(Circulation. 2001;103:226.)
© 2001 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
From the Centre for Cardiovascular Genetics (S.G.M., H.E.M., S.E.H.), University College London, London, UK; Royal Defence Medical College (M.W., M.J., M.J.W.), Gosport, Hampshire, UK; and the Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Unit (D.J.P.), Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
Correspondence to Dr Hugh Montgomery, UCL Cardiovascular Genetics, Rayne Institute, 5 University St, London WC1E, UK. E-mail h.montgomery{at}ucl.ac.uk
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and ResultsOne hundred forty-one British Army recruits homozygous for the ACE gene (79 DD and 62 II) were randomized to receive losartan (25 mg/d, a subhypotensive dose inhibiting tissue AT1 receptors) or placebo throughout a 10-week physical training program. LV mass, determined by cardiac magnetic resonance, increased with training (8.4 g, P<0.0001 overall; 12.1 versus 4.8 g for DD versus II genotype in the placebo limb, P=0.022). LV growth was similar in the losartan arm: 11.0 versus 3.7 g for DD versus II genotypes (P=0.034). When indexed to lean body mass, LV growth in the II subjects was abolished, whereas it remained in the DD subjects (-0.022 versus 0.131 g/kg, respectively; P=0.0009).
ConclusionsACE genotype dependence of exercise-induced LV hypertrophy is confirmed. Additionally, LV growth in DD (unlike II) subjects is in excess of the increase in lean body mass. These effects are not influenced by AT1 receptor antagonism with the use of losartan (25 mg/d). The 2.4-fold greater LV growth in DD men may be due to the effects of angiotensin II on other receptors (eg, angiotensin type 4) or lower degradation of growth-inhibitory kinins.
Key Words: hypertrophy myocardium genetics angiotensin exercise
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We sought to confirm ACE genotypeassociated exertional LV growth and to clarify the role of the AT1 receptor in this association.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Magnetic Resonance Scanning
As previously
described,11 10-mm ECG-gated
short-axis cardiac images (single breath holding, 0.5 T;
Figure 1
) were obtained, and LV mass was determined by
multiplying myocardial tissue volume (Simpsons rule, single observer
blind to subject data) by myocardial tissuespecific density (1.05
g/cm3). Chamber volumes were calculated by
summing end-diastolic and end-systolic endocardial areas in each
slice.
|
In addition, forty 10-mm-thick noncontiguous transaxial signal-averaged spin-echo image slices of the whole body (echo time 40 ms, repetition time 500 ms, field of view 45x45 cm, and 40-mm intergap distance) were obtained,12 adipose tissue volume was quantified (automated threshold technique, ie, averaging adjacent slice values by the Cavalieri method12 13 ), fat mass was obtained through multiplication by fat-specific density (0.95 g/m2), and lean body mass was calculated by subtracting adipose tissue mass from total body mass.
Statistical Calculations
The standard deviation of cardiac magnetic resonance
(CMR) LV mass measurements in pilot studies was 8.9 g. Thus, 30
subjects in each group (II and DD, placebo or losartan) yielded 95%
power to detect a 5% change in LV mass (8.35 g given past
data6 ) with 95% confidence
Figure 2
.
|
Data were analyzed for those who completed training at the first attempt. Baseline and follow-up values were compared by the paired Student t test, and between-group changes were compared by unpaired t tests and ANOVA (Statview 5.0, SAS Institute). A value of P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results are shown as mean±1 SD, unless otherwise stated.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
The increase in LV mass associated with training (mean±SE
8.4±1.2 g overall, P<0.0001;
8.8±1.6 g, P<0.0001 in those
taking placebo;
Table 2
) was lower among those of the II genotype (4.3±1.8
g, P=0.020 overall; 4.8±2.4 g,
P=0.057 in the placebo group)
than of the DD genotype (11.6±1.5 g,
P<0.0001 overall; 12.1±2.0 g,
P<0.0001 for placebo;
P=0.002 and
P=0.022 for comparison with
those of II genotype, respectively). Losartan had no effect on LV mass
increase: for DD genotype, 11.0±2.1 g; for II genotype, 3.7±2.7 g
(P=0.69 and
P=0.75, respectively, compared
with placebo in each genotype group).
|
The ratio of LV mass to lean body mass14 was calculated in a subset of recruits (n=117, 52 II and 65 DD). Baseline values were similar in all groups (3.11±0.35 g/kg lean body mass, P=0.16) and were increased with training by 0.063±0.023 g/kg (2.4%, P=0.008) and 0.057±0.033 g/kg (2.1%, P=0.09) in the treatment and placebo arms, respectively. The modest LV growth in II subjects was completely attenuated when indexed to lean mass (-0.022±0.034 g/kg [-0.4%], P=0.52 overall; -0.029±0.047 g/kg [-0.5%], P=0.55 for placebo) but remained for DD subjects (0.131±0.029 g/kg [4.6%], P<0.0001 overall; 0.143±0.042 g/kg [4.7%], P=0.002 for placebo); P values were 0.0009 and 0.009 for comparison with those of the II genotype, respectively. Losartan had no effect on the change in LV mass index within either genotype (DD 0.120±0.041 g/kg; II -0.011±0.048 g/kg; P=0.70 and 0.81, respectively, compared with placebo).
Overall, because recruit LV end-diastolic volume rose with
little change in end-systolic volume, stroke volume increased (LV
end-diastolic volume 108.2±24.7 to 114.7±26.5 mL,
P=0.0004; LV end-systolic
volume 34.2±10.3 to 35.9±11.0 mL,
P=0.030; and LV stroke volume
73.9±16.9 to 78.8±19.0 mL,
P=0.0005;
Table 3
). Because of a fall in resting pulse rate, cardiac
output was unchanged (4.78±1.33 versus 4.99±1.23 L/min for baseline
versus follow-up, respectively;
P=0.72). Right ventricular
volumes showed the same pattern (RV end-diastolic volume 130.6±25.5 to
139.5±28.2 mL, P<0.0001; RV
end-systolic volume 57.1±14.4 to 60.9±15.0 mL,
P=0.0004; and RV stroke volume
73.6±16.0 to 78.5±17.5 mL,
P<0.0001). Neither genotype
nor treatment group influenced volume parameters, although there was a
nonsignificant trend for losartan to attenuate volume
increases.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
These findings were independent of 25 mg/d losartan, a dose chosen for sustained biological,15 yet minimal hypotensive, effect. Such doses inhibit the pressor response to angiotensin II,16 17 18 are uricosuric, and alter plasma renin activity.19 20 21 The minor hypotensive effects seen in hypertensive patients22 are probably absent in normal subjects23 24 25 and minimal even at doses of 100 mg/d.22 26 27 Any hypotensive action would have tended toward a false-positive effect on LV growth, which was not observed in any event. Nonetheless, a small biological effect of losartan on the LV growth response was missed. Post hoc analysis demonstrates an 80% power to detect a 2.6% reduction in LV growth by losartan and a 95% power to detect a change of 4.8%. However, the nearly 3-fold difference in growth effect between genotypes was scarcely affected by losartan treatment. In keeping with rodent data,28 29 30 the present study does not support a nonpressor influence of the AT1 receptor on cardiac growth. ACE genotype might thus influence LV growth through increased levels of angiotensin II on the angiotensin type 4 receptor (the angiotensin type 2 receptor may modulate antiproliferative effects31 ) or through the reduced levels of growth-inhibitory kinins, which are degraded by ACE.32
Our previous study6
showed a greater hypertrophic response for DD subjects than was
observed in the present study (42 versus 12.1 g). However,
echocardiographic methodology uses cardiac dimensions and an assumed
geometric shape to calculate LV
mass33 34 through
equations derived from postmortem examinations of individuals of
diverse age and LV mass range (age 23 to 82 years, LV mass 96 to
625 g).33 35
Such a "best-fit" model for a mixed population cannot be expected
to be applicable to a study of young recruits. Neither were the
equations designed to assess individual alterations in LV mass in
response to hypertrophic stimuli. Furthermore, exercise produces very
specific LV morphological changes that may distort calculated LV mass.
Such distortions (and any errors in measurement) will be cubed during
calculation of LV mass. Thus, compared with CMR, M-mode echo
overestimates LV mass (and hence, the prospective change in
mass).36 Finally, repeated
echocardiographic mass measurements have poorer reproducibility than do
CMR measurements (standard deviation of the difference between
successive CMR LV mass estimates being
20% that of
echo36 ), and repeated
measures may thus overamplify detected
changes.36 37 Thus,
although echocardiographic measures of mass may have their place, it
may be less applicable to serial prospective studies of LV growth in
small samples. By contrast, CMR measures mass directly, removing any
error associated with volume changes or ventricular shape.
Training intensity (specifically, resistance exercise) was reduced after the first study. Cardiac growth responses are influenced by exercise intensity and type, leading to large variations in LV mass in those participating in different sports and with different prospective training schemes.38 39 40 Even modest training changes (such as the addition of handgrip exercises to running) may alter cardiac growth stimuli or responses.41 Given the substantial ACE genotypetraining environment interaction, it is likely that changes in the training stimulus will interact with genotype to produce differences in the nature and scale of the phenotypic response.
