(Circulation. 1998;98:2148-2153.)
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
From the University Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland. Dr Ueda is now at the Second Department of Medicine, Yokohama City University, School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Correspondence to Dr H.L. Elliott, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, G11 6NT, UK. E-mail h.l.elliott{at}clinmed.gla.ac.uk
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and ResultsSubjects with DD (n=12) and II (n=11) ACE genotypes received an intravenous infusion of enalaprilat or placebo. Pressor responses to stepwise, incremental doses of angiotensin I were measured at 1 and 10 hours after dosing. The dose required to raise mean blood pressure by 20 mm Hg (PD20) was calculated individually, and the ratio of PD20 during enalaprilat to that during placebo (dose ratio, DR) was used for assessment of the extent of ACE inhibition. The pressor response was significantly attenuated at 1 hour after enalaprilat in both groups, but significant attenuation was evident at 10 hours after dose only in the II subjects. The DRs at both 1 hour (median, 5.43 versus 2.82, P=0.0035) and 10 hours (2.06 versus 0.84, P=0.0008) after enalaprilat were significantly higher in II subjects than in DD subjects.
ConclusionsThe effect of enalaprilat was significantly greater and lasted longer in normotensive men homozygous for the II ACE genotype. By multivariate analysis, ACE (I/D) genotype and plasma angiotensin II levels were predictive of >50% of the variation in response to ACE inhibition.
Key Words: angiotensin enzymes enalaprilat genes
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
50% of this is familial10 and
can be explained by a single major gene effect. The insertion/deletion
(I/D) polymorphism in intron 16 of the ACE gene acts as a
convenient marker of this allelic variation,11
which influences not only serum ACE concentration and activity but also
ACE activity in T lymphocytes12 and in cardiac
tissue.13 The ACE gene polymorphism has also been extensively investigated as a candidate genetic locus for cardiovascular disease.14 15 16 17 Although adverse pathological outcomes have been correlated with genetic variability at the ACE locus, the pathophysiological consequences of the concomitant differences in ACE activity and, in turn, the influence of this on the response to ACE inhibitor drug treatment have not been well documented.
In a recent study, we demonstrated an enhanced pressor response to exogenous angiotensin I and increased production of angiotensin II in normotensive men homozygous for the DD allele.18 These results suggested that genetically determined differences in the level of ACE activity modulated the responsiveness of the RAS via the differential generation of angiotensin II. The principal aim of the present study was to evaluate whether or not there were similar, differential responses to ACE inhibitor drug treatment. This study therefore evaluated the magnitude and time course of the ACE-inhibitory effects after intravenous enalaprilat in normotensive men with differing levels of ACE activity and contrasting ACE (I/D) genotype.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
ACE Genotyping
Details of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method used to
establish ACE genotype have been described
elsewhere.19 In brief, D and I alleles were
amplified by PCR using standard primers in a reaction mixture
containing 5% DMSO and size-fractionated on agarose gels. Putative DD
genotypes were further confirmed by the triple-primer
method.20
Enalaprilat Infusion Study
Subjects undertook 2 separate study days at least 2 weeks apart,
with intravenous enalaprilat or placebo administered
according to a randomized, double-blind, crossover design. All subjects
were instructed to maintain a normal-sodium diet (
150 mmol/d)
for 3 days before each of the 2 study days. After an overnight fast and
avoidance of alcohol and caffeine-containing drinks for at least 12
hours, subjects attended the Clinical Investigation and Research Unit,
Western Infirmary, Glasgow, at 7:30 AM. An
intravenous cannula was inserted into each forearm and,
after a period of
30 minutes of bed rest, subjects received an
infusion of 0.01 mg/kg of enalaprilat (Merck Sharp & Dohme) or placebo
(isotonic saline) for 30 minutes. Blood pressure was measured and blood
samples were taken at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours after the
infusion for measurement of plasma enalaprilat, angiotensin
I and II, aldosterone, and active renin concentrations.
Angiotensin I Infusion Studies
Angiotensin I infusion studies were performed at 1
and 10 hours after the end of the enalaprilat or placebo infusion. Each
subject received incremental doses, each of 8 minutes' duration, from
1 to 20 ng · kg-1 ·
min-1 of angiotensin I (Clinalpha
AG). Blood pressure was measured every minute by semiautomated
sphygmomanometer (Critikon). When the rise in blood pressure was
<20 mm Hg from baseline at 20 ng ·
kg-1 · min-1,
additional doses were infused. Blood samples for measurement of plasma
angiotensin II concentrations were obtained from the
contralateral arm after each dose of angiotensin I.
Analysis of Pressor Response Data
Details of the methods and analysis for the pressor
infusion study have been described
elsewhere.21
Changes from baseline in mean blood pressure were plotted against the
log-transformed dose of angiotensin I and then adapted to a
quadratic function for each individual infusion. The PD20, which is the
dose of angiotensin I required to raise mean blood pressure
by 20 mm Hg, was calculated from the individual fit in each
subject. The dose ratio (DR) for angiotensin I, ie, the
ratio of the PD20 after enalaprilat to that after placebo, was then
calculated for each infusion time. The dose ratios therefore provide
indices of the magnitude of the attenuation by enalaprilat of the
angiotensin I pressor response; thus, a high DR
represents marked ACE inhibition, whereas a DR of
1
indicates no significant ACE inhibition. Changes in blood pressure were
also plotted against the achieved plasma concentrations of
angiotensin II (log-transformed) after each dose of
angiotensin I to calculate, from each
concentration-response curve, the PC20, which is the concentration of
plasma angiotensin II required to raise mean blood pressure
by 20 mm Hg. The concentration ratio (CR) (which
represents the effect of enalaprilat on the sensitivity to
angiotensin II) was then derived as the ratio of PC20 after
enalaprilat to that after placebo. The pressor response to
angiotensin I was then adjusted for differences in
sensitivity to angiotensin II (CR) by calculation of the
ratio of DR to CR.
For the regression analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) of changes in plasma angiotensin II levels during angiotensin I infusion was calculated individually by the trapezoidal method. The AUC ratio for angiotensin II was then calculated for both infusion times, ie, the ratio of the AUC after enalaprilat to that after placebo. The AUC ratios therefore provide indices of the magnitude of the attenuation by enalaprilat of the angiotensin II responses generated from infused angiotensin I.
Assay Methods
Blood for angiotensin I and angiotensin
II assays were taken into an inhibitor powder containing
EDTA, o-phenanthroline, and human renin
inhibitor H142 (20 mmol/L). Plasma
angiotensin I and II concentrations were measured by
radioimmunoassay after extraction with Sep-Pak C18
cartridge.22 The recoveries were 83% and 95%,
respectively. The angiotensin II antiserum had a
cross-reaction of 0.6% with angiotensin I, and the
angiotensin I antiserum had no detectable cross-reaction
with angiotensin II. Plasma aldosterone
concentration was measured by radioimmunoassay.23
Active plasma renin concentration was described by an antibody-trapping
method as described.24 Serum ACE activity was
measured by high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) with the use of an artificial
substrate (Hip-His-Leu).25 Plasma enalaprilat
concentrations were measured by HPLC.26
Coefficients of variation of assays were all <10%.
Statistical Analysis
Data are shown as median and range unless otherwise indicated.
The DR for angiotensin I and the CR for
angiotensin II are shown as median and 95% CI. By
definition, the effect of enalaprilat was considered statistically
significant if the lower confidence limit of the DR or CR was >1
(significant attenuation) or if the upper confidence limit was <1
(significant enhancement). Demographic data for the 2 groups were
compared by unpaired t test. Comparison of the baseline
values for each component of the RAS and for the DRs and CRs between
the 2 groups was by Mann-Whitney U test with CIs of
differences in medians. Comparison of the time courses of blood
pressure, ACE activity, angiotensin II,
angiotensin II/I ratio, and active renin concentration
after enalaprilat was by repeated-measures ANOVA after adjustment for
the values obtained after placebo. Comparison of the differences in
angiotensin II levels during angiotensin I
infusion between treatments (placebo versus enalaprilat) was also by
repeated-measures ANOVA.
The relationship between pretreatment levels of blood pressure, ACE activity, plasma angiotensin I and II, angiotensin II/I ratio, plasma active renin, and ACE genotype and the extent of ACE inhibition at 1 and 10 hours after enalaprilat was assessed by a simple regression analysis (Pearson); thereafter, a stepwise regression analysis taking account of baseline angiotensin II levels, angiotensin II/I ratio, plasma renin concentration, plasma enalaprilat concentration, and ACE genotype was undertaken to examine for potential confounding factors (StatView statistical package, Abacus Concepts, Inc).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Basal Activity of the RAS
Table 1
shows baseline activities and concentrations for each
component of the RAS. As expected, ACE activity in the subjects with DD
genotype was significantly higher than in those with II
genotype. There were no significant differences in plasma
angiotensin II, angiotensin I,
angiotensin II/I ratio, aldosterone, and active
renin concentration at baseline.
There was no significant relationship between baseline ACE activity and baseline plasma angiotensin II, angiotensin I, and aldosterone. There was a weak correlation between ACE activity and angiotensin II/I ratio (r2=0.152), but this did not reach statistical significance (P=0.0656).
Plasma Concentrations of Enalaprilat
Plasma enalaprilat concentrations at 1 hour after
intravenous enalaprilat were 17.4±6.8 ng/mL in II
genotype and 16.7±5.5 ng/mL in DD genotype subjects
(mean±SD), and at 10 hours after dose, 1.8±0.9 and 2.2±1.1 ng/mL,
respectively.
Time Course of Activity of the RAS and Blood Pressure After
Enalaprilat
The time courses for the absolute values and the percentage
changes in ACE activity after enalaprilat and placebo are shown in
Figure 1
. In both groups, enalaprilat
inhibited ACE activity by
90% at 1 hour after dose and by up to
40% at 10 hours after dose. Despite the absolute values for ACE
activity being higher in DD subjects than in II subjects at all time
points, the percentage inhibition of ACE activity did not differ
between the 2 groups.
|
Changes in mean blood pressure and changes in each component of the RAS
are summarized in Table 2
. Plasma
angiotensin II concentrations in DD subjects returned to
baseline levels at 10 hours after enalaprilat, whereas those in II
subjects remained suppressed, but there was no statistically
significant difference between the 2 groups (ANOVA). Furthermore, there
were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the time
courses for the changes in the other measured components of the RAS.
Although active renin concentrations after enalaprilat tended to be
higher in DD subjects than those in II subjects, this did not reach
statistical significance. There was no significant correlation between
pretreatment ACE activity and changes in blood pressure, plasma
angiotensin I, angiotensin II/I ratio, and
plasma active renin concentrations.
|
Angiotensin II Levels During Angiotensin
I Infusion
The changes in angiotensin II levels during the
angiotensin I infusion are shown in Figures 2
and 3
. At
1 hour after enalaprilat (Figure 2
), plasma angiotensin II
levels were significantly decreased in both groups compared with those
after placebo (P<0.0001 by ANOVA). At 10 hours after
enalaprilat (Figure 2
), plasma angiotensin II levels were
significantly lower than those after placebo in the subjects with II
genotype (P=0.02 by ANOVA) but not in those with DD
genotype.
|
|
Angiotensin I Pressor Response After
Enalaprilat
The individual dose ratios for angiotensin I at 1 and
10 hours after enalaprilat are shown in Figure 3
. There were no
significant changes in sensitivity to angiotensin II at
either 1 or 10 hours: at 1 hour, the CR for angiotensin II
was 0.62 (0.51, 1.12) in DD subjects and 0.79 (0.44, 1.06) in II
subjects, and at 10 hours, 0.72 (0.58, 1.23) in DD subjects and 0.99
(0.72, 1.59) in II subjects [mean (95% CI)]. There were no
significant differences between the 2 groups in sensitivity to
angiotensin II at either time point: 95% CI (-0.33, 0.41)
at 1 hour and (-0.75, 0.18) at 10 hours after enalaprilat.
At 1 hour after enalaprilat administration, angiotensin I pressor responses were significantly attenuated in both groups. Unadjusted DR was 2.82 (2.03, 3.45) in DD subjects and 5.43 (3.45, 13.36) in II subjects. The DRs adjusted for angiotensin II sensitivity were 4.20 (2.22, 5.77) in DD subjects and 9.39 (3.13, 21.01) in II subjects [median (95% CI)]. The magnitude of attenuation in subjects with II genotype was significantly greater than in subjects with DD genotype [unadjusted DR, P=0.0035, 95% CI (0.77, 12.80); adjusted DR, P=0.0178, 95% CI (0.83, 14.87)].
At 10 hours after enalaprilat, the angiotensin I pressor response was significantly attenuated only in II subjects: unadjusted DR of 2.06 (1.43, 2.86) and adjusted DR of 2.33 (1.41, 2.66) in II subjects compared with unadjusted DR of 0.84 (0.54, 1.42) and adjusted DR of 1.05 (0.76, 1.46) in DD subjects. The DR was also significantly higher in II subjects than DD subjects: unadjusted DR 95% CI (0.61, 1.95), P=0.0008; adjusted DR 95% CI (0.36, 1.57), P=0.0023.
Interrelationships Between Activity of the RAS and Attenuation of
the Pressor Response to Angiotensin I During ACE
Inhibition
At 10 hours after enalaprilat, there were statistically
significant differences between II and DD subjects in the extent of the
ACE inhibitory effect as determined by the DRs for the
angiotensin I response. By univariate
analysis, both ACE genotype and ACE activity were
significant predictors of the ACE inhibitory effect
(coefficients of determination, 50.5%; P=0.000 and 40.9%;
P=0.001), but there were no other significant relationships
for age, renin, angiotensin II, or aldosterone,
which all had coefficients of determination of <6.5%. An all-subsets
regression (multivariate) analysis showed that
48.1% of the variability could be explained by ACE genotype
(P=0.012) and that this progressively increased to 61.7%
and 70.4% with the combination of ACE genotype with
angiotensin II (P=0.000) and then with
aldosterone concentrations (P=0.000). The final
regression equation, which incorporated ACE activity
(P=0.005) to account for 78.1% of the variability in
response, was DR10=2.59-0.0433 ACE+0.0425
AII-1.27 genotype to 0.00702 aldosterone.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
By univariate analysis, both ACE genotype and ACE activity were predictive of 48.1% and 38.1%, respectively, of the variation in the ACE inhibition response to enalaprilat. However, the multivariate analysis revealed that ACE genotype was the most important single factor: in turn, ACE genotype in combination with measurements of angiotensin II and aldosterone concentrations accounted for 70% of the variation in response, and the further incorporation of ACE activity then increased the predictive power to 78.1%. Thus, ACE genotype predicted the response to the ACE inhibitor independently of ACE activity. However, although ACE genotype was the most important single factor, this analysis might also be interpreted as showing that ACE activity has an important regulatory role in the RAS via the genesis of angiotensin II and aldosterone. This possibility is wholly consistent with the results of our previous study, which suggested that the influence of ACE gene polymorphism on in vivo ACE activity was most obvious in the presence of relatively high angiotensin I concentrations.18
Other recent studies investigating the influence of the ACE gene polymorphism on the response to ACE inhibition have tended to produce inconclusive results. For example, a retrospective analysis of a clinical trial with 20 mg enalapril showed that there was no difference in blood pressure reduction for hypertensive patients with DD and II ACE genotypes.27 However, a 20-mg dose of the ACE inhibitor enalapril, for example, is likely to cause >95% peak ACE inhibition, and as seen in the present study, near-maximum ACE inhibition may mask interindividual differences in responses. For this reason, we chose a dose of enalaprilat expected to produce a submaximal effect at peak, ie, located on the "shoulder" portion of the dose-response curve. This corresponds approximately to the effect of an oral dose of <2.5 mg enalapril. In studies using conventional doses, therefore, the doses are relatively high and likely to evoke close to maximal responses (on the flat portion of the dose-response curve). Consistent with this concept is the demonstration in the present study of equivalent ACE inhibition at 1 hour after dose on both groups.
Although a number of reports focus on the ACE genotype as a
genetic cardiovascular risk factor, the relationship
between ACE activity itself and cardiovascular disease
has been little investigated, although 1 report suggests that ACE
activity may be a risk factor for myocardial infarction, independently
of the I/D polymorphism.28 The fact that the
inclusion of angiotensin II, aldosterone, and
ACE activity as independent variables significantly improved the
predictive power lends some support for this concept. Overall, however,
the results of the multivariate analysis and
the demonstration of a 2-fold greater attenuation in II subjects
despite similar angiotensin II concentrations at 1 hour
after dose suggest that categorization of the I/D genotype may
be the more precise way of predicting the response to an ACE
inhibitor drug. In turn, this suggests that genetically
determined factors other than circulating ACE activity may influence
the response to ACE inhibition. Alternatively, categorization of ACE
(I/D) genotype may simply reduce the "noise" and eliminate
such extraneous influences as dietary intake, physical activity, or
concomitant drug treatment, which render the measurement of ACE
activity (relatively) unreliable. In pragmatic terms, therefore,
relatively low doses of an ACE inhibitor drug may be
sufficient for patients with low ACE activity (which is known to be
50% genetically determined) and low levels of
angiotensin II (ie, those with II genotype) but
insufficient for full and sustained inhibition in patients with high
ACE levels and higher levels of angiotensin II, ie, those
with DD genotype.
In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that the magnitude and duration of the effect of an ACE inhibitor drug will vary in different subgroups that can be identified by the I/D genotype. Furthermore, these results are also consistent with the concept of a regulatory role for ACE via differing levels of ACE activity and the differential generation of angiotensin II concentrations, particularly in circumstances of an activated RAS. In turn, the differential pathological consequences and therapeutic outcomes that have been attributed directly to the I/D genotype may, alternatively and/or additionally, reflect differences in the relative therapeutic effectiveness of standard ACE inhibitor drug doses.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received January 15, 1998; revision received June 18, 1998; accepted July 2, 1998.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
50% of the variation in the
magnitude and duration of the response to ACE inhibitor
drug administration.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
N. Daneshtalab, R. Z. Lewanczuk, A. S. Russell, and F. Jamali Drug-disease interactions: losartan effect is not downregulated by rheumatoid arthritis. J. Clin. Pharmacol., November 1, 2006; 46(11): 1344 - 1355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J Trevelyan, E W A Needham, A Morris, and R K Mattu Comparison of the effect of enalapril and losartan in conjunction with surgical coronary revascularisation versus revascularisation alone on systemic endothelial function Heart, August 1, 2005; 91(8): 1053 - 1057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Daneshtalab, R. Z. Lewanczuk, A. Russell, and F. Jamali Rheumatoid Arthritis Does Not Reduce the Pharmacodynamic Response to Valsartan J. Clin. Pharmacol., March 1, 2004; 44(3): 245 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I Narita, S Goto, N Saito, J Song, K Omori, D Kondo, M Sakatsume, and F Gejyo Renoprotective efficacy of renin-angiotensin inhibitors in IgA nephropathy is influenced by ACE A2350G polymorphism J. Med. Genet., December 1, 2003; 40(12): e130 - 130. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
X. Li, Y. Du, Y. Du, and X. Huang Correlation of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Gene Polymorphism with Effect of Antihypertensive Therapy by Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, March 1, 2003; 8(1): 25 - 30. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.R. Abraham, L. J. Olson, M. J. Joyner, S. T. Turner, K. C. Beck, and B. D. Johnson Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Genotype Modulates Pulmonary Function and Exercise Capacity in Treated Patients With Congestive Stable Heart Failure Circulation, October 1, 2002; 106(14): 1794 - 1799. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. G. H. van der Kleij, P. E. de Jong, R. H. Henning, D. de Zeeuw, and G. Navis Enhanced Responses of Blood Pressure, Renal Function, and Aldosterone to Angiotensin I in the DD Genotype Are Blunted by Low Sodium Intake J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2002; 13(4): 1025 - 1033. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
S. Kennon, K. Barakat, G. A. Hitman, C. P. Price, P. G. Mills, K. Ranjadayalan, J. Cooper, H. Clark, and A. D. Timmis Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition is associated with reduced troponin release in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 1, 2001; 38(3): 724 - 728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Cicoira, L. Zanolla, A. Rossi, G. Golia, L. Franceschini, G. Cabrini, A. Bonizzato, M. Graziani, S. D. Anker, A. J. S. Coats, et al. Failure of aldosterone suppression despite angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor administration in chronic heart failure is associated with ACE DD genotype J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 1, 2001; 37(7): 1808 - 1812. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Sanada, Y. Higashi, K. Nakagawa, S. Sasaki, I. Kodama, M. Tsuda, N. Nagai, and K. Ohama Relationship between the angiotensin-converting enzyme genotype and the forearm vasodilator response to estrogen replacement therapy in postmenopausal women J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 1, 2001; 37(6): 1529 - 1535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. M. Roden and N. J. Brown Preprescription Genotyping : Not Yet Ready for Prime Time, but Getting There Circulation, March 27, 2001; 103(12): 1608 - 1610. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C Fatini, R Abbate, G Pepe, B Battaglini, F Gensini, G Ruggiano, G.F Gensini, and R Guazzelli Searching for a better assessment of the individual coronary risk profile. The role of angiotensin-converting enzyme, angiotensin II type 1 receptor and angiotensinogen gene polymorphisms Eur. Heart J., April 2, 2000; 21(8): 633 - 638. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. J. Anderson, E. Elstein, H. Haber, and F. Charbonneau Comparative study of ACE-inhibition, angiotensin II antagonism, and calcium channel blockade on flow-mediated vasodilation in patients with coronary disease (BANFF study) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 1, 2000; 35(1): 60 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1998 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |