Drugs in R & D

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 239–249 | Cite as

Effects of Angiotensin Receptor Blockade on Haemodynamics and Gene Expression after Myocardial Infarction

  • Andrey K. Gurevich
  • Sandor A. Falk
  • Raphael A. Nemenoff
  • Howard D. Weinberger
  • Sandra N. Summer
  • Mona Rizeq
  • Patricia E. Gengaro
  • Martin P. Bedigian
  • Robert W. Schrier
Original Research Article


Introduction: Despite the fact that congestive heart failure (CHF) remains the most common disease in the developed world and has been extensively studied, there is little known about the molecular and cellular mechanisms of cardiac dysfunction. Angiotensin has been implicated as a mediator of cardiac injury; however, the mechanisms of its action have not been delineated. The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between the haemodynamic and molecular events during cardiac dysfunction and the role of the angiotensin system.

Study design: We examined the effects of the angiotensin receptor blocker, valsartan, on changes in the haemodynamic and gene expression patterns in a postmyocardial infarction model in the rat.

Methods: Myocardial infarction (MI) was induced in rats by coronary artery ligation. Cardiac haemodynamicswere monitored using echocardiography. Gene expression profiles after myocardial infarction were identified using Affymetrix Genechip® oligonucleotide arrays.

Results: Myocardial contractility, as assessed by cardiac output and left ventricle (LV) fraction of shortening, was reduced in untreated animals by week 3 after MI (p < 0.05 versus baseline), and preserved with valsartan treatment as observed by the nonsignificant changes versus baseline. LV dilatation, as demonstrated by increases in LVsystolic and diastolic diameters, developed by week 3 in untreated animals (p < 0.05 versus baseline) while valsartan-treated animals were protected and showed no significant increases in diameter size compared with baseline. LV hypertrophy, as shown by LV posterior wall thickness, was more profound in untreated animals (p < 0.05 versus baseline) than in those treated with valsartan at weeks 3 and 4. Changes in gene expression at 4 weeks after MI included those encoding muscle-specific genes, fibrous tissue proliferation, immune response and various others. Treatment with valsartan reversed these changes in 67% of overexpressed genes and 83% of underexpressed genes.

Conclusion: Angiotensin receptor blockade with valsartan was found to protect cardiac function, and this beneficial effect was accompanied by a reversal of changes in gene expression induced by MI.


  1. 1.
    Ghali JK, Cooper R, Ford E. Trends in hospitalization for heart failure in the United States, 1973–1986: evidence for increasing population prevalence. Arch Intern Med 1990; 150: 769–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schrier RW. Pathogenesis of sodium and water retention in high-output and low-output cardiac failure, nephrotic syndrome, cirrhosis, and pregnancy (1). N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 1065–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schrier RW. Pathogenesis of sodium and water retention in high-output and low-output cardiac failure, nephrotic syndrome, cirrhosis, and pregnancy (2). N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 1127–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schrier RW. Body fluid volume regulation in health and disease: a unifying hypothesis. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113: 155–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schrier RW. A unifying hypothesis of body fluid volume regulation: the Lilly Lecture 1992. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1992; 26: 295–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schrier RW, Niederberger M. Paradoxes of body fluid volume regulation in health and disease: a unifying hypothesis. West J Med 1994; 161: 393–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schrier RW, Abraham WT. Hormones and hemodynamics in heart failure. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 577–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schrier RW, Gurevich AK, Cadnapaphornchai MA. Pathogenesis and management of sodium and water retention in cardiac failure and cirrhosis. Semin Nephrol 2001; 21: 157–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cadnapaphornchai MA, Gurevich AK, Weinberger HD, et al. Pathophysiology of sodium and water retention in heart failure. Cardiology 2001; 96: 122–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 1429–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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
  12. 12.
    The 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
  13. 13.
    The US Carvedilol Heart Failure Study Group. The effect of carvedilol on mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 1349–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bristow MR, Gilbert EM, Abraham WT, et al. Carvedilol produces dose related improvements in left ventricular function and survival in subjects with chronic heart failure. Circulation 1996; 94: 2807–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colucci WC, Packer M, Bristow MR, et al. Carvedilol inhibits clinical progression in patients with mild symptoms of heart failure. Circulation 1996; 94: 2800–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Genth-Zotz S, Zotz RJ, Sigmund M, et al. MIC trial.Metoprolol in patients with mild to moderate heart failure: effects on ventricular function and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Eur J Heart Fail 2000; 2: 175–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    MERIT-HF Study Group. Effects of controlled-release metoprolol on total mortality, hospitalizations, and wellbeing in patients with heart failure: the Metoprolol CR/XL randomized intervention trial in congestive heart failure (MERIT-HF). JAMA 2000; 283: 1295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II (CIBIS-II): a randomised trial. Lancet 1999; 353: 9–13Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Von Arnim T. Prognostic significance of transient ischemic episodes: response to treatment shows improved prognosis: results of the Total Ischemic Burden Bisoprolol Study (TIBBs) follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996; 28: 20–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wei S, Chow LT, Sanderson JE. Effect of carvedilol in comparison with metoprolol on myocardial collagen postinfarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36: 276–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Beller KD, Diedrich F, Sponer G. The effect of carvedilol on contrast echocardiography in comparison to metoprolol in conscious dogs. Arzneimittel Forschung 1999; 49: 830–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Di Lenarda A, Sabbadini G, Salvatore L, et al. Long-term effects of carvedilol in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy with persistent left ventricular dysfunction despite chronic metoprolol. The Heart-Muscle Disease Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 33: 1926–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kukin ML, Kalman J, Charney RH, et al. Prospective, randomized comparison of effect of long-term treatment with metoprolol or carvedilol on symptoms, exercise, ejection fraction, and oxidative stress in heart failure. Circulation 1999; 99: 2645–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schwinger RH. The aldosterone antagonist spironolactone prolongs the survival of chronic heart failure patients: the results of the RALES study. The Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1999; 124: 987–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kulbertus H. Study of the month. The RALES study (randomized aldactone evaluation study). Rev Med Liege 1999; 54: 770–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure: Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 709–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jin H, Yang R, Awad TA, et al. Effects of early angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibition on cardiac gene expression after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2001; 103: 736–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schrier RW, Abdallah JG, Weinberger HH, et al. Therapy of heart failure. Kidney Int 2000; 57: 1418–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ecder T, Korular D, Gurevich AK, et al. Therapy of heart failure. Curr Opin Invest Drugs 2001; 2: 81–6Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Parmley WW. Pathophysiology of congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1985; 56: 7A–11APubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, et al. Left ventricular endsystolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 1987; 76: 44–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fletcher PJ, Pfeffer JM, Pfeffer MA, et al. Left ventricular diastolic pressure-volume relations in rats with healed myocardial infarction: effects on systolic function. Circ Res 1981; 49: 618–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Agabiti-Rosei E, Muiesan ML. Prognostic significance of left ventricular hypertrophy regression. Adv Exp Med Biol 1997; 432: 199–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schmieder RE, Martus P, Klingbeil A. Reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension: a meta-analysis of randomized double-blind studies. JAMA 1996; 275: 1507–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ojamaa K, Kenessey A, Shenoy R, et al. Thyroid hormone metabolism and cardiac gene expression after acute myocardial infarction in the rat. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2000; 279: E1319–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dixon IMC, Ju H, Jassal DS, et al. Effect of ramipril and losartan on collagen expression in right and left heart after myocardial infarction. Mol Cell Biochem 1996; 165: 31–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rockman HA, Wachhorst SP, Mao L, et al. ANG II receptor blockade prevents ventricular hypertrophy and ANF gene expression with pressure overload in mice. Am J Physiol 1994; 266: H2468–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kim S, Ohta K, Hamaguchi A, et al. Effects of an AT1 receptor antagonist, an ACE inhibitor and a calcium channel antagonist on cardiac gene expressions in hypertensive rats. Br J Pharmacol 1996; 118: 549–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Li H, Simon H, Bocan TMA, et al. MMP/TIMP expression in spontaneously hypertensive heart failure rats: the effect of ACE- and MMP-inhibition. Cardiovasc Res 2000; 46: 298–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Makoto K, Kensuke E, Takashi M, et al. Differential effects of imidapril and candesartan cilexetil on plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 expression induced by prolonged inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis in rat hearts. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2000; 35: 932–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sandmann S, Yu M, Unger T. Transcriptional and translational regulation of calpain in the rat heart after myocardial infarction-effects of AT1 and AT2 receptor antagonists and ACE inhibitor. Br J Pharmacol 2001; 132: 767–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Friddle CJ, Koga T, Rubin EM, et al. Expression profiling reveals distinct sets of genes altered during induction and regression of cardiac hypertrophy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97: 6745–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sehl PD, Tai JT, Hillan KJ, et al. Application of cDNA microarrays in determining molecular phenotype in cardiac growth, development, and response to injury. Circulation 2000; 101: 1990–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gidh-Jain M, Huang B, Jain P, et al. Alterations in cardiac gene expression during ventricular remodeling following experimental myocardial infarction. J Mol Cell Cardiol 1998; 30: 627–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ruskoaho H. Atrial natriuretic peptide: synthesis, release, and metabolism. Pharmacol Rev 1992; 44: 479–602PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrey K. Gurevich
    • 1
  • Sandor A. Falk
    • 1
  • Raphael A. Nemenoff
    • 1
  • Howard D. Weinberger
    • 2
  • Sandra N. Summer
    • 1
  • Mona Rizeq
    • 3
  • Patricia E. Gengaro
    • 1
  • Martin P. Bedigian
    • 4
  • Robert W. Schrier
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medicine, Division of Renal Diseases and HypertensionUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences CenterDenverUSA
  2. 2.Department of Medicine, Division of CardiologyUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences CenterDenverUSA
  3. 3.Department of PathologyVeterans Administration Medical CenterDenverUSA
  4. 4.Novartis Pharmaceutical CorporationEast HanoverUSA

Personalised recommendations