Proposed ACE genotype dependence of LV growth conflicts with some cross-sectional studies. However, the cardiac renin-angiotensin system probably transduces growth stimuli and is not a cause of LV hypertrophy in itself. Diverse environmental hypertrophic stimuli may create sufficient "white noise" to mask modest individual-effect gene-environment interactions in cross-sectional studies.42
Limitations of the Study
A higher dose of losartan might have influenced LV
growth whether through a hypotensive effect or
not.43 Furthermore, we
studied no heterozygous group, because our aim was to confirm an ACE
genotype association with LV growth and to explore the potential role
of the AT1 receptor in such genotype dependence.
We specifically did not set out to explore the potential additive or
synergistic effects of the presence of
1 allele, an investigation
that was beyond the scope of the present
study.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received July 20, 2000; revision received August 21, 2000; accepted August 23, 2000.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J R Payne, K I Eleftheriou, L E James, E Hawe, J Mann, A Stronge, P Kotwinski, M World, S E Humphries, D J Pennell, et al. Left ventricular growth response to exercise and cigarette smoking: data from LARGE Heart Heart, December 1, 2006; 92(12): 1784 - 1788. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. B. Kritchevsky, B. J. Nicklas, M. Visser, E. M. Simonsick, A. B. Newman, T. B. Harris, E. M. Lange, B. W. Penninx, B. H. Goodpaster, S. Satterfield, et al. Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Insertion/Deletion Genotype, Exercise, and Physical Decline JAMA, August 10, 2005; 294(6): 691 - 698. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. K. Arnett, B. R. Davis, C. E. Ford, E. Boerwinkle, C. Leiendecker-Foster, M. B. Miller, H. Black, and J. H. Eckfeldt Pharmacogenetic Association of the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Insertion/Deletion Polymorphism on Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Risk in Relation to Antihypertensive Treatment: The Genetics of Hypertension-Associated Treatment (GenHAT) Study Circulation, June 28, 2005; 111(25): 3374 - 3383. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. J. Pennell, U. P. Sechtem, C. B. Higgins, W. J. Manning, G. M. Pohost, F. E. Rademakers, A. C. van Rossum, L. J. Shaw, and E. K. Yucel Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report Eur. Heart J., November 1, 2004; 25(21): 1940 - 1965. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Alfakih, A. Maqbool, M. Sivananthan, K. Walters, G. Bainbridge, J. Ridgway, A. J. Balmforth, and A. S. Hall Left Ventricle Mass Index and the Common, Functional, X-Linked Angiotensin II Type-2 Receptor Gene Polymorphism (-1332 G/A) in Patients With Systemic Hypertension Hypertension, June 1, 2004; 43(6): 1189 - 1194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Hernandez, A. de la Rosa, A. Barragan, Y. Barrios, E. Salido, A. Torres, B. Martin, I. Laynez, A. Duque, A. De Vera, et al. The ACE/DD genotype is associated with the extent of exercise-induced left ventricular growth in endurance athletes J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 6, 2003; 42(3): 527 - 532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.A. McCrohon, J.C.C. Moon, S.K. Prasad, W.J. McKenna, C.H. Lorenz, A.J.S. Coats, and D.J. Pennell Differentiation of Heart Failure Related to Dilated Cardiomyopathy and Coronary Artery Disease Using Gadolinium-Enhanced Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Circulation, July 8, 2003; 108(1): 54 - 59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. G. Nabel Cardiovascular Disease N. Engl. J. Med., July 3, 2003; 349(1): 60 - 72. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. de Simone, R. B. Devereux, S. G. Myerson, and D. J. Pennell What Is Bright Is Not Always Gold * Response: What Is Old Is Not Always Best Hypertension, June 1, 2003; e10(6): . [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. G. Myerson, H. E. Montgomery, M. J. World, and D. J. Pennell Left Ventricular Mass: Reliability of M-Mode and 2-Dimensional Echocardiographic Formulas Hypertension, November 1, 2002; 40(5): 673 - 678. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. G. Williams, S. H. Day, S. Dhamrait ;, and R. M. Fuentes ACE gene, physical activity, and physical fitness J Appl Physiol, October 1, 2002; 93(4): 1561 - 1562. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. P. Kelly Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {alpha} as a Genetic Determinant of Cardiac Hypertrophic Growth: Culprit or Innocent Bystander? Circulation, March 5, 2002; 105(9): 1025 - 1027. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. G. Myerson, N. G. Bellenger, and D. J. Pennell Assessment of Left Ventricular Mass by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Hypertension, March 1, 2002; 39(3): 750 - 755. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Jamshidi, H. E. Montgomery, H.-W. Hense, S. G. Myerson, I. P. Torra, B. Staels, M. J. World, A. Doering, J. Erdmann, C. Hengstenberg, et al. Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {alpha} Gene Regulates Left Ventricular Growth in Response to Exercise and Hypertension Circulation, February 26, 2002; 105(8): 950 - 955. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2001 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |