azilsartan and candesartan

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are preferably used in hypertensive patients with CKD. Azilsartan is a strong antihypertensive ARB, but its antiproteinuric effects are not well understood. We compared the antiproteinuric effect of azilsartan and candesartan in CKD patients in an open-label, randomized, crossover trial.. A total of 111 patients were treated with 20 mg of azilsartan daily for 2 months as a run-in period. After the run-in period, patients were randomized into 2 arms and received either 20 mg of azilsartan or 8 mg of candesartan daily for 3 months in a crossover trial. The primary outcome was the percent change in urinary protein-to-Cr ratio (UPCR).. Ninety-five patients completed the trial. The mean age was 64.3 years. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and UPCR were 41.5 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 1.8 g/gCr, respectively. The baseline systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 131.4 and 71.0 mm Hg, respectively. The mean percent change in the UPCR was -3.8% in the azilsartan group and 30.8% in the candesartan group at the 1st endpoint (p = 0.0004), and 6.1% in the azilsartan group and 25.8% in the candesartan group at the 2nd (final) endpoint (p = 0.029). The incidence of adverse events, including eGFR levels and serum potassium levels, was not significantly different between the groups.. A 20 mg azilsartan dose had potent antiproteinuric effects compared with an 8 mg candesartan dose, without an increase in adverse events. Azilsartan may provide renal protection in addition to antihypertensive effects in CKD patients.

Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Cross-Over Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Oxadiazoles; Proteinuria; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Tetrazoles

Previous studies suggest that the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is characterized not only by high ventricular stiffness, but also by vascular stiffness. Azilsartan has higher vascular affinity compared with other angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), which were proven to have no beneficial effects on clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF in earlier clinical trials. We aimed to test the hypothesis that azilsartan may improve left ventricular diastolic function in HFpEF patients with hypertension in this trial.. The Effects of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on Diastolic Function in Patients Suffering from Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: J-TASTE trial is a multicenter, randomized, open-labeled, and assessor(s)-blinded, active controlled using candesartan, parallel-group clinical trial, to compare changes in left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction between HFpEF patients with hypertension who have received candesartan or azilsartan for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint is the change in early diastolic wave height/early diastolic mitral annulus velocity (E/e') assessed by echocardiography from the baseline to the end of the study (48 weeks). A total of 190 patients will be recruited into the study.. The design of the J-TASTE trial will provide data on whether differences between the effects of the two tested drugs on LV diastolic function exist in HFpEF patients with hypertension and will improve understanding of the pathophysiological role of vascular stiffness on diastolic function.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Diastole; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Hypertension; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Oxadiazoles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Stroke Volume; Tetrazoles; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Stiffness; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left; Ventricular Function, Left; Young Adult

Morning blood pressure (BP) surge is reported as a risk factor for cardiovascular events and end-organ damage independent of the 24-h BP level. Controlling morning BP surge is therefore important to help prevent onset of cardiovascular disease. We compared the efficacy of azilsartan and candesartan in controlling morning systolic BP (SBP) surges by analyzing relevant ambulatory BP monitoring data in patients with/without baseline BP surges. As part of a 16-week randomized, double-blind study of azilsartan (20-40 mg once daily) and candesartan (8-12 mg once daily) in Japanese patients with essential hypertension, an exploratory analysis was carried out using ambulatory BP monitoring at baseline and week 14. The effects of study drugs on morning BP surges, including sleep trough surge (early morning SBP minus the lowest night-time SBP) and prewaking surge (early morning SBP minus SBP before awakening), were evaluated. Patients with sleep trough surge of at least 35 mmHg were defined by the presence of a morning BP surge (the 'surge group'). Sleep trough surge and prewaking surge data were available at both baseline and week 14 in 548 patients, 147 of whom (azilsartan 76; candesartan 71) had a baseline morning BP surge. In surge group patients, azilsartan significantly reduced both the sleep trough surge and the prewaking surge at week 14 compared with candesartan (least squares means of the between-group differences -5.8 mmHg, P=0.0395; and -5.7 mmHg, P=0.0228, respectively). Once-daily azilsartan improved sleep trough surge and prewaking surge to a greater extent than candesartan in Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension.

Topics: Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Asian People; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Double-Blind Method; Essential Hypertension; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Oxadiazoles; Tetrazoles

Abnormal variations in night-time hypertension such as "non-dipping" type (< 10% decrease in nocturnal systolic blood pressure [SBP] from daytime SBP) are a risk factor for cardiovascular events independent of 24-h BP.. As part of a randomized, double-blind study of azilsartan (20-40 mg once daily) and candesartan (8-12 mg once daily) in Japanese patients with essential hypertension, an exploratory analysis was performed using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) at baseline and Week 14. Effects of study drugs on nocturnal BP variations according to patients' nocturnal SBP dipping status were evaluated.. ABPM data were available for 273 patients treated with azilsartan and 275 with candesartan. In the dipping group (≥ 10% decrease from daytime SBP), azilsartan produced a greater reduction from baseline in daytime than in night-time SBP (- 14.1 and - 10.9 mmHg, respectively), and the change in daytime SBP was significantly greater with azilsartan than with candesartan (p = 0.0077). In the non-dipping group, azilsartan produced a greater reduction from baseline in night-time than in daytime SBP (- 20.2 and - 9.9 mmHg, respectively), and reductions in both night-time SBP (p = 0.02) and daytime SBP (p = 0.0042) were significantly greater with azilsartan than with candesartan.. Once-daily azilsartan improved non-dipping night-time SBP to a greater extent than candesartan in Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension.

Topics: Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Asian People; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Circadian Rhythm; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Oxadiazoles; Tetrazoles

A potent angiotensin II type-1 receptor blocker, azilsartan, has been reported to reduce blood pressure more effectively than candesartan. Interestingly, azilsartan can also restore the circadian rhythm of blood pressure. We hypothesized that azilsartan could also improve salt sensitivity; thus, we examined the effect of azilsartan on sodium handling in renal tubules. Subtotal nephrectomized C57BL/6 mice received azilsartan (1.0 mg/kg/day), candesartan (0.3 mg/kg/day), or vehicle via the oral route in conjunction with a normal- (0.3%) or high-salt (8.0%) diet. Two weeks later, the azilsartan group showed significantly lower blood pressure during the light period than the candesartan and vehicle groups (azilsartan: 103.1 ± 1.0; candesartan: 111.7 ± 2.7; vehicle: 125.5 ± 2.5 mmHg; P < 0.05; azilsartan or candesartan vs. vehicle). The azilsartan group also showed higher urinary fractional excretion of sodium during the dark period than the candesartan and vehicle groups (azilsartan: 21.37 ± 3.69%; candesartan: 14.17 ± 1.42%; vehicle: 13.85 ± 5.30%; P < 0.05 azilsartan vs. candesartan or vehicle). A pressure-natriuresis curve demonstrated that azilsartan treatment restored salt sensitivity. Immunofluorescence and western blotting showed lower levels of Na+-H+ exchanger-3 (NHE3) protein (the major sodium transporter in renal proximal tubules) in the azilsartan group, but not in the candesartan or vehicle groups. However, azilsartan did not affect NHE3 transcription levels. Interestingly, we did not observe increased expression of downstream sodium transporters, which would have compensated for the increased flow of sodium and water due to non-absorption by NHE3. We also confirmed the mechanism stated above using cultured opossum kidney proximal tubular cells. Results revealed that a proteasomal inhibitor (but not a lysosomal inhibitor) blocked the azilsartan-induced decrease in NHE3 protein expression, suggesting that azilsartan increases NHE3 ubiquitination. In conclusion, azilsartan (but not candesartan) improved salt sensitivity possibly by decreasing NHE3 expression via ubiquitin-proteasomal degradation.

Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Animals; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Kidney Tubules, Proximal; Male; Mice; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Nephrectomy; Oxadiazoles; Salt Tolerance; Sodium-Hydrogen Exchanger 3; Sodium-Hydrogen Exchangers; Sodium, Dietary; Tetrazoles

We aimed to examine the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect and the time to attain the maximal antihypertensive effect (stabilization time) of several angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) based on home BP measurements.. We surveyed consecutive newly diagnosed, untreated patients with hypertension who started the treatment with a mid-level dose of one of seven ARBs (losartan 50 mg, telmisartan 40 mg, candesartan 8 mg, olmesartan 20 mg, valsartan 80 mg, irbesartan 100 mg, or azilsartan 20 mg). All study participants measured home BP in the morning for at least 1 week during an untreated period and 4 weeks during the treatment period.. Age, the proportion of men, and baseline home BP levels did not differ significantly between groups (total n = 232; age, 62.2 years; 50.9% men; home SBP/DBP, 151.6/90.0 mmHg). Significant differences in the BP-lowering effect and the stabilization time between ARBs were observed (P ≤ 0.02). The extent of BP-lowering effects of azilsartan 20 mg was significantly greater than that of valsartan 80 mg or irbesartan 100 mg (15.3 vs. 7.9 or 8.2 mmHg, respectively P ≤ 0.03). The stabilization time of losartan for home SBP was significantly longer than that of valsartan, irbesartan, or azilsartan (22.8 vs. 7.1, 4.7, or 7.1 days, respectively, P ≤ 0.01).. The maximum effect and the stabilization time differed among ARBs used at the mid-level dose in Japan. An ARB should be chosen based on its desired characteristics.

Topics: Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Benzoates; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Determination; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Imidazoles; Irbesartan; Losartan; Male; Middle Aged; Oxadiazoles; Self Care; Telmisartan; Tetrazoles; Time Factors; Valsartan

Abnormal elevation of blood pressure in early morning (rest-to-active phase) is suggested to cause cardiovascular events. We investigated whether azilsartan (AZL), a novel potent angiotensin receptor blocker, suppresses blood pressure elevation from the light-rest to dark-active phase in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs). AZL has a sustained depressor effect around the rest-to-active phase in SHRs to a greater extent than candesartan (CAN), despite their similar depressor effects for over 24 h. AZL did not cause sympathoexcitation. These results suggest that AZL has a more sustained depressor effect than CAN around the rest-to-active phase in SHRs, and might have advantages for early morning hypertension.

Topics: Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Hypertension; Male; Oxadiazoles; Rats; Rats, Inbred SHR; Rest; Tetrazoles

Azilsartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), was administered to renal transplant recipients to investigate the safety and antihypertensive effect in addition to its ARB-characteristic organ-protective effect.. The subjects were 20 patients (18 males, 2 females; baseline serum creatinine 2.39 ± 1.33 mg/dL) responding poorly to candesartan, who suffered albuminuria (>0.3 g/g creatinine) and hypertension (>140/90 mm Hg) following renal transplantation. Three months after candesartan was switched to azilsartan 20 mg/d, blood pressure, creatinine-corrected urinary albumin excretion, urinary L-type acid binding protein, urinary 8-hydroxydeoxyguano-sine, serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were evaluated. Thirteen patients received cyclosporine (65.0%) and 7 received tacrolimus (35.0%). Another hypertensive (calcium antagonist) agent was combined in 7 (35.0%).. Systolic blood pressure significantly decreased from 139.5 mm Hg (baseline) from 128.7 mm Hg (at 3 months), whereas no significant changes were observed for diastolic blood pressure. The percentage of patients achieving the target level of antihypertensive effect (blood pressure < 130/80 mm Hg) significantly improved from 30.0% (baseline) to 70.0% (at 3 months). No significant changes were observed in renal graft function, oxidative stress marker level, or biochemical examination findings.. Sufficient antihypertensive effect was demonstrated soon after switching to azilsartan. However, no significant change was found in renal damage markers. Long-term study must be conducted to confirm the protective effect azilsartan on the transplanted kidney, as found with candesartan. The safety of azilsartan was demonstrated. If the transplanted kidney protection is demonstrated, this drug is expected to contribute to the improved long-term prognosis of renal transplant recipients.

Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Creatinine; Female; Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Male; Oxadiazoles; Tetrazoles

The angiotensin II type 1 (AT(1)) receptor blocker (ARB) candesartan strongly reduces blood pressure (BP) in patients with hypertension and has been shown to have cardioprotective effects. A new ARB, azilsartan, was recently approved and has been shown to provide a more potent 24-h sustained antihypertensive effect than candesartan. However, the molecular interactions of azilsartan with the AT(1) receptor that could explain its strong BP-lowering activity are not yet clear. To address this issue, we examined the binding affinities of ARBs for the AT(1) receptor and their inverse agonist activity toward the production of inositol phosphate (IP), and we constructed docking models for the interactions between ARBs and the receptor. Azilsartan, unlike candesartan, has a unique moiety, a 5-oxo-1,2,4-oxadiazole, in place of a tetrazole ring. Although the results regarding the binding affinities of azilsartan and candesartan demonstrated that these ARBs interact with the same sites in the AT(1) receptor (Tyr(113), Lys(199) and Gln(257)), the hydrogen bonding between the oxadiazole of azilsartan-Gln(257) is stronger than that between the tetrazole of candesartan-Gln(257), according to molecular docking models. An examination of the inhibition of IP production by ARBs using constitutively active mutant receptors indicated that inverse agonist activity required azilsartan-Gln(257) interaction and that azilsartan had a stronger interaction with Gln(257) than candesartan. Thus, we speculate that azilsartan has a unique binding behavior to the AT(1) receptor due to its 5-oxo-1,2,4-oxadiazole moiety and induces stronger inverse agonism. This property of azilsartan may underlie its previously demonstrated superior BP-lowering efficacy compared with candesartan and other ARBs.

Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Animals; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Chlorocebus aethiops; COS Cells; Humans; Inositol Phosphates; Oxadiazoles; Protein Binding; Receptor, Angiotensin, Type 1; Tetrazoles

Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Animals; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Humans; Oxadiazoles; Receptor, Angiotensin, Type 1; Tetrazoles

The effects of a new AT(1) receptor blocker (ARB), TAK-536, on insulin resistance were explored using type 2 diabetic KK-A(y) mice and compared with those of candesartan cilexetil (candesartan).. Male KK-A(y) mice were treated with TAK-536 or candesartan at doses of 0.0005%, 0.001%, and 0.005% in laboratory chow for 2 weeks. Results of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and tissue glucose uptake were examined. Expression of markers for insulin resistance and adipocyte differentiation was measured by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.. Both TAK-536 and candesartan suppressed the increase in plasma glucose level in the OGTT without significant change in insulin concentration and improved insulin sensitivity. Both ARBs also increased tissue glucose uptake, especially in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue. These effects of TAK-536 on glucose intolerance were stronger than those of candesartan. In skeletal muscle, TAK-536 but not candesartan decreased the expression of TNF-alpha at doses of 0.001%. In adipose tissue, TAK-536 and candesartan reduced TNF-alpha expression but increased the expression of adiponectin, PPARgamma, C/EBalpha, and aP2. The effects of TAK-536 on these parameters were also greater than those of candesartan. Adipose tissue weight and cell size were decreased by TAK-536 at 0.005%.. These results indicate the greater beneficial effects of TAK-536 in improving glucose intolerance, insulin sensitivity, and induction of adipocyte differentiation, and suggest that TAK-536 is advantageous as a new ARB for treatment of metabolic syndrome.

Topics: Adipocytes; Adipose Tissue; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Animals; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Body Weight; Cell Differentiation; Cell Size; Eating; Glucose; Glucose Intolerance; Insulin Resistance; Male; Mice; Muscle, Skeletal; Oxadiazoles; Tetrazoles; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha