Results of a meta-analysis comparing the tolerability of lercanidipine and other dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers

Clinical Therapeutics

Volumn 31, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1652-1663

  Makarounas Kirchmann, Kelly ^a,b   Glover Koudounas, Sophie ^c   Ferrari, Paolo ^d  

^a KMC Health Care   (Australia)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c Medical and Scientific Affairs ^*  (Australia)

^d FREMANTLE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

adverse events; calcium channel blocker; dihydropyri dines; edema; lercanidipine; tolerability

Indexed keywords

AMLODIPINE; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKING AGENT; DIHYDROPYRIDINE DERIVATIVE; FELODIPINE; LACIDIPINE; LERCANIDIPINE; MANIDIPINE; NIFEDIPINE;

CHRONIC ALLOGRAFT NEPHROPATHY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED DRUG RELEASE; DIASTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; DISEASE SEVERITY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; FOLLOW UP; HEADACHE; HOT FLUSH; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; META ANALYSIS; PERIPHERAL EDEMA; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASODILATATION;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKERS; DIHYDROPYRIDINES; EDEMA; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 72449137809     PISSN: 01492918     EISSN: 1879114X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.08.010     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Materson B.J., Reda D.J., Cushman W.C., et al. Single-drug therapy for hypertension in men. A comparison of six antihypertensive agents with placebo. The Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents [published correction appears in N Engl J Med. 1994;330:1689]. N EnglJ Med. 328 (1993) 914-921
2. Eisenberg M.J., Brox A., and Bestawros A.N. Calcium channel blockers: An update. Am J Med. 116 (2004) 35-43
3. Braunwald E. Mechanism of action of calcium-channel-blocking agents. N Engl J Med. 307 (1982) 1618-1627
4. Leonetti G., Magnani B., Pessina A.C., et al., the COHORT Study Group. Tolerability of long-term treatment with lercanidipine versus amlodipine and lacidipine in elderly hypertensives. Am J Hypertens 15 (2002) 932-940
5. Messerli F.H., Oparil S., and Feng Z. Comparison of efficacy and side effects of combination therapy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (benazepril) with calcium antagonist (either nifedipine or amlodipine) versus high-dose calcium antagonist monotherapy for systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 86 (2000) 1182-1187
6. Cherubini A., Fabris F., Ferrari E., et al. Comparative effects of lercanidipine, lacidipine, and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system on blood pressure and heart rate in elderly hypertensive patients: The ELderly and LErcanidipine (ELLE) study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 37 (2003) 203-212
7. Millar-Craig M., Shaffu B., Greenough A., et al. Lercanidipine vs lacidipine in isolated systolic hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 17 (2003) 799-806
8. Anderson R.B., Hollenberg N.K., and Williams G.H. Physical Symptoms Distress Index: A sensitive tool to evaluate the impact of pharmacological agents on quality of life. Arch Intern Med. 159 (1999) 693-700
9. Simons L.A., Ortiz M., and Calcino G. Persistence with antihy-pertensive medication: Australia-wide experience, 20042006. Med J Aust 188 (2008) 224-227
10. Borghi C., Prandin M.G., Dormi A., Ambrosioni E., and the Study Group of the Regional Unit of the Italian Society of Hypertension. Improved tolerability of the dihydropyri-dine calcium-channel antagonist lercanidipine: The ler-canidipine challenge trial. Blood Press Suppl 1 (2003) 14-21
11. Angelico P., Guarneri L., Leonardi A., and Testa R. Vascular-selective effect of lercanidipine and other 1,4-dihydropyri-dines in isolated rabbit tissues. J Pharm Pharmacol. 51 (1999) 709-714
12. Epstein M. Lercanidipine: A novel dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker. Heart Dis. 3 (2001) 398-407
13. Herbette L.G., Vecchiarelli M., Sartani A., and Leonardi A. Ler-canidipine: Short plasma half-life, long duration of action and high cholesterol tolerance. Updated molecular model to rationalize its pharmacokinetic properties. Blood Press Suppl. 2 (1998) 10-17
14. Borghi C. Lercanidipine in hypertension. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 1 (2005) 173-182
15. Beckey C., Lundy A., and Lutfi N. Lercanidipine in the treatment of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother 41 (2007) 465-473
16. Policicchio D., Magliocca R., and 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 29 Suppl (1997) S31-S35
17. 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 Lercanidipine in Adults (LEAD) Study. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 5 (2003) 249-253
18. Mulrow C.D. Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ 309 (1994) 597-599
19. In: Higgins J.P., and Green S. (Eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008), Wiley, Chichester, UK
20. Der Simonian R., and Kacker R. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update. Contemp Clin Trials 8 (2007) 105-114
21. 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 61 (2000) 850-862
22. Lund-Johansen P., Stranden E., Helberg S., et al. Quantification of leg oedema in postmenopausal hypertensive patients treated with lercanidipine or amlodipine. J Hypertens 21 (2003) 1003-1010
23. Casiglia E., Mazza A., Tikhonoff V., et al. Therapeutic profile of manidipine and lercanidipine in hypertensive patients. Adv Ther. 21 (2004) 357-369
24. Briganti E.M., Shaw J.E., Chadban S.J., et al., the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Untreated hypertension among Australian adults: The 1999-2000 Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Med J Aust. 179 (2003) 135-139
25. Chobanian A.V., Bakris G.L., Black H.R., et al., the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee. Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension. 42 (2003) 1206-1252
26. Jones J.K., Gorkin L., Lian J.F., et al. Discontinuation of and changes in treatment after start of new courses of antihypertensive drugs: A study of a United Kingdom population. BMJ. 311 (1995) 293-295
27. Van Wijk B.L., Klungel O.H., Heerdink E.R., and de Boer A. Rate and determinants of 10-year persistence with antihypertensive drugs. J Hypertens. 23 (2005) 2101-2107
28. Aranda P., Tamargo J., Aranda F.J., et al. Use and adverse reactions of antihypertensive drugs in Spain Part I of the RAAE Study. Blood Press Suppl. 1 (1997) 11-16
29. Düsing R., Weisser B., Mengden T., and Vetter H. Changes in antihypertensive therapy-the role of adverse effects and compliance. Blood Press. 7 (1998) 313-315
30. Pruijm M.T., Maillard M.P., and Burnier M. Patient adherence and the choice of antihypertensive drugs: Focus on lercanidipine. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 4 (2008) 1159-1166
31. Veronesi M., Cicero A.F., Prandin M.G., et al. A prospective evaluation of persistence on antihypertensive treatment with different antihyper-tensive drugs in clinical practice. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 3 (2007) 999-1005
32. He J., and Whelton P.K. Elevated systolic blood pressure and risk of cardiovascular and renal disease: Overview of evidence from observational epidemiologic studies and randomized controlled trials. Am Heart J. 138 (1999) 211-219
33. Moher D., Pham B., Lawson M.L., and Klassen T.P. The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews. Health Technol Assess. 7 (2003) 1-90