ライフサイエンスコーパス: lisinopril

1 in vitro with FBL, with and without 10(-6) M lisinopril.

2 those given chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril.

3 assignment to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril.

4 so, whereas it was equivalent to those given lisinopril.

5 ice given anti-TGFbeta1 or the ACE inhibitor lisinopril.

6 erved between the SBP PRS and BP response to lisinopril.

7 zed adults to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril.

8 ts on placebo, 29% on carvedilol, and 30% on lisinopril.

9 tion: Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan or lisinopril.

10 -lisinopril, respectively, versus 1.9 nM for lisinopril.

11 ys of treatment with placebo, amlodipine, or lisinopril.

12 with and without pretreatment with unlabeled lisinopril.

13 e incidence of new-onset HFPEF compared with lisinopril.

14 : D(C4)lisinopril, D(C5)lisinopril, and D(C8)lisinopril.

15 s higher in the amlodipine (2.5-10 mg/d) and lisinopril (10-40 mg/d) arms compared with the chlorthal

16 ice were treated with Agt-ASO (66 mg/kg/wk), lisinopril (100 mg/kg/d), PBS (control), or scrambled AS

17 .5 mm Hg) than with amlodipine (-3.8 mm Hg), lisinopril (-2.4 mm Hg), or doxazosin (-3.8 mm Hg).

18 months after the creation, the ACE inhibitor lisinopril 20 mg was given orally daily.

19 igher in the placebo group (47%) than in the lisinopril (37%) and the carvedilol (31%) groups.

20 inine ratio > or =300 mg/g) who all received lisinopril (80 mg once daily).

21 positron emission tomography in 17 patients (lisinopril: 9 patients, losartan: 8 patients) with hyper

22 t equal to those of the commercial standard (lisinopril, 98.99%).

23 Conversely, atenolol, when added to lisinopril, achieved maximum hemodynamic benefit and als

24 Lisinopril also decreased progression by two or more gra

25 ining the biodistribution of the 99mTc-[D(C8)lisinopril] analog in rats with and without pretreatment

26 roups to produce di(2-pyridylmethyl)amine(Cx)lisinopril analogs: D(C4)lisinopril, D(C5)lisinopril, an

27 t one level in 21 (13.2%) of 159 patients on lisinopril and 39 (23.4%) of 166 patients on placebo (od

28 dest BP changes and decreased adherence with lisinopril and absence of lipid differences with pravast

29 an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) and placebo or lisinopril and an ARB (telmisartan), with the doses adju

30 breast cancer treated with trastuzumab, both lisinopril and carvedilol prevented cardiotoxicity in pa

31 oth cystic and noncystic cells compared with lisinopril and control treatments.

32 een designed with potency similar to that of lisinopril and has been demonstrated to specifically loc

33 Early lowering of blood pressure with lisinopril and labetalol after acute stroke seems to be

34 R) before and after long-term treatment with lisinopril and losartan in patients with hypertension an

35 The angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril and mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonis

36 values ranging from 44 to 4500 nM for Ni-NTA-lisinopril and Ni-DOTA-lisinopril, respectively, versus

37 Early treatment with heart failure drugs lisinopril and spironolactone improves skeletal muscle p

38 In early ADPKD, the combination of lisinopril and telmisartan did not significantly alter t

39 three months of MR and decreased during both lisinopril and the combined therapy in which it was not

40 y-surface area) to receive an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) and placebo or lisinopril and an ARB (telmis

41 the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril) and thus was dependent on angiotensin-conver

42 ants (eg, valproate), antihypertensives (eg, lisinopril), and immunomodulators (eg, mycophenolate).

43 (2) 75 mg aspirin, 40 mg simvastatin, 10 mg lisinopril, and 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide or to usual

44 (1) 75 mg aspirin, 40 mg simvastatin, 10 mg lisinopril, and 50 mg atenolol or (2) 75 mg aspirin, 40

45 hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate, trichostatin A, lisinopril, and 6 from the glucocorticoid family) signif

46 isease, was identical in the chlorthalidone, lisinopril, and amlodipine groups.

47 nt of the relative effect of chlorthalidone, lisinopril, and amlodipine in preventing HF.

48 Cx)lisinopril analogs: D(C4)lisinopril, D(C5)lisinopril, and D(C8)lisinopril.

49 opril (EDTA-lisinopril, NTA-lisinopril, DOTA-lisinopril, and GGH-lisinopril) conjugates were used to

50 nt classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs (lisinopril [angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor], ca

51 Labetalol and lisinopril are effective antihypertensive drugs in acute

52 ese results indicate that both diltiazem and lisinopril are safe for treatment of hypertension after

53 a and then randomly assigned them to receive lisinopril (at a dose of 10 to 40 mg per day) or placebo

54 The angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril, at standard dose, reduced proteinuria by app

55 ectiveness of a polypill containing aspirin, lisinopril, atenolol, and simvastatin for secondary prev

56 n-induced LVH after long-term treatment with lisinopril but not with losartan.

57 GGH were linked to the lysine side chain of lisinopril by 1-ethyl-3-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]carbodi

58 (M = technetium, rhenium) was conjugated to lisinopril by acylation of the epsilon-amine of the lysi

59 racycline use and then randomized to receive lisinopril, carvedilol, or placebo.

60 0.89-1.25), respectively, for amlodipine and lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone, and 10-year adj

61 This class of metal chelate-lisinopril complexes possesses a range of high-affinity

62 dent inactivation of sACE-1 by metal chelate-lisinopril complexes revealed a remarkable range of cata

63 endent inhibition of sACE-1 by metal chelate-lisinopril complexes revealed IC(50) values ranging from

64 ting a more optimal orientation of M-chelate-lisinopril complexes within the active site of the N-dom

65 , following preincubation with metal chelate-lisinopril compounds.

66 il, NTA-lisinopril, DOTA-lisinopril, and GGH-lisinopril) conjugates were used to form coordination co

67 where the distance of the chelator from the lisinopril core was investigated by varying the number o

68 nar anterior imaging analysis of 99mTc-[D(C8)lisinopril] corroborated these data.

69 bacute hemodynamic effects of amlodipine and lisinopril could contribute to the differences in CCA re

70 iron, cobalt, nickel, and copper, such that lisinopril could mediate localization of the reactive me

71 Herein, the activity of lisinopril-coupled transition metal chelates was tested

72 idylmethyl)amine(Cx)lisinopril analogs: D(C4)lisinopril, D(C5)lisinopril, and D(C8)lisinopril.

73 Lisinopril, dapagliflozin, and hydralazine were administ

74 d time-averaged WSS in the CCA compared with lisinopril, despite similar reductions in BP.

75 k of +25 to +31% per each 10 mg increment of lisinopril-dose equivalent.

76 erosis in G2/G2 BAC-transgenic mice required lisinopril doses two times higher than were effective in

77 ked chelate-lisinopril (EDTA-lisinopril, NTA-lisinopril, DOTA-lisinopril, and GGH-lisinopril) conjuga

78 The resulting amide-linked chelate-lisinopril (EDTA-lisinopril, NTA-lisinopril, DOTA-lisino

79 nts, with a dose threshold of >5 mg of daily lisinopril equivalence, possibly due to prevention of AV

80 When the mean daily post-operative lisinopril-equivalent ACE inhibitor/ARB dose was >5 mg,

81 ted the effects found in rats medicated with lisinopril, except that cardiac ACE2 mRNA fell to values

82 A new radiotracer, 18F-fluorobenzoyl-lisinopril (FBL), was synthesized without compromising i

83 ith different concentrations of captopril or lisinopril for 5 days.

84 rapy, the beta-blocker atenolol was added to lisinopril for another three months.

85 the effectiveness and safety of diltiazem or lisinopril for treatment of hypertension after heart tra

86 o 35 mg daily, n=1568) of the ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, for 39 to 58 months, while background therap

87 7) in the placebo group and 59% (103) in the lisinopril group (p = 0.2).

88 t maximal coronary blood flow and MPR in the lisinopril group increased significantly compared with p

89 Patients on lisinopril had significantly lower HbA1c at baseline tha

90 with chlorthalidone, randomization to either lisinopril (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval,

91 dence interval: 0.27 to 0.89; p = 0.009) and lisinopril (hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval:

92 e had significantly lower risk than those on lisinopril (HR, 1.18 versus 2.57; P=0.04 for interaction

93 rophic mice treated with spironolactone plus lisinopril (IC50 0.1 nM) compared with untreated control

94 sinopril], IC50 = 1,146 nM, as compared with lisinopril, IC50 = 4 nM.

95 D(C5)lisinopril], IC50 = 144 nM; and Re[D(C4)lisinopril], IC50 = 1,146 nM, as compared with lisinopri

96 concentration of 50% (IC50) = 3 nM; Re[D(C5)lisinopril], IC50 = 144 nM; and Re[D(C4)lisinopril], IC5

97 inhibits angiotensinogen (Agt) synthesis to lisinopril in adult conditional Pkd1 systemic-knockout m

98 the effectiveness and safety of diltiazem or lisinopril in the treatment of hypertension in cyclospor

99 nce and absence of the antihypertensive drug lisinopril) in order to aid the understanding of how the

100 Losartan treatment but not lisinopril increased cardiac tissue levels of Ang II and

101 the length of the methylene spacer: Re[D(C8)lisinopril], inhibitory concentration of 50% (IC50) = 3

102 Compared with chlorthalidone, treatment with lisinopril is not associated with a meaningful reduction

103 Neither amlodipine nor lisinopril is superior to chlorthalidone in preventing C

104 after continuous administration of vehicle, lisinopril, losartan, or both drugs combined in their dr

105 Amlodipine and lisinopril lowered BP similarly, but CCA flow rate was s

106 Lisinopril may decrease retinopathy progression in non-h

107 roups of either chlorthalidone (n = 3745) or lisinopril (n = 2294), with genetic data available from

108 ndomly assigned to receive labetolol (n=58), lisinopril (n=58), or placebo (n=63) between January, 20

109 an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril; n = 8233), or an alpha-blocker (doxazosin; n

110 with one of the most widely used inhibitors, lisinopril (N2-[(S)-1-carboxy-3-phenylpropyl]-L-lysyl-L-

111 ulting amide-linked chelate-lisinopril (EDTA-lisinopril, NTA-lisinopril, DOTA-lisinopril, and GGH-lis

112 We investigated the effect of lisinopril on retinopathy in type 1 diabetes.

113 ACE2 is not inhibited by lisinopril or captopril.

114 For such patients, lisinopril or carvedilol should be considered to minimiz

115 d showed reduced cystic volume compared with lisinopril or control treatments.

116 (Lisinopril or Coreg CR in Reducing Side Effects in Women

117 n blood pressure were obtained in rats given lisinopril or losartan alone or in combination.

118 alidone, 5.6% with amlodipine, and 4.3% with lisinopril), or no diabetes at 2 years of in-trial follo

119 h the angiotensin converting enzyme blocker, lisinopril, or angiotensin II receptor blocker, losartan

120 ere randomly assigned to receive amlodipine, lisinopril, or chlorthalidone.

121 ts randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin treatments and followed up for

122 ) determined that treatment with amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin was not superior to thiazide-li

123 re randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin, providing an opportunity to co

124 the risk of HFPEF compared with amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin; the hazard ratios were 0.69 (9

125 classical ACE inhibitors such as captopril, lisinopril, or enalaprilat.

126 phagic, or intravenous labetalol, sublingual lisinopril, or placebo if they had dysphagia, within 36

127 ral randomisation to receive oral labetalol, lisinopril, or placebo if they were non-dysphagic, or in

128 ubated in solution containing cold, 10(-6) M lisinopril (P < 0.0001).

129 omized and 34 [lisinopril/pravastatin (n=9), lisinopril/P-placebo (n=8), L-placebo/pravastatin (n=9),

130 emia with rosiglitazone or hypertension with lisinopril partially reduced ACR, consistent with indepe

131 een the lisinopril-telmisartan group and the lisinopril-placebo group.

132 ngiotensin-receptor blocker (telmisartan) or lisinopril plus placebo.

133 an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril) plus an angiotensin-receptor blocker (telmis

134 y-seven participants were randomized and 34 [lisinopril/pravastatin (n=9), lisinopril/P-placebo (n=8)

135 sought to determine whether randomization to lisinopril reduces incident AF or atrial flutter (AFL) c

136 to 4500 nM for Ni-NTA-lisinopril and Ni-DOTA-lisinopril, respectively, versus 1.9 nM for lisinopril.

137 utralization of TGFbeta1 by anti-TGFbeta1 or lisinopril resulted in less collagen deposition and less

138 Similarly, captopril and lisinopril significantly inhibited intracellular accumul

139 Although lisinopril significantly reduced preload, its effect on

140 One het group received spironolactone and lisinopril starting at 8 weeks of life (het-treated-8);

141 as dramatically reduced by pretreatment with lisinopril, supporting ACE-mediated binding in vivo.

142 without significant differences between the lisinopril-telmisartan group and the lisinopril-placebo

143 composite primary outcome (hazard ratio with lisinopril-telmisartan, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0

144 Blood pressure was better controlled with lisinopril than with Agt-ASO.

145 After three months of lisinopril therapy, the beta-blocker atenolol was added

146 so reduced in thyroids of anti-TGFbeta1- and lisinopril-treated mice compared with those of controls.

147 Of 61 lisinopril-treated patients, 28 (46%) were responders, 2

148 from 100 +/- 1.0 to 84 +/- 2.0 mm Hg in the lisinopril-treated responders (p < 0.0001).

149 from 153 +/- 2.1 to 127 +/- 2.7 mm Hg in the lisinopril-treated responders (p < 0.0001).

150 months of MR and rose insignificantly after lisinopril treatment (2.99 +/- 0.17).

151 all of the CCA was significantly lower after lisinopril treatment than after amlodipine treatment (P

152 .016) after amlodipine treatment than after lisinopril treatment.

153 Lisinopril-tryptophan (LisW) has previously been reporte

154 ly reported C-domain selective ACE inhibitor lisinopril-tryptophan (LisW) to probe the structural req

155 sed with chlorthalidone versus amlodipine or lisinopril use during year 1.

156 model showed relative risks of amlodipine or lisinopril versus chlorthalidone during year 1 were 2.22

157 idence intervals; P values) of amlodipine or lisinopril versus chlorthalidone were 1.35 (1.21 to 1.50

158 hoices of lisinopril vs hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril vs amlodipine, candesartan vs hydrochlorothia

159 differences were excluded for the choices of lisinopril vs candesartan and hydrochlorothiazide vs aml

160 (P < .001), specifically for the choices of lisinopril vs hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril vs amlodip

161 Participants taking lisinopril vs L-placebo were more likely to report misse

162 Participants randomized to lisinopril vs. L-placebo had significant declines in dia

163 A single dose of lisinopril was administered during study days to ensure

164 ity, whereas the combination of losartan and lisinopril was associated with elevated cardiac ACE2 act

165 hyperemic flow in the patients treated with lisinopril was not significantly different from correspo

166 Lisinopril was similar to chlorthalidone in preventing C

167 -glomerulosclerotic effects of standard dose lisinopril were markedly effective in G1/G1 compared wit

168 nts as high as 150,000 M(-1) min(-1) (Cu-GGH-lisinopril), while catalyst-mediated cleavage of sACE-1

169 .77-1.42) than participants on amlodipine or lisinopril with incident diabetes (HR range, 1.22-1.53).

170 Chlorthalidone was similar to lisinopril with regard to incidence of HFREF (hazard rat

171 % of participants (chlorthalidone/amlodipine/lisinopril) with new-onset HFPEF versus 41.9% in those w