Abstract
Importance
Two major guide-line committees (JNC-8 and NICE UK) have dropped beta-blockers as first-line therapy in the treatment of hypertension. Also, recent meta-analyses (that do not take age into account) have concluded that beta-blockers are inappropriate first-line agents in the treatment of hypertension. This review seeks to shed some light on the “rights and wrongs” of such actions and conclusions.
Objectives
Because the pathophysiology of primary/essential hypertension differs in elderly and younger subjects, the latter being closely linked to obesity and increased sympathetic nerve activity, the author sought to clarify the efficacy of beta-blockers in the younger/middle-aged group in reducing the risk of death, and cardiovascular end-points.
Evidence acquisition
Four searches were undertaken, utilising PubMed up to 31st Dec 2015. One search was under the terms “hypertension AND obesity AND sympathetic nerve activity”. A second was “hypertension AND plasma noradrenaline/norepinephrine AND survival”. A third was “beta-blockers or adrenergic beta-antagonists AND hypertension AND age AND stroke or myocardial infarction or death”. A fourth was “meta-analysis of beta-blockers AND hypertension AND age AND death, stroke, myocardial infarction”
Results
Diastolic (with or without systolic) hypertension, in contrast to isolated systolic hypertension, occurs primarily in younger subjects, and is linked to overweight/obesity and increased sympathetic nerve activity. In younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects, high plasma norepinephrine levels are linked (independent of blood pressure) to an increased risk of future cardiovascular events and death. High resting heart rates (a surrogate for high sympathetic nerve activity) likewise predict premature all-cause death, coronary heart disease and cardiovascular events in younger hypertensive subjects. In this younger/middle-aged hypertensive group, antihypertensive agents that increase sympathetic nerve activity (diuretics, dihydropyridine calcium blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)) do not decrease (and may increase) the risk of myocardial infarction, and are therefore inappropriate first-line agents in this age-group. By contrast, in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects (less than 60 years old), meta-analysis has shown that beta-blockers are significantly superior to randomised placebo, and at least as effective as randomised comparator agents, in reducing death/stroke/myocardial infarction. In this younger/middle-aged hypertensive group beta-blockers have been shown (vs randomised placebo or diuretics) to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction by 35–50 %, and stroke by 50–55 % (vs placebo), in non-smoker men. Atenolol was at least as effective as ACE-inhibition (captopril) in reducing all 7 cardiovascular endpoints (including stroke which was reduced by 50 %), vs less tight control of blood pressure, in obese hypertensive subjects with type-2 diabetes (UKPDS study); and after 20 years follow-up, atenolol was significantly (23 %) superior to the ACE-inhibitor in reducing the risk of all-cause death (beta-blockers have anti-cancer properties, which maybe relevant).
Conclusions and Relevance
Primary/essential hypertension in younger/middle-age is underpinned by high sympathetic nerve activity. In this age-group high resting heart rates and high plasma norepinephrine levels (independent of blood pressure) are linked to premature cardiovascular events and death. Thus, anti-hypertensive agents that increase sympathetic nerve activity ie diuretics, dihydropyridine calcium blockers, and ARBs, are inappropriate first-line choices in this younger age-group. Beta-blockers perform well vs randomised placebo and other antihypertensive agents regarding reduced risk of death/stroke/myocardial infarction in younger (<60 years) hypertensive subjects, and are a reasonable first-line choice of therapy (certainly in men). These facts should be reflected in the recommendations of guideline committees around the world.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
There is much confusion regarding the role of beta-blockers (BB) in primary (or essential) hypertension, stemming from two main sources. Firstly there are differences among Guideline committees from the USA (James et al. 2014), Europe (Mancia et al. 2007) and UK (Krause et al. 2011), concerning the role of BBs; BBs are no longer recommended as first-line therapy for hypertension in the USA (James et al. 2014) and UK (Krause et al. 2011). Secondly, the results of 7 recent meta-analyses (Wu et al. 2013; Prospective Studies Collaboration 2002; Wiysonge and Opie 2013; Lindholm et al. 2005; Xue et al. 2015; