European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 30, Issue 6, pp 723–725

Dose response and length of action of nifedipine capsules and tablets in patients with essential hypertension: A randomised crossover study

  • F. P. Cappuccio
  • N. D. Markandu
  • F. A. Tucker
  • G. A. MacGregor
Short Communications

Summary

Twelve patients with essential hypertension on no other drug treatment were entered into a randomised crossover study of 5, 10 and 20 mg capsules of nifedipine given 3 times a day and 20 mg tablets given twice a day. Each dose was given for 2 weeks in a random order. All forms of nifedipine were effective in lowering blood pressure.

However, 5 mg capsules were less effective than the 10 and 20 mg capsules or 20 mg tablets. There was little to choose between the latter. All doses of nifedipine were more effective 1 and 3 h after the dose compared to subsequent times afterwards. Indeed, as time elapsed after the last dose up to 12 h, there was a gradual increase in blood pressure. However, even at 12 h the 10, 20 mg capsules and 20 mg tablets were still causing an approximate 10% reduction in blood pressure.

Nifedipine tablets are as effective as capsules though they might be longer acting, particurarly around 6 h after the last dose.

Key words

nifedipine hypertension capsules tablets comparative dose response 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aoki K, Kondo S, Mochizuki A, Yoshida T, Kato S, Kato K, Takikawa K (1978) Antihypertensive effect of cardiovascular Ca2+-antagonist in hypertensive patients in the absence and presence of beta-adrenergic blockade. Am Heart J 96: 218–226Google Scholar
  2. Bailey S, Dobbs RJ, Robinson BF (1982) Nifedipine in the treatment of hypertension: Report of a double blind controlled trial. Br J Clin Pharmacol 14: 509–512Google Scholar
  3. Banzet O, Colin JN, Thibonnier M, Singlas E, Alexandre JM, Corvol P (1983) Acute antihypertensive effect and pharmacokinetics of a tablet preparation of nifedipine. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 24: 145–150Google Scholar
  4. Cappuccio FP, Markandu ND, Sagnella GA, MacGregor GA (1985) Sodium restriction lowers high blood pressure through a decreased response of the renin system. Direct evidence using saralasin. J Hypertens 3: 243–247Google Scholar
  5. Guazzi M, Olivari MT, Polese A, Fiorentini C, Magrini F, Moruzzi P (1977) Nifedipine, a new antihypertensive with rapid action. Clin Pharmacol Ther 22: 528–532Google Scholar
  6. Hallin L, Andren L, Hansson L (1983) Controlled trial of nifedipine and bendroflumethiazide in hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 5: 1083–1085Google Scholar
  7. Hornung RS, Gould BA, Jones RI, Sonecha TN, Raftery EB (1983) Nifedipine tablets for systemic hypertension: A study using continuous ambulatory intra-arterial recording. Am J Cardiol 51: 1323–1327Google Scholar
  8. Jakobsen P, Lederballe Pedersen O, Mikkelsen E (1979) Determination of nifedipine and one of its metabolites using electroncapture detection. J Chromatogr 162: 81–87Google Scholar
  9. Landmark K (1985) Antihypertensive and metabolic effects of long-term therapy with nifedipine slow-release tablets. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 7: 12–17Google Scholar
  10. Lederballe Pedersen O, Mikkelsen E (1978) Acute and chronic effects of nifedipine in arterial hypertension. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 14: 375–381Google Scholar
  11. MacGregor GA, Markandu ND, Rotellar C, Smith SJ, Sagnella GA (1983) The acute response to nifedipine is related to pretreatment blood pressure. Postgrad Med J 59 [Suppl 2]: 91–94Google Scholar
  12. Marone C, Luisoli S, Bomio F, Beretta Piccoli C, Bianchetti MG, Weidmann P (1984) Pressor factors and cardiovascular pressor responsiveness after short-term antihypertensive therapy with the calcium antagonist nifedipine alone or combined with a diuretic. J Hypertens 2 [Suppl 3]: 449–452Google Scholar
  13. Midtbo K, Hals O, van der Meer J (1982) Verapamil compared with nifedipine in the treatment of essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 4 [Suppl 3]: 363–368Google Scholar
  14. Ochs HR, Ramsch KD, Verburg-Ochs B, Greenblatt DJ, Gerloff J (1984) Nifedipine: Kinetics and dynamics after single oral doses. Klin Wochenschr 62: 427–429Google Scholar
  15. Olivari MT, Bartorelli C, Polese A, Fiorentini C, Moruzzi P, Guazzi MD (1979) Treatment of hypertension with nifedipine, a calcium antagonistic agent. Circulation 59: 1056–1062Google Scholar
  16. Raemsch KD, Sommer J (1983) Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of nifedipine. Hypertension 5 [Suppl 2]: 18–24Google Scholar
  17. Taburet AM, Singlas E, Colin JN, Banzet O, Thibonnier M, Corvol P (1983) Pharmacokinetic studies of nifedipine tablet — correlation with antihypertensive effects. Hypertension 5 [Suppl 2]: 29–33Google Scholar
  18. Thibonnier M, Bonnet F, Corvol P (1980) Antihypertensive effect of fractionated sublingual administration of nifedipine in moderate essential hypertension. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 17: 161–164Google Scholar
  19. Tucker FA, Minty PSB, MacGregor GA (1985) Study of nifedipine photodecomposition in plasma and whole blood using capillary gas liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr 342: 193–198Google Scholar
  20. Zar JH (1984) Biostatistical analysis (2nd edn). Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. P. Cappuccio
    • 1
  • N. D. Markandu
    • 1
  • F. A. Tucker
    • 1
  • G. A. MacGregor
    • 1
  1. 1.Blood Pressure Unit, Department of MedicineCharing Cross and Westminster Medical SchoolLondonU.K.

Personalised recommendations