This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 110/9/1103    most recent 01.CIR.0000140265.21608.8Ev1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fliser, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fliser, D. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB CHOLESTEROL Medline Plus Health Information High Blood Pressure Statins Vasculitis Related Collections Risk Factors Clinical Studies

(Circulation. 2004;110:1103-1107.)
© 2004 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Articles

Antiinflammatory Effects of Angiotensin II Subtype 1 Receptor Blockade in Hypertensive Patients With Microinflammation

Danilo Fliser, MD; Konrad Buchholz, MD; Hermann Haller, MD, for the EUropean Trial on Olmesartan and Pravastatin in Inflammation and Atherosclerosis (EUTOPIA) Investigators

From the Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Correspondence to Danilo Fliser, MD, Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany. E-mail fliser.danilo{at}mh-hannover.de

Received February 8, 2004; de novo received March 11, 2004; revision received May 13, 2004; accepted May 21, 2004.

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
Background— Experimental studies revealed proinflammatory properties of angiotensin II. We evaluated antiinflammatory effects of the angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor antagonist olmesartan medoxomil alone and in cotherapy with the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor pravastatin in patients with essential hypertension and microinflammation.

Methods and Results— We measured a panel of vascular inflammation markers, including high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and lipid levels during 12 weeks of therapy with olmesartan (n=100) or placebo (n=99) in a prospective double-blind multicenter study. Pravastatin was added to the double-blind therapy at week 6 in both treatment arms. Blood pressure control was achieved with addition of hydrochlorothiazide. Olmesartan treatment had already significantly reduced serum levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (–15.1%; P<0.05), high-sensitivity tumor necrosis factor- (–8.9%; P<0.02), interleukin-6 (–14.0%; P<0.05), and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (–6.5%; P<0.01) after 6 weeks of therapy, whereas placebo treatment (ie, blood pressure reduction) had no major effect on inflammation markers. After 12 weeks of therapy, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (–21.1%; P<0.02), high-sensitivity tumor necrosis factor- (–13.6%; P<0.01), and interleukin-6 (–18.0%; P<0.01) decreased further with olmesartan and pravastatin cotherapy, but treatment with pravastatin alone (ie, cotherapy with placebo) did not significantly alter inflammation markers. In contrast, addition of pravastatin led to a significant (P<0.001) reduction in LDL cholesterol serum concentrations in the olmesartan and placebo treatment groups (–15.1% and –12.1%, respectively).

Conclusions— Angiotensin II receptor blockade significantly reduces vascular microinflammation in patients with essential hypertension by as early as week 6 of therapy. This antiinflammatory action of angiotensin II receptor antagonists may contribute to their beneficial cardiovascular effects.

Key Words: angiotensin • atherosclerosis • cholesterol • hypertension • inflammation

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
Atherosclerosis is now widely accepted as a chronic vascular inflammatory disorder that is present in a variety of conditions such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus.^1–7 A pivotal role in this process is represented by circulating immune cells that attach to the inflamed vessels by interacting with adhesion molecules and chemokines secreted by the activated endothelium. It is possible to quantify blood levels of these molecules as biochemical indicators of vascular inflammation. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) is an acute-phase protein that has emerged as a prognostic tool for cardiovascular risk in patients with atherosclerosis in large-scale prospective studies.^2,7–11 In a recently published study comprising 28 000 women, hsCRP was an even better predictor of cardiovascular events than LDL cholesterol.¹¹ Moreover, in a direct comparison, hsCRP surpassed a panel of inflammation and lipid markers in predicting cardiovascular events.¹² There seems to be even a dose-response effect of CRP on cardiovascular risk; individuals with hsCRP levels between 1 and 3 mg/L are at intermediate risk, and those with levels >3 mg/L are classified as having high cardiovascular risk.^2,9

Results of recently published studies indicated that increased hsCRP serum levels can be lowered by nonpharmacological interventions, eg, weight reduction, as well as pharmacological interventions, eg, use of aspirin and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins).^13–18 In this regard, large controlled studies with angiotensin II (Ang II) subtype 1 receptor antagonists are still lacking, despite the well-known proinflammatory properties of Ang II.^19–21 The present prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study was undertaken to evaluate the antiinflammatory effect of the Ang II subtype 1 receptor antagonist olmesartan medoxomil in patients with essential hypertension and signs of (vascular) microinflammation (ie, hsCRP >3 mg/L). For this purpose, we have measured a panel of inflammation biomarkers, including hsCRP serum levels, before and during 3 months of therapy with olmesartan. Furthermore, we have evaluated the effect of a combination therapy with the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor pravastatin.

	Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
Patients
The present phase IIIb trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study conducted between July 2001 and July 2003 at 26 investigator sites in Germany, Poland, and the Czech Republic. The local ethics committees of all study centers approved the study protocol, and all participants gave written informed consent. Eligible for inclusion were male and female patients >18 years of age with essential hypertension, any diagnosed atherosclerotic disease (eg, coronary or peripheral artery disease), type 2 diabetes mellitus (HbA_1C blood level between 8% and 12%), and/or LDL cholesterol serum concentration between 3.89 and 6.48 mmol/L. Patients had a mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP), ie, phase V Korotkoff sounds of conventional BP measurement, between 95 and 110 mm Hg inclusive at screening (newly diagnosed hypertensives without previous treatment) or at the end of a 2-week taper-off period (patients already receiving antihypertensive treatment) before entry into the placebo run-in phase. In addition, patients must have had an hsCRP serum concentration >3 mg/L and detectable interleukin-6 (IL-6) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) serum levels. Patients’ blood samples at screening were immediately transported to the Medical School Hannover, where these inflammation markers were measured and from which the results were communicated to the study centers within 48 hours.

Exclusion criteria were any type of secondary hypertension; malignant hypertension; renovascular occlusive disease; renal transplant; serum creatinine >150 µmol/L and/or proteinuria >100 mg/dL; any other type of chronic inflammatory disease (eg, rheumatoid arthritis); an acute inflammatory disease and/or an hsCRP serum concentration >20 mg/L; ECG evidence of second- or third-degree atrioventricular block; cardiac arrhythmia requiring therapy; bradycardia (<50 bpm at rest); heart failure; myocardial infarction within 6 months before screening; history or clinical evidence of significant cerebrovascular disease (eg, stroke within the last 2 years); malabsorption syndrome; and a history of any serious underlying disease or condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would have interfered with the conduct of the study (eg, cancer within the last 5 years, psychiatric problems, history of alcohol and/or drug abuse). Furthermore, patients with sitting DBP >110 mm Hg or sitting systolic BP (SBP) >200 mm Hg, patients who had taken any statins within 3 months before screening, and patients with significantly elevated liver enzyme levels were excluded. Finally, patients with known hypersensitivity or contraindication to Ang II subtype 1 receptor antagonists, statins, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), or related drugs were also excluded. Female patients of childbearing potential were enrolled if they had a negative pregnancy test within 48 hours before starting the active treatment period and routinely used adequate contraception before and during the study.

Protocol and Measurements
After a taper-off period of 2 weeks for pretreated patients and an obligatory 2-week placebo run-in phase for all patients, those who were eligible for the trial were randomized to 1 of the 2 treatment groups receiving either 20 mg olmesartan or olmesartan-matching placebo once daily in the morning. For the purpose of consistency, conventional blood pressure measurements with mercury sphygmomanometers and appropriate cuff sizes were performed in all study centers throughout the study. For each patient, blood pressure measurements were performed by the same person between 7 and 11 AM on all visits. Baseline sitting DBP was defined as the mean of 3 measurements before the first administration of double-blind medication. Patients with no reasonable response to treatment, ie, sitting DBP 90 mm Hg, additionally received either 12.5 or 25 mg HCTZ. After week 6 of double-blind medication, all patients received 20 mg pravastatin once daily (in the evening at bedtime) as an add-on to the double-blind treatment. Treatment compliance was assessed by tablet counts. Patients who proved not to have complied with dispensing instructions during the placebo run-in phase were excluded from the trial. During the study, patients were not allowed to receive any other antihypertensive drugs, other lipid-lowering agents, tricyclic antidepressants, or long-acting nitrates. The dose of comedication was not changed throughout the trial. Regular laboratory examinations, ECGs, and adverse event recordings were performed to assess safety parameters.

The primary study objective was to evaluate the antiinflammatory effect of olmesartan using a panel of inflammation markers: hsCRP, high-sensitivity tumor necrosis factor- (hsTNF-), IL-6, ICAM-1, and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1). In addition, the effect of combination therapy of olmesartan and pravastatin on these inflammation markers was investigated. For this purpose, inflammation markers and total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglyceride serum concentrations were analyzed at baseline (ie, after the placebo run-in period) and after 6 and 12 weeks of treatment. Blood samples were taken in the morning after an overnight fast of 12 hours. They were immediately cooled on ice and centrifuged at 1500g and 4°C for 10 minutes, and the supernatants were stored in 1-mL aliquots at –80°C until further analyses. All samples were labeled with a code, and the analysts were not aware of the status of the samples. Measurements of routine chemistry were performed in a central study laboratory using standard equipment and certified methods. Inflammation markers were measured in the laboratory of the Division of Nephrology, Medical School Hannover. Serum concentration of hsCRP was measured with a clinically validated high-sensitivity nephelometric assay (Dade Behring).²² Serum concentrations of hsTNF-, IL-6, MCP-1, and ICAM-1 were measured with an ELISA according to manufacturer’s instructions (R&D Systems). The intra-assay coefficients of variation for these tests ranged between 4.9% and 6.8%, respectively. To eliminate interassay variability, all samples from one patient were tested in a single assay.

Statistical Analysis
To compare demographic and laboratory parameters between treatment groups at baseline, we used a ² test for categorical variables (eg, gender) and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables (ie, age). ANCOVA was used to compare changes from baseline to weeks 6 and 12 in the level of circulating inflammation markers, BP, and lipid parameters in the olmesartan and placebo treatment arms, taking treatment and trial center effects into account. Analyses were performed on the full analysis set (intention-to-treat approach). For this approach, last-observation-carried-forward methods were applied for the replacement of missing values. All statistical tests were 2-sided tests with a 5% level of significance. Data are presented as mean±SD.

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
After a screening of 507 individuals, 226 patients with essential hypertension fulfilling the above inclusion criteria were enrolled on an intention-to-treat basis (total set); 211 patients were finally randomized and completed the trial after 12 weeks of treatment. Twelve patients were excluded from the final analysis because of major protocol violations or violation of at least 1 criterion of schedule compliance. Thus, the final full analysis set comprised 199 patients, of whom 100 were treated with olmesartan and 99 were in the placebo treatment group. The demographic data of these patients at baseline are presented in Table 1. Both treatment groups were comparable with regard to age, gender, and body mass index, but the placebo treatment group comprised significantly more patients with known type 2 diabetes mellitus.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   TABLE 1. Demographic Data and Inflammation Markers at Baseline of Patients With Essential Hypertension Treated With Olmesartan or Placebo

The absolute baseline values of hsCRP, hsTNF-, IL-6, and MCP-1 are shown in Table 1, whereas percent changes in inflammation markers during 12 weeks of treatment are presented in the Figure. A statistically significant decrease was observed for hsCRP (Figure, A), hsTNF- (Figure, B), IL-6 (Figure, C), and MCP-1 (Figure, D) after 6 weeks of treatment with olmesartan. Serum levels of hsCRP, hsTNF-, and IL-6 decreased even further in the olmesartan treatment arm after 12 weeks of therapy. In contrast, in the placebo treatment group, the only significant decrease was observed for IL-6 after 6 weeks but not after 12 weeks of treatment. With the addition of pravastatin to the placebo treatment arm, hsCRP decreased by 8.0%, but this decrease was not statistically significant. Moreover, a significant difference (P<0.05) between treatment groups was found for hsTNF- at week 12 of the double-blind treatment (Figure, B). No significant changes in ICAM-1 serum levels were found in the olmesartan (baseline, 248±67 ng/mL; week 6, 246±92 ng/mL; week 12, 248±89 ng/mL) and placebo (baseline, 266±71 ng/mL; week 6, 258±64 ng/mL; week 12, 256±61 ng/mL) treatment groups.

View larger version (10K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Changes in serum concentrations of hsCRP (A), hsTNF- (B), IL-6 (C), and MCP-1 (D) in patients with essential hypertension after 6 and 12 weeks of therapy with olmesartan (n=100) or placebo (n=99). Pravastatin was added to both treatment arms at week 6. *P<0.05, **P<0.02, #P<0.01 vs baseline; $P<0.05, olmesartan vs placebo.

We did not find significant changes in lipid levels after 6 weeks of olmesartan and placebo treatment (Table 2). In contrast, total and LDL cholesterol levels significantly decreased in both treatment groups after 12 weeks of therapy without any significant differences between treatments. Thus, the observed decreases reflect the effect of pravastatin cotherapy. Blood pressure significantly decreased in both treatment groups, with a more distinct decrease observed with olmesartan (Table 2). The differences between treatments were statistically significant except for the difference observed for SBP at week 12. In the placebo group, more patients needed coadministration of HCTZ (42.4% versus 21.0% of patients treated with olmesartan).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   TABLE 2. Blood Pressure and Lipid Levels During 12 Weeks of Treatment With Olmesartan (n=100) or Placebo (n=99) With Pravastatin Added to Both Treatment Arms After 6 Weeks of Treatment

	Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
The results of the present prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study document that the Ang II subtype 1 receptor antagonist olmesartan medoxomil significantly reduces the level of vascular microinflammation in patients with essential hypertension. Treatment with olmesartan significantly reduced a panel of inflammation markers currently used to characterize vascular inflammation such as hsCRP, hsTNF-, and IL-6. Among these markers, hsCRP has attracted the greatest attention in cardiovascular medicine because of its strong predictive power for cardiovascular events in a variety of populations.^2,7–11 This is probably due to its long-term stability during storage, long half-life, lack of diurnal variation, and lack of age and sex dependence. As a consequence, it has been proposed that the level of vascular microinflammation in subjects at risk could be monitored by using hsCRP serum concentrations.^2,9,10

Our patients with essential hypertension were a population at high risk, like that studied in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation trial.²³ In most of them, atherosclerotic disease and/or the key components of the metabolic syndrome (eg, type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or hyperlipidemia) were present. This was reflected by a rather high level of microinflammation and a mean baseline hsCRP serum concentration of >4.5 mg/L in both treatment groups. After 12 weeks of therapy with olmesartan, the hsCRP level was reduced by >20%, whereas blood pressure reduction in the placebo treatment group had only minor or no effect on inflammation markers. Thus, the beneficial cardiovascular effects documented for inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system (eg, ACE inhibitors and Ang II receptor antagonists) could be attributed, at least in part, to their antiinflammatory action independent of the blood pressure–lowering effect.^23–26 This seems an attractive hypothesis because Ang II mediates a variety of proinflammatory effects.^19–21 The conclusion that long-term reduction in blood CRP levels by Ang II receptor blockade may have therapeutic benefits in patients at high risk is supported by current experimental work that revealed that CRP not only is an excellent biochemical indicator of inflammation but also possesses proatherogenic properties. For example, CRP activates endothelial cells to express adhesion molecules, selectins, cytokines, and the chemokine MCP-1.^27,28 It also induces the secretion of IL-6 and decreases the bioavailability of nitric oxide in human endothelial cells.^29–31 The concentration of CRP that elicits these proinflammatory responses in vitro is >5 µg/mL, ie, far above the mean hsCRP serum concentration encountered in the general population.^2,9,10 However, in subjects in whom a cluster of cardiovascular risk factors such as smoking, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus is present, hsCRP levels may be higher and approach the level observed in our cohort. In contrast to the significant decrease in hsCRP and other inflammation markers, we did not observe a change in ICAM-1 levels with olmesartan treatment. This unexpected finding may point to a specific interruption of the inflammation pathway by Ang II receptor blockade and deserves further (experimental) studies.²⁰

Surprisingly, coadministration of pravastatin to the placebo treatment arm significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels but had no significant effect on inflammation markers. On first glance, our finding seems to contradict results of recent clinical studies with pravastatin and simvastatin.^16–18,32 These results were obtained by post hoc analysis of a large outcome trial and in smaller short-term studies,^16,18,32 and may therefore have been confounded by cotherapies usually given to cardiovascular risk patients such as aspirin.¹⁵ In the primary prevention cohort of the Pravastatin Inflammation CRP Evaluation trial comprising 1702 subjects with no prior history of cardiovascular disease, treatment with 40 mg pravastatin significantly reduced hsCRP by 16.9%, but the absolute decrease in mean hsCRP serum concentration was modest, ie, 0.20 mg/L.¹⁷ In the present study, pravastatin add-on therapy in the placebo treatment group led to a nonsignificant decrease in hsCRP serum levels by 8.0%, but the absolute decrease was 0.36 mg/L. Large prospective trials in patients with elevated hsCRP serum concentrations are on the way to elucidate this issue.³³ However, the absence of a major effect of pravastatin on the panel of inflammation markers in the placebo treatment arm permits the notion that the significant and persistent decreases in hsCRP, hsTNF-, and IL-6 serum concentrations during 12 weeks of olmesartan therapy were primarily the result of continuous Ang II receptor blockade.

In conclusion, treatment with the Ang II receptor antagonist olmesartan significantly reduces biochemical markers of (vascular) inflammation in patients with essential hypertension by as early as week 6 of therapy. These antiinflammatory properties of Ang II receptor antagonists may have beneficial cardiovascular effects in addition to their blood pressure–lowering action.

	Appendix

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
The following persons participated as investigators in the EUTOPIA trial in Poland (in alphabetic order): A. Doboszynska, J. Gessek, A. Januszewicz, S. Jeka, B. Kwiatkowska, S. Liszewska-Pfeijfer, F. Monies, S. Niemczyk, A. Stochmal, A. Wiecek, A. Witkowski, and D. Wojciechowski; in the Czech Republic: D. Astl, R. Cífková, Z. Grosman, K. Hrubant, L. Kadlecová, I. Karen, J. Leso, V. Zemanová, and E. Zídková; and in Germany: K. Buchholz, D. Fliser, H. Haller, A. Hanzlik, M. Kütemeyer, L. Rehn, and U. Schax.

	Acknowledgments

 
This study was supported by SANKYO Pharma.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Appendix References

 
1. Ross R. Atherosclerosis: an inflammatory disease. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340: 115–126.[Free Full Text]

2. Pearson TA, Mensah GA, Alexander RW, et al, for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American Heart Association. Markers of inflammation and cardiovascular disease: application to clinical and public health practice: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2003; 107: 499–511.[Free Full Text]

3. Espinola-Klein C, Rupprecht HJ, Blankenberg S, et al, for the AtheroGene Investigators. Impact of infectious burden on extent and long-term prognosis of atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2002; 105: 15–21.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4. Magyar MT, Szikszai Z, Balla J, et al. Early-onset carotid atherosclerosis is associated with increased intima-media thickness and elevated serum levels of inflammatory markers. Stroke. 2003; 34: 58–63.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

5. Saito M, Ishimitsu T, Minami J, et al. Relations of plasma high-sensitivity C-reactive protein to traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Atherosclerosis. 2003; 167: 73–79.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

6. Sesso HD, Buring JE, Rifai N, et al. C-reactive protein and the risk of developing hypertension. JAMA. 2003; 290: 2945–2951.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

7. Blake GJ, Rifai N, Buring JE, et al. Blood pressure, C-reactive protein, and risk of future cardiovascular events. Circulation. 2003; 108: 2993–2999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

8. Gabay C, Kushner I. Acute-phase proteins and other systemic responses to inflammation. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340: 448–454.[Free Full Text]

9. Ridker PM. Clinical application of C-reactive protein for cardiovascular disease detection and prevention. Circulation. 2003; 107: 363–369.[Free Full Text]

10. Yeh ET, Willerson JT. Coming of age of C-reactive protein: using inflammation markers in cardiology. Circulation. 2003; 107: 370–371.[Free Full Text]

11. Ridker PM, Rifai N, Rose L, et al. Comparison of C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in the prediction of first cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1557–1565.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

12. Ridker PM, Hennekens CH, Buring JE, et al. C-reactive protein and other markers of inflammation in the prediction of cardiovascular disease in women. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 836–843.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

13. Esposito K, Pontillo A, Di Palo C, et al. Effect of weight loss and lifestyle changes on vascular inflammatory markers in obese women: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2003; 289: 1799–1804.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

14. Tchernof A, Nolan A, Sites CK, et al. Weight loss reduces C-reactive protein levels in obese postmenopausal women. Circulation. 2002; 105: 564–569.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

15. Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, et al. Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. N Engl J Med. 1997; 336: 973–999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

16. Ridker PM, Rifai N, Pfeffer MA, et al. Long-term effects of pravastatin on plasma concentration of C-reactive protein: the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) Investigators. Circulation. 1999; 100: 230–235.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

17. Albert MA, Danielson E, Rifai N, et al, for the PRINCE Investigators. Effect of statin therapy on C-reactive protein levels: the Pravastatin Inflammation CRP Evaluation (PRINCE). JAMA. 2001; 286: 64–70.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

18. Plenge JK, Hernandez TL, Weil KM, et al. Simvastatin lowers C-reactive protein within 14 days: an effect independent of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1447–1452.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

19. Mervaala EM, Muller DN, Park JK, et al. Monocyte infiltration and adhesion molecules in a rat model of high human renin hypertension. Hypertension. 1999; 33: 389–395.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

20. Brasier AR, Recinos A, Eledrisi MS. Vascular inflammation and the renin-angiotensin system. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2002; 22: 1257–1266.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

21. Dandona P, Kumar V, Aljada A, et al. Angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan suppresses reactive oxygen species generation in leukocytes, nuclear factor-kappa B, in mononuclear cells of normal subjects: evidence of an anti-inflammatory action. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003; 88: 4496–4501.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

22. Roberts WL, Moulton L, Law TC, et al. Evaluation of nine automated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods: implications for clinical and epidemiological applications, part 2. Clin Chem. 2001; 47: 418–425.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

23. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 145–153.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

24. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al, for the LIFE Study Group. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension Study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet. 2002; 359: 995–1003.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

25. Khan BV, Navalkar S, Khan QA, et al. Irbesartan, an angiotensin type 1 receptor inhibitor, regulates the vascular oxidative state in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 1662–1667.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

26. Koh KK, Ahn JY, Han SH, et al. Pleiotropic effects of angiotensin II receptor blocker in hypertensive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42: 905–910.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

27. Pasceri V, Willerson JT, Yeh ET. Direct proinflammatory effect of C-reactive protein on human endothelial cells. Circulation. 2000; 102: 2165–2168.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

28. Pasceri V, Cheng JS, Willerson JT, et al. Modulation of C-reactive protein–mediated monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 induction in human endothelial cells by anti-atherosclerosis drugs. Circulation. 2001; 103: 2531–2534.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

29. Verma S, Li SH, Badiwala MV, et al. Endothelin antagonism and interleukin-6 inhibition attenuate the proatherogenic effects of C-reactive protein. Circulation. 2002; 105: 1890–1896.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

30. Verma S, Wang CH, Li SH, et al. A self-fulfilling prophecy: C-reactive protein attenuates nitric oxide production and inhibits angiogenesis. Circulation. 2002; 106: 913–919.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

31. Venugopal SK, Devaraj S, Yuhanna I, et al. Demonstration that C-reactive protein decreases eNOS expression and bioactivity in human aortic endothelial cells. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1439–1441.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

32. Jialal I, Stein D, Balis D, et al. Effect of hydroxymethyl glutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor therapy on high sensitive C-reactive protein levels. Circulation. 2001; 103: 1933–1935.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

33. Ridker PM, for the JUPITER Study Group. Rosuvastatin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among patients with low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein: rationale and design of the JUPITER trial. Circulation. 2003; 108: 2292–2297.[Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Montalescot, H. Drexler, R. Gallo, T. Pearson, M. Thoenes, and D. L. Bhatt Effect of irbesartan and enalapril in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: results of the randomized, double-blind ARCHIPELAGO study Eur. Heart J., November 2, 2009; 30(22): 2733 - 2741. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Galle, E. Schwedhelm, S. Pinnetti, R. H. Boger, C. Wanner, and on behalf of the VIVALDI investigators Antiproteinuric effects of angiotensin receptor blockers: telmisartan versus valsartan in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overt nephropathy Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., October 1, 2008; 23(10): 3174 - 3183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Ogawa, J. P. Veinot, M. L. Kuroski de Bold, T. Georgalis, and A. J. de Bold Angiotensin II receptor antagonism reverts the selective cardiac BNP upregulation and secretion observed in myocarditis Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): H2596 - H2603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Ogawa, T. Mori, K. Nako, T. Ishizuka, and S. Ito Reduced Albuminuria with Sarpogrelate Is Accompanied by a Decrease in Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1 Levels in Type 2 Diabetes Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2008; 3(2): 362 - 368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D Conen, B M Everett, R J Glynn, and P M Ridker Effect of valsartan compared with valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide on plasma levels of cellular adhesion molecules: the Val-MARC trial Heart, March 1, 2008; 94(3): e13 - e13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Casaclang-Verzosa, B. J. Gersh, and T. S.M. Tsang Structural and functional remodeling of the left atrium: clinical and therapeutic implications for atrial fibrillation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 1, 2008; 51(1): 1 - 11. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Naya, T. Tsukamoto, K. Morita, C. Katoh, T. Furumoto, S. Fujii, N. Tamaki, and H. Tsutsui Olmesartan, But Not Amlodipine, Improves Endothelium-Dependent Coronary Dilation in Hypertensive Patients J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 18, 2007; 50(12): 1144 - 1149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Xu, O. A. Carretero, C.-X. Lin, M. A. Cavasin, E. G. Shesely, J. J. Yang, T. L. Reudelhuber, and X.-P. Yang Role of cardiac overexpression of ANG II in the regulation of cardiac function and remodeling postmyocardial infarction Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, September 1, 2007; 293(3): H1900 - H1907. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Coles, C. A. Fielding, S. Rose-John, J. Scheller, S. A. Jones, and V. B. O'Donnell Classic Interleukin-6 Receptor Signaling and Interleukin-6 trans-Signaling Differentially Control Angiotensin II-Dependent Hypertension, Cardiac Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription-3 Activation, and Vascular Hypertrophy in Vivo Am. J. Pathol., July 1, 2007; 171(1): 315 - 325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Tkacova and P. Joppa Angiotensin-converting enzyme genotype and C-reactive protein in patients with COPD Eur. Respir. J., April 1, 2007; 29(4): 816 - 817. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. J. Wang, M. G. Larson, M. J. Keyes, D. Levy, E. J. Benjamin, and R. S. Vasan Association of Plasma Natriuretic Peptide Levels With Metabolic Risk Factors in Ambulatory Individuals Circulation, March 20, 2007; 115(11): 1345 - 1353. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Ruef, M. Browatzki, C. A. Pfeiffer, J. Schmidt, and R. Kranzhofer Angiotensin II promotes the inflammatory response to CD40 ligation via TRAF-2 Vascular Medicine, February 1, 2007; 12(1): 23 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Luther, J. V. Gainer, L. J. Murphey, C. Yu, D. E. Vaughan, J. D. Morrow, and N. J. Brown Angiotensin II Induces Interleukin-6 in Humans Through a Mineralocorticoid Receptor-Dependent Mechanism Hypertension, December 1, 2006; 48(6): 1050 - 1057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Liu and G. Li Anti-inflammatory effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers: potential benefits for the prevention of atrial fibrillation Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2006; 27(19): 2370 - 2371. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M Ridker, E. Danielson, N. Rifai, R. J. Glynn, and for the Val-MARC Investigators Valsartan, Blood Pressure Reduction, and C-Reactive Protein: Primary Report of the Val-MARC Trial Hypertension, July 1, 2006; 48(1): 73 - 79. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Mascitelli, F. Pezzetta, W. Matsuyama, I. Higashimoto, M. Osame, and K. Arimura Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade and COPD Chest, June 1, 2006; 129(6): 1734 - 1735. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Miller and S. Havas The Role of Inflammation for Heart Disease Risk Cannot Be Determined by Correlations Between C-Reactive Protein and Risk Factors--Reply Arch Intern Med, May 8, 2006; 166(9): 1040 - 1041. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Hermann and F. Ruschitzka Novel anti-inflammatory drugs in hypertension Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 859 - 864. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Pauletto and M. Rattazzi Inflammation and hypertension: the search for a link Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 850 - 853. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Ogawa, T. Mori, K. Nako, T. Kato, K. Takeuchi, and S. Ito Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers Reduce Urinary Oxidative Stress Markers in Hypertensive Diabetic Nephropathy Hypertension, April 1, 2006; 47(4): 699 - 705. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. McMurray, S. Solomon, K. Pieper, S. Reed, J. Rouleau, E. Velazquez, H. White, J. Howlett, K. Swedberg, A. Maggioni, et al. The Effect of Valsartan, Captopril, or Both on Atherosclerotic Events After Acute Myocardial Infarction: An Analysis of the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 21, 2006; 47(4): 726 - 733. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Mascitelli and F. Pezzetta Anti-Inflammatory Action of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 21, 2006; 47(4): 889 - 889. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. J. Boos, R. A. Anderson, and G. Y.H. Lip Is atrial fibrillation an inflammatory disorder? Eur. Heart J., January 2, 2006; 27(2): 136 - 149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Z. Yuan, M. Nimata, T.-a. Okabe, K. Shioji, K. Hasegawa, T. Kita, and C. Kishimoto Olmesartan, a novel AT1 antagonist, suppresses cytotoxic myocardial injury in autoimmune heart failure Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, September 1, 2005; 289(3): H1147 - H1152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Fliser, K.-K. Wagner, A. Loos, D. Tsikas, and H. Haller Chronic Angiotensin II Receptor Blockade Reduces (Intra)Renal Vascular Resistance in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2005; 16(4): 1135 - 1140. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. H. Bahlmann, K. de Groot, O. Mueller, B. Hertel, H. Haller, and D. Fliser Stimulation of Endothelial Progenitor Cells: A New Putative Therapeutic Effect of Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists Hypertension, April 1, 2005; 45(4): 526 - 529. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 110/9/1103    most recent 01.CIR.0000140265.21608.8Ev1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fliser, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fliser, D. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB CHOLESTEROL Medline Plus Health Information High Blood Pressure Statins Vasculitis Related Collections Risk Factors Clinical Studies