Why the study?
Does a single oral dose of RHC 3659 inhibit the pressor response to angiotensin I and alter RAAS biomarkers in normal male volunteers?
Does a single oral dose of RHC 3659 inhibit the pressor response to angiotensin I and alter RAAS biomarkers in normal male volunteers?
RHC 3659 demonstrates dose-dependent ACE inhibition in healthy volunteers, though in vitro instability may underestimate its potency.
Signals potential for a new oral ACE inhibitor; leaves open efficacy and safety in patients.
1 The new converting enzyme inhibitor RHC 3659 was tested in 15 male volunteers. The study consisted of two parts: first, the ability of a single oral dose (5, 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg) to inhibit the pressor response to exogenous angiotensin I was tested with blood pressure and heart rate monitored continuously through an intraarterial catheter. A dose-related shift to the right of the pressor response curve to angiotensin I was observed with a peak occurring within 0.5 to 1 h. The pressor response to angiotensin II was unaffected. 2 In the second part, plasma renin and converting enzyme activity, angiotensin II and aldosterone were measured serially before and up to 8 h after administration of a single oral dose of RHC 3659. As expected. plasma angiotensin II and aldosterone fell within 30 min while plasma renin activity increased. Plasma converting enzyme activity was suppressed at 0.5 h in a dose-related manner with levels still below 30% of control 4 h following 80 mg of the inhibitor. 3 However, in vitro the enzyme-inhibitor complex seemed quited fragile since during storage of the plasma samples at -20 degrees C, converting enzyme activity increased significantly already within days (P less than 0.001, n = 28) and continued to rise for more than 2 months. This fragility may explain the seemingly lower potency of RHC 3659 when compared to captopril. No side effects were observed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burnier et al. (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: