Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 371–384 | Cite as

Zofenopril

A Review of the Evidence of its Benefits in Hypertension and Acute Myocardial Infarction
  • Claudio Borghi
  • Ettore Ambrosioni
Clinical Review

Abstract

The efficacy and tolerability of zofenopril in the treatment of essential hypertension have been evaluated in four well-designed trials. In a dose-finding study (zofenopril 7.5 to 60 mg/day) dosages >7.5 mg/day were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP). In three comparative studies, zofenopril 30 to 60 mg/day once daily was as effective as atenolol 50 to 100 mg/day, amlodipine 5 to 10 mg/day and enalapril 20 to 40 mg/day when assessed by reductions in diastolic BP. In general, adverse effects reported for zofenopril were class specific, mild and transient, and rarely required drug withdrawal.

Two major controlled trials evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of zofenopril in the treatment of myocardial infarction (MI). The Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long term Evaluation (SMILE) trial assessed 6 weeks’ zofenopril treatment in 1556 patients with anterior acute (<24 hours from symptoms) MI not receiving thrombolytic therapy. Zofenopril significantly reduced the relative risk for the incidence of death or severe congestive heart failure (CHF) at 6 weeks by 32.7% (95% CI = 6.8 to 51.4%) compared with placebo. Mortality at 12 months was also significantly reduced in zofenopril versus placebo recipients, indicating that the benefits of zofenopril therapy extended beyond treatment end. Hypotension was more frequent in zofenopril than in placebo recipients (17.1 vs 8.9%; p < 0.001). In the SMILE-II trial, the tolerability and efficacy of zofenopril versus lisinopril for 6 weeks were compared in patients with MI receiving thrombolytic therapy (n = 1024). The incidence of severe hypotension was similar between zofenopril and lisinopril recipients (10.9 vs 11.7%), but this event was considered by the investigators to be related to the study medication in a significantly lower percentage of zofenopril versus lisinopril recipients (6.7 vs 9.8%; p< 0.05).

In conclusion, these findings indicate that zofenopril is at least as effective and well tolerated as many other antihypertensive drugs in the treatment of essential hypertension. On the strength of its anti-ischaemic properties (as shown by its efficacy in acute MI), it should be particularly suitable for the treatment of patients with myocardial ischaemia

References

  1. 1.
    Singhvi SM, Foley JE, Willard DA, et al. Disposition of zofenopril calcium in healthy subjects. JPharm Sci 1990; 79: 970–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marzo A, Dal Bo L, Mazzucchelli P, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of zofenopril in healthy volunteers. Arzneimittel-Forsch 1999; 49: 992–6Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Subissi A, Evangelista S, Giachetti A. Preclinical profile of zofenopril: an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor with peculiar cardioprotective properties. Cardiovasc Drug Rev 1999; 17: 115–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chopra M, Beswick H, Clapperton M, et al. Antioxidant effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors: free radical and oxidant scavenging are sulfhydryl dependent, but lipid peroxidation is inhibited by both sulfhydryl- and non-sulfhydryl-containing Ace inhibitors. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 19: 330–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sargent CA, Sleph PG, Dzwonczyk S, et al. Cardioprotection in ischemic rat hearts with the SH-containing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor zofenopril: possible involvement of the ATP-sensitive potassium channel. J Pharmacol ExpTher 1993; 265: 609–18Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Gilst WH, de Graeff PA, de Leeuw MJ, et al. Converting enzyme inhibitors and the role of the sufhydryl group in the potentiation of exo- and endogenous nitrovasodilators. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 18: 429–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brogelli L, Parenti A, Capaccioli S, et al. The angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor zofenoprilat prevents endothelial cell apoptosis and promotes coronary angiogenesis ‘in vitro’ [abstract]. FASEB J 1999; 13: A528Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu X, Engelman RM, Rousou JA, et al. Attenuation of myocardial reperfusion injury by sulfhydryl-containing angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Cardiovasc Drug Ther 1992; 6: 437–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferrari R, Cargnoni A, Curello S, et al. Protection of the ischemie myocardium by the converting-enzyme inhibitor zofenopril: insight into its mechanism of action. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 20: 694–704PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McDonald KM, Garr M, Carlyle PF, et al. Relative effects of alpha 1-adrenoceptor blockade, converting enzyme inhibitor therapy, and angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor blockade on ventricular remodeling in the dog. Circulation 1994; 90: 3034–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tio RA, de Langen CDJ, de Graeff PA, et al. The effects of oral pretreatment with zofenopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, on early reperfusion and subsequent electro-physiologic stability in the pig. Cardiovasc Drug Ther 1990: 4: 695–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Darragh A. Report on the comparative effects of zofenopril (SQ 26,991) and captopril on angiotensin-induced pressor responses in normal male subjects. Data on file. Menarini, 1982Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Uhr MR. Evaluation of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition activity of zofenopril following administration of three oral ascending doses to healthy volunteers. Data on file. Menarini, 1997Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fouad-Tarazi FM. Report on the effect of zofenopril calcium on regional blood flow in patients with essential hypertension. Data on file. Menarini, 1988Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. J Hypertens 1999; 17: 151–83Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, et al. Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, Short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet 1990; 335: 827–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients randomized to doxazosin vs chlorthalidone: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2000; 283: 1967–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. Lancet 1998; 351: 1755–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mancia G, Zanchetti A, Agabiti-Rosei E, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure is superior to clinic blood pressure in predicting treatment-induced regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Circulation 1997; 95: 1464–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 145–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lacourcière Y, Provencher P. Comparative effects of zofenopril and hydrochlorothiazide on office and ambulatory blood pressures in mild to moderate essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1989; 27: 371–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malacco E, Giusti A, on behalf of the Zofenopril Study G. Once-daily zofenopril provides 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure control in hypertensive patients aged under 65 years. Am J Hypertens 1998 Apr; 11 (Pt 2): 70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Perlik F, Bergamini N, Poggi G, et al. Comparative evaluation of the anti-hypertensive effect of zofenopril — an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor — versus atenolol, in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension. Multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study. Data on file. Menarini, 1998Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giusti A, Bertolotti M, Clark WIC, et al. The efficacy and safety of zofenopril compared to amlodipine in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1999 Apr; 12 (Pt 2): 140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Giusti A, Bretolotti M, Llabres S, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of zofenopril or enalapril in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Data on file. Am J Hypertens 1999 Apr; 12 (Pt 2): 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Study of the duration of action of zofenopril in the treatment of mild to moderate essential arterial hypertension. Data on file. Menarini, 1989Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Estacio RO, Jeffers BW, Hiatt WR, et al. The effect of nisol-dipine as compared with enalapril on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes and hypertension. N Eng J Med 1998; 338: 645–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tatti P, Pahor M, Byington RP, et al. Outcome results of the of the Fosinopril versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial (FACET) in patients with hypertension and NIDDM. Diabetes Care 1998; 21: 597–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hansson L, Lindholm LH, Niskanen L, et al, for the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) study group. Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) randomised trial. Lancet 1999; 353: 611–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Swedberg K, Held P, Kjekshus J, et al. for the CONSENSUS II Study Group. Effects of the early administration of enalapril on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 678–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B, et al. for the Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-Term Evaluation (SMILE) Study Investigators. The effect of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor zofenopril on mortality and morbidity after anterior myocardial infarction. New Engl J Med 1995; 332: 80–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Borghi C, Bacchelli S, Esposti D, et al. on behalf of the SMILE Study Investigators. Effects of the administration of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor during the acute phase of myocardial infarction in patients with arterial hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1999; 12(7): 665–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ambrosioni E, Borghi C, Magnani B, on behalf of the SMILE pilot study working party. Early treatment of acute myocardial infarction with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: safety considerations. Am J Cardiol 1991;68(14): 101D–10DPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gruppo Italiano per la Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto Miocardico. GISSI-3: effects of lisinopril and transdermal glyceryl trinitrate singly and together on 6-week mortality and ventricular function after acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1994; 343: 1115–22Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    ISIS Collaborative Group. ISIS-4: randomised study of oral captopril in over 50,000 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1993; 88 (Suppl. I): I–394Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Latini R, Tognoni G, Maggioni AP, et al. on behalf of the Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitor Myocardial Infarction Collaborative Group. Clinical effects of early angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment for acute myocardial infarction are similar in the presence and absence of aspirin: systematic overview of individual data from 96,712 randomized patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. In pressGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hall AS, Murray GD, Ball SG, et al.on behalf of the AIREX Study Investigators. Follow-up study of patients randomly allocated ramipril or placebo for heart failure after acute myocardial infarction: AIRE Extension (AIREX) Study. Lancet 1997; 349: 1493–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Borghi C, Ambrosioni E. Comparison between the safety profile of Zofenopril and Lisinopril in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Presented at the American Heart Association 73rd Scientific Sessions 2000 Nov 12–15: New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. Circulation. In pressGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rutherford JD, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, et al. for the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) trial Investigators. Effects of captopril on ischaemic events after MI. Results of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement trial. Circulation 1994; 90: 1731–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Køber L, Torp-Pedersen C, Carlsen JE, et al. A clinical trial of the ACE inhibitor trandolapril in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1670–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chinese Cardiac Study Collaborative Group. Oral captopril versus placebo among 13,634 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction: interim report from the Chinese Cardiac Study (CCS-1). Lancet 1995; 345: 686–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    ACE Inhibitor Myocardial Infarction Collaborative Group. Indications for ACE inhibitors in the early treatment of acute myocardial infaction: systematic review of individual data from 100,000 patients in randomized trials. Circulation 1998; 97: 2202–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudio Borghi
    • 1
  • Ettore Ambrosioni
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations