(Circulation. 2000;101:2922.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
From the Cardiomyopathy Program and Cardiovascular Section, Boston University Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Mass (M.M.G., W.S.C.); Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY (T.H.L.); University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (S.S.G.); Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Md (J.M.H.); Boston VA Medical Center, Boston, Mass (M.T.S.); Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio (C.V.L.); University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (E.L.); University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (J.M.N.); and Loyola University, Maywood, Ill (B.E.L.).
Correspondence to Wilson S. Colucci, MD, Cardiovascular Section, Boston University Medical Center, 88 E Newton St, Boston, MA 02118. E-mail wilson.colucci{at}bmc.org
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and ResultsThis multicenter, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial enrolled 48 patients with chronic New York
Heart Association functional class III or IV heart failure (mean left
ventricular ejection fraction 21±1%) treated with
ACE inhibitors and diuretics. Patients with
a baseline pulmonary capillary wedge pressure
15 mm Hg
and a cardiac index
2.5 L · min-1 ·
m-2 were randomized to 1 of 3 doses (1.5, 3.0, or 6.0
mg/kg) of sitaxsentan or placebo as an intravenous infusion
over 15 minutes. Hemodynamic responses were assessed by
catheterization of the right side of the heart for 6
hours. Sitaxsentan decreased pulmonary artery systolic
pressure, pulmonary vascular resistance, mean pulmonary
artery pressure, and right atrial pressure (P
0.001,
0.003, 0.017, and 0.031, respectively) but had no effect on heart rate,
mean arterial pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge
pressure, cardiac index, or systemic vascular resistance. Plasma ET-1
levels were elevated at baseline and decreased with sitaxsentan.
ConclusionsIn patients with moderate to severe heart failure receiving conventional therapy, acute ETA receptor blockade caused selective pulmonary vasodilation associated with a reduction in plasma ET-1. Sitaxsentan may be of value in the treatment of patients with pulmonary hypertension secondary to chronic heart failure.
Key Words: endothelin heart failure hemodynamics
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Understanding of the actions of ET-1 in heart failure has been aided by the development of ET receptor antagonists. Acute intravenous8 and short-term oral9 administration of bosentan, a nonselective (ETA/ETB) receptor antagonist, caused systemic and pulmonary vasodilation in patients with severe heart failure. Because ETB receptors are coupled to endothelium-dependent vasodilation, it might be anticipated that ETA-selective antagonists would be more effective vasodilators than nonselective antagonists. However, there has been relatively little experience with ETA-selective antagonists in patients with heart failure, save for a small, uncontrolled study of the intravenous administration of the ETA-selective antagonist BQ-123.10
Sitaxsentan is a nonpeptide, small organic molecule that binds competitively to the human ETA receptor with high affinity (KI=0.43 nmol/L). Sitaxsentan is 6000-fold more selective for the human ETA receptor than for the human ETB receptor.11 Preclinical studies have shown that sitaxsentan exerts potent vasodilator effects. In rats with hypoxia-induced pulmonary hypertension, sitaxsentan attenuated the increase in pulmonary artery pressure but had no effect on heart rate (HR) or mean arterial pressure (MAP) (Tommy Brock, PhD, unpublished data, 1997). These preliminary data suggest that sitaxsentan may exert a specific action on the pulmonary circulation. We undertook a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study with sitaxsentan to determine the acute hemodynamic effects of ETA receptor blockade in patients with stable chronic heart failure.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
21 years,
with chronic New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV heart
failure and an LV ejection fraction
35%. All patients were receiving
a diuretic and ACE inhibitor (or had failed
attempts to start an ACE inhibitor). Digoxin, amlodipine or
nifedipine, and metoprolol or carvedilol were allowed. All
patients had a baseline pulmonary capillary wedge pressure
(PCWP)
15 mm Hg and a cardiac index (CI)
2.5 L ·
min-1 · m-2.
Exclusion criteria included myocardial infarction within 8 weeks;
unstable angina or angina-limited exercise; heart failure due to
uncorrected valvular stenosis, obstructive
cardiomyopathy, pericardial disease, amyloidosis,
active myocarditis, or a malfunctioning artificial heart valve;
symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
or asthma; history of symptomatic ventricular
tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or
sudden death unless treated with an implantable defibrillator; history
of second- or third-degree A-V block unless treated with a pacemaker;
HR >115 bpm; and systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg or
>200 mm Hg. The study protocol was approved by the institutional
review committee at each study site, and all patients provided written
informed consent.
Randomization and Blinding
A single computer-generated randomization code was used for all
sites and was coordinated by an independent randomization center. The
first 24 patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 3 treatment
groups: sitaxsentan 1.5 mg/kg (dose level 1), sitaxsentan 3.0 mg/kg
(dose level 2), or placebo (5% dextrose in water). Based on the safety
results of the first 24 subjects enrolled and an interim
analysis of the pharmacodynamic effects of the 1.5 and 3.0
mg/kg doses, the protocol was amended to eliminate dose level 1 and add
a third dose of sitaxsentan (6.0 mg/kg; dose level 3). The subsequent
24 patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to: sitaxsentan 3.0 mg/kg,
sitaxsentan 6.0 mg/kg, or placebo. Study drug was prepared by a
research pharmacist and infused in a blinded fashion over 15 minutes
into a peripheral vein by site personnel who were not
associated with the subjects clinical management.
Hemodynamic Measurements
After insertion of a Swan-Ganz catheter and after
1 hour of
stabilization, 2 sets of baseline hemodynamic
measurements were obtained. When CI and PCWP values differing by <15%
were obtained on subsequent measurements, the study drug was infused
over 15 minutes, and the following hemodynamic
measurements were obtained at 15 and 30 minutes and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and
6 hours after completion of drug infusion: HR, systemic
arterial pressure (systolic and
diastolic), pulmonary arterial pressure
(mean systolic and diastolic), PCWP, cardiac output
(by thermodilution or Fick method), and mean right atrial pressure
(RAP). Mean systemic arterial pressure, systemic vascular
resistance (SVR), PVR, CI, and LV stroke work index were derived
according to standard formulas.
Concomitant Medications
All medications with possible hemodynamic
effects, including vasodilators, ACE inhibitors,
ß-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, digoxin, and
antiarrhythmics, were withheld beginning at midnight on the day of the
study and throughout the 6-hour blinded evaluation period. Sitaxsentan
sodium (Texas Biotechnology Corporation) was supplied as 250 mg of a
sterile, yellow lyophilized cake in a clear 20-mL vial. Sitaxsentan was
reconstituted with 10 or 20 mL of sterile water to yield a final
concentration of 25 or 12.5 mg/mL, respectively, and the infusion dose
was calculated based on the patients weight and randomized dose
level. Patients were limited to light liquid meals no less than 1 hour
before baseline measurements and after hemodynamic
readings were obtained at hour 4.
Laboratory Analyses
Blood was obtained for general chemistry, complete blood count
with differential, and international normalized ratio (INR) at baseline
and after completion of the study. Plasma ET-1,
norepinephrine, and tumor necrosis factor-
(TNF-
)
levels were determined from blood drawn at baseline and at 3 and
6 hours after study-drug infusion. ET-1 levels were measured by
radioimmunoassay with a commercial kit (Phoenix Pharmaceuticals).
TNF-
levels were measured by ELISA with a commercial kit (R&D
Systems). Norepinephrine levels were measured by
high-performance liquid chromatography with
electrochemical detection.
Statistical Analysis
To determine the comparability of the 4 treatment groups for
demographic and baseline variables, categorical variables were
analyzed via Fishers exact test and continuous variables
by 1-way ANOVA with effects for treatment. Primary efficacy
analyses were performed on all enrolled patients according to
intention to treat, and missing data were replaced by the
last-observation-carried-forward principle. For each time point,
differences among the treatment groups in mean change from baseline
were determined via 1-way ANOVA with effects for treatment. In
addition, a repeated-measures model was used on the changes from
baseline to determine the effects of treatment, time, and the
interaction of treatment and time. Safety was assessed by comparing the
treatments with respect to the occurrence of adverse experiences and
the changes from baseline in laboratory values and ECG measurements.
All analyses were performed with the SAS statistical package
(SAS Institute), and data are presented as mean±SEM, with a
value of P<0.05 considered statistically significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Hemodynamic Effects of Sitaxsentan
The hemodynamic effects of sitaxsentan are shown
in Table 2![]()
. Table 3
summarizes the overall treatment effect
of sitaxsentan on hemodynamic parameters as
analyzed by intention to treat across all doses (versus
placebo). Compared with placebo, sitaxsentan caused significant
reductions in PASP, PVR, mean pulmonary artery pressure (MPAP),
and RAP (P
0.001, 0.003, 0.017, and 0.031, respectively)
(Figure 1
).
|
|
|
|
The decrease in PASP was significant by 30 minutes, maximal at 2 to 3
hours, and persisted for
6 hours after the infusion (Figure 1A
). The decrease in PASP was similar at all 3 doses tested. At
2 hours, PASP decreased by 13%, 10%, and 11% in the sitaxsentan
1.5-, 3.0-, and 6.0-mg/kg groups, respectively, and increased by 4% in
the placebo group. Likewise, at 2 hours, PVR decreased by 38%, 34%,
and 20% in the sitaxsentan 1.5-, 3.0-, and 6.0-mg/kg groups,
respectively, and increased by 20% in the placebo group (Figure 1B
). In patients receiving sitaxsentan, baseline PVR predicted
the magnitude of the decrease in PVR at 2 hours (Figure 2
). At 2 hours, RAP decreased by 13%,
23%, and 17% in the sitaxsentan 1.5-, 3.0-, and 6.0-mg/kg groups,
respectively, and increased by 11% in the placebo group.
|
In contrast to the effects on pulmonary and right-heart
hemodynamics, sitaxsentan exerted no discernible effect
on HR, MAP, PCWP, or SVR (Tables 2
and 3
). There were
weak trends for CI to increase (P=0.202) and MAP to decrease
(P=0.258).
Plasma ET-1, Norepinephrine, and TNF-
Levels
In the study population as a whole, baseline ET-1 levels were
markedly elevated, with a mean value of 15.4±1.5 pg/mL. There were no
between-group differences. Baseline ET-1 levels did not correlate with
baseline PVR (r=0.05, P=0.75) or the reduction in
PVR (2 hours) with sitaxsentan (r=0.26, P=0.19).
Of note, plasma ET-1 levels decreased by 18±8% and 21±8% at 3 and 6
hours, respectively, in patients receiving sitaxsentan but did not
change in the placebo group (Figure 3
).
Plasma norepinephrine (680±49 pg/mL) and TNF-
(3.3±0.3
pg/mL) levels were elevated at baseline but did not change in any of
the treatment groups (data not shown).
|
Adverse Effects
Overall, 46% of all patients experienced an adverse event (Table 4
). However, except for an increase in
the frequency of gastrointestinal events reported with sitaxsentan (2
in the 6.0-mg/kg dose group; P=0.05), there were no
significant differences among treatment groups with respect to adverse
events, including congestive heart failure, hypotension,
bradycardia, and ventricular arrhythmias.
Sitaxsentan had no effect on the complete blood count, serum blood urea
nitrogen or creatinine, liver-function tests, or INR over
the 6-hour study period.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
6 hours after drug infusion, and was maximal at the
lowest dose tested. Of note, the hemodynamic effect of
sitaxsentan was associated with a decrease in plasma ET-1 levels. This pattern of hemodynamic effect appears to differ from that observed with acute administration of the nonselective ETA/ETB receptor antagonist bosentan. Kiowksi et al8 randomized 24 patients with NYHA class III heart failure to receive bosentan or placebo by intravenous infusion. Bosentan decreased MAP, MPAP, PCWP, PVR, and SVR and increased CI. Similar hemodynamic effects were seen after 2 weeks of oral bosentan therapy.9 Cowburn et al10 infused the ETA-selective antagonist BQ-123 for 60 minutes in 8 patients with stable chronic heart failure. In that uncontrolled study, BQ-123 caused modest decreases in SVR (12%) and PVR (14%), and a small increase in CI.
It is possible that the differing hemodynamic effects of sitaxsentan and bosentan reflect their differences in receptor selectivity. It is also possible that they are due to an inherent difference in the study populations or protocols. Regardless of the reason, it can be concluded that under the conditions of the present study, acute infusion of sitaxsentan exerted a selective pulmonary vasodilator effect. Such an action is consistent with the demonstration that ET-1 causes concentration-dependent contraction of pulmonary arteries and veins in vitro12 and increases PVR in vivo.13 Both of these actions are mediated predominantly by the ETA receptor.14 Stimulation of ETB receptors in the pulmonary vasculature generally attenuates ETA-mediated vasoconstriction,15 although pulmonary vasoconstrictor effects have also been reported.16
The extent to which sitaxsentan decreased PVR was strongly correlated
with the baseline PVR. This observation may explain the lack of a
significant pulmonary vasodilator effect with BQ-123, because
in the study by Cowburn et al,10 patients had only mild
pulmonary hypertension with a mean PVR of
180 dyne ·
s · cm-5. By contrast, our patients had
moderate-to-severe pulmonary hypertension with a mean PVR of
349 dyne · s · cm-5. In patients
with heart failure, inhaled NO also exerts a selective
pulmonary vasodilator action, apparently owing to its route of
administration.17 Interestingly, we found that the
pulmonary vasodilator effect of inhaled NO also correlated best
with the baseline PVR.17 However, in contrast to inhaled
NO, sitaxsentan did not cause an increase in PCWP.
It is surprising that sitaxsentan did not decrease SVR. Infusion of another ETA-selective antagonist, BQ-123, into the brachial artery of patients with heart failure caused vasodilation.18 Although it is possible that higher doses of sitaxsentan would have decreased SVR, the pulmonary vasodilator effects that we observed appeared to be maximal at the lowest dose tested and, if anything, may have diminished at higher doses. One possible explanation for these findings is that a component of the elevated SVR in patients with heart failure is due to vasoconstrictor ETB receptors located on systemic resistance vessels. In support of this thesis, the intra-arterial infusion of sarafotoxin S6c, an ETB receptor agonist, causes an enhanced vasoconstrictor response in patients with heart failure.18 Likewise, intravenous infusion of the selective ETB receptor agonist ET-3 resulted in constriction of systemic but not pulmonary vasculature in patients with LV failure.19 An enhanced vasoconstrictor response to ETB stimulation in heart failure might reflect desensitization of ETA receptors in the systemic vasculature.20
Despite a reduction in PVR, sitaxsentan did not significantly increase CI. There are several possible explanations. As mentioned, we did not observe a decrease in SVR, and in the absence of a positive inotropic effect, sitaxsentan would not be expected to increase CI. Second, we did not observe an increase in LV preload. Indeed, even if PCWP had increased with sitaxsentan, we might not have observed an increase in CI with selective pulmonary vasodilation. In a prior study using the selective pulmonary vasodilator inhaled NO, we demonstrated small but significant decreases in CI and stroke volume index associated with a 23% increase in PCWP.17 Another potential explanation for the lack of increase in CI is that sitaxsentan exerted a negative inotropic effect. ETA receptors are expressed in human myocardium21 and mediate the positive inotropic effect of ET-1.22
Consistent with previous reports,1 we found increased plasma ET-1 levels in patients with moderate-to-severe heart failure. However, baseline ET-1 levels did not correlate with pulmonary artery pressures or PVR, or with the change in PVR after ETA blockade. In prior studies8 9 with the nonselective ET receptor antagonist bosentan, ET-1 levels increased within 2 to 3 hours of administration. The increase in plasma ET-1 with bosentan is thought to be due to displacement of ET-1 from receptor binding sites and/or decreased clearance by ETB receptors.7 In striking contrast, sitaxsentan caused a decrease in ET-1 levels. The mechanism for this decrease in plasma ET-1 is not clear. Given the important role of the pulmonary vasculature in contributing ET-1 to the systemic circulation, it is possible that it reflects reduced ET-1 pulmonary vascular production due to improved pulmonary hemodynamics. Another possibility is that selective antagonism of the ETA receptor allows more ET-1 to be available for clearance via the ETB receptor.
An important pathophysiological implication
of these findings is that reactive pulmonary hypertension in
patients with heart failure is mediated, at least in part, by
ETA receptors. The ratio of
ETA to ETB receptors on
human resistance and conduit pulmonary arteries is
10:1.23 In animal models of pulmonary
hypertension, ETA receptors mediate
vasoconstriction and smooth muscle cell proliferation.24
ETB receptors found primarily on vascular
endothelial cells exert opposing actions with regard to
both vascular tone5 and
hypertrophy.25 Thus, selective antagonism of
the ETA receptor would be expected to cause
pulmonary vasodilation, whereas nonselective
ETA/ETB blockade might lead
to less vasodilation.
A clinical implication of these findings is that ETA-selective blockade may be of particular value in patients with reactive pulmonary hypertension in the setting of heart failure. The apparent relative lack of systemic vasodilation would not support a primary role for sitaxsentan for the purpose of LV afterload reduction. However, there is evidence from animal studies that ET-1 antagonists may reduce LV remodeling.26 Because this antiremodeling action may be mediated directly at the myocardial level,27 the relative lack of systemic vasodilation with sitaxsentan may be of little consequence in terms of its long-term cardioprotective benefits and might actually facilitate its use as an adjunctive agent in patients with already low SVR due to vasodilator or ACE inhibitor therapy.
| Footnotes |
|---|
1 See Appendix for a complete list of the study investigators. ![]()
| Appendix 1 |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Received August 20, 1999; revision received December 15, 1999; accepted February 1, 2000.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B. J Epstein Efficacy and Safety of Darusentan: A Novel Endothelin Receptor Antagonist Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2008; 42(7): 1060 - 1069. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. F. Opitz, R. Ewert, W. Kirch, and D. Pittrow Inhibition of endothelin receptors in the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension: does selectivity matter? Eur. Heart J., June 17, 2008; (2008) ehn234v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Battistini, N. Berthiaume, N. F. Kelland, D. J. Webb, and D. E. Kohan Profile of Past and Current Clinical Trials Involving Endothelin Receptor Antagonists: The Novel "-Sentan" Class of Drug. Experimental Biology and Medicine, June 1, 2006; 231(6): 653 - 695. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. F. Kelland and D. J. Webb Clinical Trials of Endothelin Antagonists in Heart Failure: A Question of Dose? Experimental Biology and Medicine, June 1, 2006; 231(6): 696 - 699. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Jesmin, S. Zaedi, S. Maeda, H. Togashi, I. Yamaguchi, K. Goto, and T. Miyauchi Endothelin Antagonism Suppresses Plasma and Cardiac Endothelin-1 Levels in SHRSPs at the Typical Hypertensive Stage. Experimental Biology and Medicine, June 1, 2006; 231(6): 919 - 924. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S J Leslie, J C S Spratt, S P McKee, F E Strachan, D E Newby, D B Northridge, M A Denvir, and D J Webb Direct comparison of selective endothelin A and non-selective endothelin A/B receptor blockade in chronic heart failure Heart, July 1, 2005; 91(7): 914 - 919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Lepore, A. Maroo, L. M. Bigatello, G. W. Dec, W. M. Zapol, K. D. Bloch, and M. J. Semigran Hemodynamic Effects of Sildenafil in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Hypertension: Combined Administration With Inhaled Nitric Oxide Chest, May 1, 2005; 127(5): 1647 - 1653. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Okajima, R. Parent, E. Thorin, and M. Lavallee Pathophysiological plasma ET-1 levels antagonize {beta}-adrenergic dilation of coronary resistance vessels in conscious dogs Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, October 1, 2004; 287(4): H1476 - H1483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D B McKenzie and A J Cowley Drug therapy in chronic heart failure Postgrad. Med. J., November 1, 2003; 79(937): 634 - 642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S C Apostolopoulou, S Rammos, Z S Kyriakides, D J Webb, N R Johnston, D V Cokkinos, and D T. Kremastinos Acute endothelin A receptor antagonism improves pulmonary and systemic haemodynamics in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension that is primary or autoimmune and related to congenital heart disease Heart, October 1, 2003; 89(10): 1221 - 1226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Torre-Amione, J. B. Young, W. S. Colucci, B. S. Lewis, C. Pratt, G. Cotter, K. Stangl, U. Elkayam, J. R. Teerlink, A. Frey, et al. Hemodynamic and clinical effects of tezosentan, an intravenous dual endothelin receptor antagonist, in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 2, 2003; 42(1): 140 - 147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. W Kenyon and J. M Nappi Bosentan for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2003; 37(7): 1055 - 1062. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. F. Luscher, F. Enseleit, R. Pacher, V. Mitrovic, M. R. Schulze, R. Willenbrock, R. Dietz, V. Rousson, D. Hurlimann, S. Philipp, et al. Hemodynamic and Neurohumoral Effects of Selective Endothelin A (ETA) Receptor Blockade in Chronic Heart Failure: The Heart Failure ETA Receptor Blockade Trial (HEAT) Circulation, November 19, 2002; 106(21): 2666 - 2672. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J J V McMurray Heart failure in 10 years time: focus on pharmacological treatment Heart, October 1, 2002; 88(90002): ii40 - 46. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Ooi, W. S. Colucci, and M. M. Givertz Endothelin Mediates Increased Pulmonary Vascular Tone in Patients With Heart Failure: Demonstration by Direct Intrapulmonary Infusion of Sitaxsentan Circulation, September 24, 2002; 106(13): 1618 - 1621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Ueno, T. Miyauchi, S. Sakai, R. Yamauchi-Kohno, K. Goto, and I. Yamaguchi A combination of oral endothelin-areceptor antagonist and oral prostacyclinanalogue is superior to each drug alone inameliorating pulmonary hypertension in rats J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 3, 2002; 40(1): 175 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. J. Barst, S. Rich, A. Widlitz, E. M. Horn, V. McLaughlin, and J. McFarlin Clinical Efficacy of Sitaxsentan, an Endothelin-A Receptor Antagonist, in Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension* : Open-Label Pilot Study Chest, June 1, 2002; 121(6): 1860 - 1868. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Fraccarollo, J. Bauersachs, M. Kellner, P. Galuppo, and G. Ertl Cardioprotection by long-term ETA receptor blockade and ACE inhibition in rats with congestive heart failure: mono- versus combination therapy Cardiovasc Res, April 1, 2002; 54(1): 85 - 94. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. H.S. Kim and L. J. Rubin Endothelin in Health and Disease: Endothelin Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Pulmonary Artery Hypertension Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, March 1, 2002; 7(1): 9 - 19. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P.J. Cowburn and J.G.F. Cleland Endothelin antagonists for chronic heart failure: do they have a role? Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2001; 22(19): 1772 - 1784. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Eddahibi and S. Adnot Endothelins and pulmonary hypertension, what directions for the near future? Eur. Respir. J., July 1, 2001; 18(1): 1 - 4. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Seed, J. McMurray, M. M. Givertz, W. S. Colucci, T. H. LeJemtel, S. S. Gottlieb, J. M. Hare, M. T. Slawsky, C. V. Leier, E. Loh, et al. Acute Endothelin A Receptor Blockade in Heart Failure Response Circulation, May 8, 2001; 103 (18): e94 - e94. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Acute Endothelin A Receptor Blockade and Heart Failure Journal Watch Cardiology, September 15, 2000; 2000(915): 10 - 10. [Full Text] |
||||
| |||||||||||