%; P = 0.002), but had no effect on rate of death. The composite end point of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality was similar in the two groups. The rate of first hospitalization for heart failure was reduced in the losartan group (-32%; P = 0.005), as was proteinuria (-35%; P < 0.001). The RENAAL study also provided the opportunity to evaluate risk factors that predict ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes in whom blood pressure was aggressively treated. In our multivariate model, four independent risk factors, proteinuria (most important), serum creatinine level, hypoalbuminemia, and anemia, were identified that predicted the development of ESRD. CONCLUSION: Proteinuria is the single most powerful predictor of ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Thus, it is imperative that it be assessed in all patients with type 2 diabetes to identify those at risk for progressive renal disease. The routine availability of the urinary albumin-creatinine ratio as a diagnostic test provides an important opportunity to further improve the prognosis of individuals with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.

Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists↗

PubMed2003

Hypertension and medical informatics.

BACKGROUND: Only about 27% of Americans with hypertension have their disease under control. Hypertension in the African-American population has a higher prevalence (32%) and is less likely to be treated or controlled compared with that in the caucasian population. Hypertension places a significant burden on patients and health care systems. Applications of medical informatics can facilitate the management of hypertension. Examples that illustrate the utility, status, and future potential of medical informatics applications in the treatment of hypertension are presented. METHODS: Relevant studies and review articles were accessed through a PubMed search of the English-language literature and for current Internet-based information for the time period of 1993-2002. Search terms included, but were not limited to, hypertension, medical informatics, medical information science, electronic medical records, Internet, and managed care. RESULTS: There is evidence that medical informatics has a favorable impact on health care issues as it relates to patients and physicians. Although the use of computers to assist in managing hypertension is in its infancy, there are examples where informatics applications have a demonstrated clinical value. CONCLUSIONS: Management of hypertension needs much improvement. The use of computers and the Internet in health care is expanding and expected to have a positive impact on the management of chronic diseases, such as hypertension.

Black People↗