ライフサイエンスコーパス: irbesartan

1 mean sitting DBP and SBP, respectively, for irbesartan).

2 F-PEF) on patients' lives and the effects of irbesartan.

3 specific mortality rates between placebo and irbesartan.

4 ibrosis that was prevented by treatment with irbesartan.

5 n coronary artery disease patients receiving irbesartan.

6 he presence of the AT(1) receptor antagonist irbesartan.

7 nvolved, Ang II was added in the presence of irbesartan (10 micromol/L), a specific AT(1) receptor an

8 re made over 24 h following randomization to irbesartan 12.5 mg, 37.5 mg, 75 mg, 150 mg or placebo.

9 f aliskiren 150 mg was comparable to that of irbesartan 150 mg (8.9+/-0.7 and 12.5+/-1.2 mm Hg, least

10 red mean sitting DBP significantly more than irbesartan 150 mg (P<0.05).

11 Aliskiren 150 mg is as effective as irbesartan 150 mg in lowering blood pressure.

12 al doses of aliskiren (150, 300, or 600 mg), irbesartan 150 mg, or placebo.

13 bolic syndrome in a double-blinded manner to irbesartan 150 mg/d (n=14), lipoic acid 300 mg/d (n=15),

14 quickly accessing the antihypertensive drug irbesartan (2).

15 ber of AT(1) receptor antagonists, including irbesartan (3).

16 th indapamide 1.5 mg/d, ramipril 10 mg/d (or irbesartan 300 mg/d), and amlodipine 10 mg/d were random

17 thy due to type 2 diabetes to treatment with irbesartan (300 mg daily), amlodipine (10 mg daily), or

18 ressure-lowering drugs each at quarter-dose (irbesartan 37.5 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, hydrochlorothiaz

19 aily caloric intake); 6 received alcohol and irbesartan (5 mg.kg(-1).d(-1) PO); and 8 were controls.

20 ge -5.9+/-0.9 mm Hg and -5.3+/-0.9 mm Hg for irbesartan 75 mg and 150 mg, respectively) after 12 week

21 vement in MLHFQ scores was not observed with irbesartan after 6 months (mean adjusted difference, 0.4

22 (I-Preserve) trial and to determine whether irbesartan altered the distribution of mode of death in

23 e interaction of assigned study medications (irbesartan, amlodipine, and placebo) on progressive rena

24 diabetes and overt nephropathy treated with irbesartan, amlodipine, or placebo in addition to conven

25 Patients were randomized to irbesartan, amlodipine, or placebo, with other antihyper

26 Treatment with irbesartan, amlodipine, or placebo.

27 ound 7 clearly demonstrated superiority over irbesartan (an AT(1) receptor antagonist) in the normal

28 We evaluated the ability of irbesartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, and lipoic

29 /d (n=14), lipoic acid 300 mg/d (n=15), both irbesartan and lipoic acid (n=15), or matching placebo (

30 Conversely, irbesartan and losartan were largely G protein-selective

31 Primary event rates in the irbesartan and placebo groups were 100.4 and 105.4 per 1

32 d tolerability profile comparable to that of irbesartan and placebo, in patients with mild-to-moderat

33 Administration of irbesartan and/or lipoic acid to patients with the metab

34 Treatment with irbesartan and/or lipoic acid was associated with statis

35 he exaggerated renal vasodilator response to irbesartan, and the therapeutic effectiveness of interru

36 Irbesartan, at once-daily doses of 75 mg and 150 mg, ind

37 ed for telemesartan and, to a lesser extent, irbesartan based on a partial agonist action on PPAR-gam

38 All of these effects were inhibited by irbesartan but not PD 123319 or divalinil.

39 weeks with the angiotensin receptor blocker irbesartan, but not with the thiazide-type diuretic chlo

40 dividuals were enrolled in the international Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT) and followe

41 iabetic nephropathy and were enrolled in the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT) and had a b

42 tensive patients with type 2 diabetes in the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT), a randomiz

43 L) trial with independent replication in the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT).

44 The primary outcomes of the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial were doubling of s

45 Treatment with irbesartan did not affect overall mortality or the distr

46 Irbesartan did not improve the outcomes of patients with

47 Irbesartan did not substantially improve MLHFQ scores du

48 placebo were reallocated to one of the four irbesartan doses, treatment was continued for 12 weeks a

49 ed coronary artery disease were treated with irbesartan for a 12-week period.

50 onary artery disease (CAD) were treated with irbesartan for a 24-week period.

51 e Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial With Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events, there was

52 h the risk related to WRF was greater in the irbesartan group (HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.21 to 2.28; p = 0.

53 mary outcome occurred in 742 patients in the irbesartan group and 763 in the placebo group.

54 group (P=0.003) and 37 percent lower in the irbesartan group than in the amlodipine group (P<0.001).

55 ne concentration was 33 percent lower in the irbesartan group than in the placebo group (P=0.003) and

56 tion increased 24 percent more slowly in the irbesartan group than in the placebo group (P=0.008) and

57 es in mortality rate between the placebo and irbesartan groups.

58 In contrast, patients receiving irbesartan had a significantly lower incidence of conges

59 from acute lung injury by the AT1 antagonist irbesartan; however, this effect was again blocked by A7

60 The ARB was losartan in 17 patients and irbesartan in 1 patient.

61 We used data from the AVOID study and the Irbesartan in Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT) to estim

62 istics and outcomes in the I-Preserve trial (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Frac

63 s and outcomes of patients with HFpEF in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Frac

64 lure with preserved ejection fraction in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Frac

65 death in patients with HFPEF enrolled in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Frac

66 n 3,595 patients included in the I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Frac

67 in these trials, along with the I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Systolic Func

68 es by international geographic region in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved systolic func

69 The Irbesartan in HFPEF trial (I-PRESERVE) enrolled 4128 pat

70 preserved ejection fraction enrolled in the irbesartan in patients with heart failure and preserved

71 ong-term hemodynamic and clinical effects of irbesartan in patients with heart failure.

72 Therefore, we studied the effects of irbesartan in patients with this syndrome.

73 Treatment with irbesartan in these patients significantly reduced level

74 RA, renal perfusion rose more in response to irbesartan in type 2 diabetes mellitus (714 +/- 83 to 93

75 An additional renoprotective effect of irbesartan, independent of achieved SBP, was observed do

76 Irbesartan induced significant dose-related decreases in

77 Irbesartan is an orally active antagonist of the angiote

78 The angiotensin-II-receptor blocker irbesartan is effective in protecting against the progre

79 ry was increased by 67%, 44%, and 75% in the irbesartan, lipoic acid, and irbesartan plus lipoic acid

80 Our results show that use of irbesartan may retard the inflammatory process seen in p

81 Our results indicate that irbesartan may suppress the atherosclerotic process by i

82 PRA rose in response to irbesartan more gradually in the patients with type 2 di

83 seven dogs treated with the receptor blocker irbesartan (MR+AT(1)RB) started 24 h after induction of

84 The effect of irbesartan on each inflammatory marker is significant.

85 In addition, treatment with irbesartan or irbesartan plus lipoic acid decreased 8-is

86 randomly assigned them to receive 300 mg of irbesartan or placebo per day.

87 ) and development of WRF after initiation of irbesartan or placebo were examined.

88 Patients were randomized to receive irbesartan or placebo.

89 r either the angiotensin-II-receptor blocker irbesartan or the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine slo

90 With alcohol plus irbesartan, plasma Ang II, cardiac angiotensin-convertin

91 In addition, treatment with irbesartan or irbesartan plus lipoic acid decreased 8-isoprostane leve

92 and 75% in the irbesartan, lipoic acid, and irbesartan plus lipoic acid groups, respectively, compar

93 Irbesartan prevented the alcohol-induced decreases in LV

94 Treatment with the AT1 receptor blocker, irbesartan rescued the systolic dysfunction, normalized

95 Treatment with irbesartan significantly decreased the pro-oxidative env

96 sly reported in HFrEF but more frequent with irbesartan than with placebo.

97 erability comparable to those of placebo and irbesartan; the incidence of adverse events and number o

98 ximal suppression of inflammatory markers by irbesartan therapy in patients with CAD was seen at 12 w

99 ) patients and occurred more frequently with irbesartan treatment (8% vs. 4%).

100 Estimated GFR decreased early with irbesartan treatment and remained significantly lower th

101 WRF after initiation of irbesartan treatment in HFpEF was associated with excess

102 symptomatic HF-PEF were randomly assigned to irbesartan (up to 300 mg daily) or placebo.

103 Treatment with irbesartan was associated with a relative risk of end-st

104 Treatment with irbesartan was associated with a risk of the primary com

105 In addition, the AT1 receptor blocker irbesartan was evaluated for its ability to suppress the

106 Irbesartan was well tolerated without evidence of dose-r

107 The neurohormonal effects of irbesartan were highly variable and none of the changes

108 ses of an angiotensin II (AngII) antagonist, irbesartan, were assessed in eight healthy volunteers an

109 est rise in renal plasma flow in response to irbesartan, whereas renal plasma flow rose less and GFR

110 present in an AT(1) receptor antagonist (1, irbesartan) with key structural elements in a biphenylsu

111 ose of the biphenyl AT(1) antagonists (e.g., irbesartan) would yield a compound with dual activity fo