ACE inhibitors are important therapeutic agents in controlling hypertension, correcting some of its pathophysiological derangement and improving its prognosis. While there are many such agents, there may be some important differences between them. This placebo run-in, double blind, crossover study, using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, compares the efficacy of perindopril 4-8 mg and enalapril 10-20 mg as once daily antihypertensive agents on 32 patients. For diastolic blood pressure (DBP), perindopril had a placebo-corrected peak (P) reduction of blood pressure (BP) of -6.4 +/- 1.3 mmHg vs its placebo-corrected trough (T) of -5.2 +/- 1.7 mmHg. Enalapril had a reduction in DBP of -8.5 +/- 1.3 mmHg (P) and -5.7 +/- 1.7 mmHg (T). For systolic blood pressure (SBP), perindopril had a reduction of -7.5 +/- 1.6 mmHg (P) vs -7.3 +/- 2.2 mmHg (T) compared to enalapril with -10.8 +/- 1.6 mmHg (P) vs -8.3 +/- 2.3 mmHg (T). Placebo-corrected trough-to-peak ratio (SBP/DBP) for perindopril was 0.97/0.81 vs 0.77/0.67 for enalapril. There was no difference noted in 24-hour mean BP, area under the curve or post-dose casual BP measurements. Both perindopril and enalapril were well tolerated and the two treatment groups had similar safety profiles. Perindopril thus had a predictable and sustained blood pressure effect giving a 24-hour cover for the patient without excessive peak effect or poor trough effect.
BACKGROUND: Data comparing the effect of losartan and perindopril on aortic stiffness among hypertensive subjects without A(1166)C polymorphism was not available.
METHODS: The short-term and long-term effects of losartan (50 mg) and perindopril (4 mg) on aortic stiffness measured as carotid femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) were compared in 39 middle-aged Malay subjects with mild-to-moderate hypertension in a 4-month, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-design study.
RESULTS: Four-month treatment with both drugs showed a significant reduction in blood pressure (BP) (P < .005) and PWV (P < .05) as compared to the baseline. On the other hand 1-month treatment showed a significant reduction in BP only in perindopril group (P < .05) but not in the losartan group. There was no significant reduction in pulse pressure and PWV after 1 month treatment by both drugs. No significant difference was seen in reduction in BP after 1 month and 4 months treatment between the two drugs. Similarly no significant difference was seen in reduction in PWV between the two drugs after 1 month (P = .613) and 4 months (P = .521) of treatment. Reduction in PWV by losartan (r = 0.470) and perindopril (r = 0.457) correlated significantly only with reduction in DBP (P < .05) and remained significant even after controlling for reduction in DBP (P < .05). Reduction in PWV by both losartan and perindopril was independent of reduction in BP by these drugs.
CONCLUSIONS: These results showed that long-term treatment with losartan shows similar pressure independent reduction in PWV as perindopril among Malay hypertensive subjects with a homogenous "AA" genotype for angiotensin II type 1 receptor and may serve as a suitable alternative to perindopril.
This study was conducted to determine the tolerability and efficacy of valsartan (DIOVAN) compared to perindopril (COVERSYL) in Malaysian patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Two hundred and fifty adult Malaysian patients with a mean sitting diastolic blood pressure of more than 95 mmHg and less than 115 mmHg after a 14 day washout period were randomized to receive either valsartan 80 mg once daily (n=125) or perindopril 4 mg daily (n=125) for eight weeks. The primary end point for efficacy was the change in mean sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SiSBP and SiDBP). The primary criteria for evaluation of tolerability was the incidence of adverse events. There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to sex, age, weight, baseline sitting and standing systolic and diastolic blood pressure. At 0, 4 and 8 weeks the mean SiDBP in the valsartan group were 101.4, 92.8 and 91.0 mmHg respectively. The corresponding BP for the perindopril treated group was 102.6, 93.8 and 93.2 mmHg. (95% CI -1.39 to +3.27). There were no significant differences in the mean BP measurements between the valsartan and perindopril group at 0, 4 and 8 weeks. In each group there were significant differences between the BP at 4 and 8 weeks compared to baseline. A similar pattern was seen with SiSBP. At 4 weeks 28.7% of the valsartan and 25% of the perindopril group had their BP normalized (SiDBP <90 mmHg) The percentages of patients who responded (SiDBP reduction >10 mmHg but SiDBP >90 mmHg) were 21.3 in the valsartan group and 20.8 in the perindopril group. At 8 weeks, 31.1% of the valsartan group and 30.8% of the perindopril group had their BP normalized. The response rate was 27% and 22.5% for valsartan and perindopril respectively. The major adverse event was cough which occurred in 18 patients (14.4%) in the perindopril and 1 (0.8%) in the valsartan group at 4 weeks. At 8 weeks the figures were 24 (19.2%) and 2 (1.6%) respectively. The results indicate that Valsartan is safe and efficacious in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. It is equally efficacious to Perindopril and not associated with any major adverse event. It has a better tolerability profile with respect to dry cough.