Mechanistic differences of various AT1-receptor blockers in isolated vessels of different origin

Hypertension

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 1406-1413

  Morsing, Peter ^a   Adler, Gunnel ^a   Brandt Eliasson, Ulla ^a   Karp, Linda ^a   Ohlson, Kristina ^a   Renberg, Lars ^a   Sjöquist, Per Ove ^a   Abrahamsson, Tommy ^a  

^a ASTRAZENECA R AND D   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Aorta; Pharmacology; Portal vein; Protein binding; Receptors, angiotensin

Indexed keywords

2 BUTYL 4 CHLORO 1 [[2' (1H TETRAZOL 5 YL) 4 BIPHENYLYL]METHYL] 5 IMIDAZOLECARBOXYLIC ACID; ANGIOTENSIN 1 RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; CANDESARTAN; CANDESARTAN HEXETIL; IRBESARTAN; LOSARTAN; ANGIOTENSIN 1 RECEPTOR; ANGIOTENSIN 2 RECEPTOR; ANGIOTENSIN II; ANGIOTENSIN RECEPTOR; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; BENZIMIDAZOLE DERIVATIVE; BIPHENYL DERIVATIVE; IMIDAZOLE DERIVATIVE; PLASMA PROTEIN; TETRAZOLE DERIVATIVE;

ANIMAL TISSUE; AORTA; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG MECHANISM; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG RECEPTOR BINDING; LIPOPHILICITY; MALE; NONHUMAN; ORAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; PORTAL VEIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RABBIT; RAT; RECEPTOR BLOCKING; TEMPERATURE; VASOCONSTRICTION; ANIMAL; BLOOD; DRUG ANTAGONISM; FEMALE; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; KINETICS; METABOLISM; MUSCLE CONTRACTION; PHYSIOLOGY; SPRAGUE DAWLEY RAT; VASCULAR SMOOTH MUSCLE;

ANGIOTENSIN II; ANIMALS; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; AORTA; BENZIMIDAZOLES; BIPHENYL COMPOUNDS; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PROTEINS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMIDAZOLES; KINETICS; LOSARTAN; MALE; MUSCLE CONTRACTION; MUSCLE, SMOOTH, VASCULAR; PORTAL VEIN; RABBITS; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; RECEPTOR, ANGIOTENSIN, TYPE 1; RECEPTOR, ANGIOTENSIN, TYPE 2; RECEPTORS, ANGIOTENSIN; TETRAZOLES;

EID: 0032588251     PISSN: 0194911X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/01.HYP.33.6.1406     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. McClellan KJ, Goa KL. Candesartan cilexetil a review of its use in essential hypertension. Drugs. 1998;56:847-869.
2. Gillis JC, Markham A. Irbesartan: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in management of hypertension. Drugs. 1997;54:885-902.
3. Goa KL, Wagstaff AJ. Losartan potassium: a review of its pharmacology, clinical efficacy and tolerability in the management of hypertension. Drugs. 1996;51:820-846.
4. Andersson OK, Neldam S. The antihypertensive effect and tolerability of candesartan cilexetil, a new generation angiotensin II antagonist, in comparison with losartan. Blood Pressure. 1998;7:53-59.
5. Kassler-Taub K, Littlejohn T, Elliott W, Ruddy T, Adler E. Comparative efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and losartan in mild-to-moderate hypertension: Irbesartan/Losartan Study Investigators. Am J Hypertens. 1998;11:445-453.
6. 1 receptor. Eur J Phamacol. 1997;319:137-146.
7. Chiu AT, McCall DE, Price WA, Wong PC, Carini DJ, Duncia JV, Wexler RR, Yoo SE, Johnson AL, Timmermans PB. Nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonists, VII: cellular and biochemical pharmacology of DuP 753, an orally active antihypertensive agent. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1990;252:711-718.
8. Gaddum JH, Hameed KA, Hathaway DE, Stephens FF. Quantitative studies on antagonists for 5-hydroxytryptamine. Q J Exp Physiol 1955; 40:49-74.
9. Zhang JC, Van Meel A, Pfaffendorf M, Van Zwieten P. Different types of angiotensin II receptor antagonism induced by BIBS 222 in the rat portal vein and rabbit aorta; the influence of receptor reserve. J Pharmcol Exp Ther. 1993;269:509-514.
10. Abrahamsson T, Brandt U, Marklund SL, Sjöquist P-O. Vascular bound recombinant extracellular superoxide dismutase type C protects against the detrimental effects of superoxide radicals on endothelium-dependent arterial relaxation. Circ Res. 1992;70:264-271.
11. Sutler MC, Ljung B. Contractility, muscle mass and agonist sensitivity of isolated portal veins from normo-and hypertensive rats. Acta Physiol Scand. 1977;99:484-495.
12. von Corswant C, Thoren P, Engstrom S. Triglyceride-based micro-emulsion for intravenous administration of sparingly soluble substances. J Pharmaceut Sci. 1998;87:200-208.
13. Schill G, Ehrsson H, Vessman J, Westerlund D. Separation Methods for Drug and Related Organic Compounds. 2nd ed. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Pharmaceutical Press; 1983:1-3.
14. Applications, and theory guide to pH-metric pKa and logP determination, revision 1. Forrest Row, UK: Sirius Analytical Instruments Ltd; 1993.
15. 1 antagonism. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1995;273: 753-761.
16. Liu YJ, Shankley NP, Welsh NJ, Black JW. Evidence that the apparent complexity of receptor antagonism by angiotensin II analogues is due to reversible and synoptic action. Br J Pharmacol. 1992;106:233-241.
17. Robertson MJ, Dougall IG, Harper D, McKechnie KCW, Leff P. Agonist-antagonist interactions at angiotensin receptors: application of a 2-state receptor model. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 1994;15:364-369.
18. Noda M, Shibouta Y, Inada Y, Ojima M, Wada T, Sanada T, Kubo K, Kohara Y, Naka T, Nishikawa K. Inhibition of rabbit aortic angiotensin II (AII) receptor by CV-11974, a new nonpeptide AII antagonist. Biochem Pharmacol. 1993;46:311-318.
19. 1 subtype angiotensin II receptor antagonist. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1993;265:826-834.
20. Wong PC, Price WA Jr, Chiu AT, Duncia JV, Carini DJ, Wexler RR, Johnson AL, Timmermans PB. Nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonists, XI: pharmacology of EXP3174: an active metabolite of DuP 753, an orally active antihypertensive agent. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1990;255:211-217.
21. 1b receptors: pharmacological and functional requirements. FEBS Lett. 1994;349:365-370.
22. 1 receptor activation is dependent upon two juxtaposed asparagine residues on transmembrane helices III and VII. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:4245-4251.
23. Malerczyk C, Fuchs B, Belz GG, Roll S, Butzer R, Breithaupt-Grögler K, Herrman V, Magin SG, Högemann A, Voith B, Mutschler E. Angiotensin II antagonism and plasma radioreceptor-kinetics of candesartan in man. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1998;45:567-573.