Comparison of the antihypertensive effect of imidapril and enalapril in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study
R. Van Der Does et R. Euler, Comparison of the antihypertensive effect of imidapril and enalapril in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study, CURR THER R, 62(6), 2001, pp. 437-450
Citations number
15
Categorie Soggetti
Pharmacology,"Pharmacology & Toxicology
Journal title
CURRENT THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL
Background: Imidapril is a novel angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibi
tor that has been shown to be effective in the treatment of mild to moderat
e hypertension at doses ranging from 5 to 40 mg.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the antihypertensive ef
ficacy of imidapril (5-10 mg daily) with that of the ACE inhibitor enalapri
l (5-10 mg daily) in patients with essential hypertension.
Methods: After a 4-week, single-blind, placebo run-in phase, patients were
randomized to receive imidapril 5 to 10 mg daily or enalapril 5 to 10 mg da
ily for 12 weeks. The dose of medication could be doubled if mean sitting d
iastolic blood pressure (DBP) remained > 90 mm Hg after 4 weeks of treatmen
t. Response was defined as sitting DBP less than or equal to 90 mm Hg or a
reduction in sitting DBP of greater than or equal to 10 mm Hg compared with
baseline. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in the intent-to-treat popula
tion.
Results: A total of 353 patients from 24 centers were randomized to treatme
nt (176 imidapril; 177 enalapril); 341 completed the trial. One patient did
not receive study medication; the intent-to-treat population therefore con
sisted of 352 patients. There was no difference between groups in the propo
rtion of patients who responded favorably to treatment with imidapril (131/
175 [74.9%]) or enalapril (131/177 [74.0%]). Clinically relevant reductions
in sitting and standing DBP and systolic blood pressure were apparent afte
r 2 weeks of treatment, and there was a trend toward further reductions for
the remainder of the study period in both treatment groups. There was no s
ignificant difference in the numbers of patients with greater than or equal
to1 adverse event between the imidapril group (76/175 [43.4%]) and the ena
lapril group (86/177 [48.6%]). In both treatment groups, the most common ad
verse events (occurring in >5% of patients) were headache, bronchitis, coug
h, and upper respiratory tract infections. There was no difference between
groups in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events.
Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that imidapril and enalapril
are equally effective and well tolerated in patients with mild to moderate
essential hypertension. The dose range of 5 to 10 mg for imidapril was app
ropriate for the treatment of patients with essential hypertension.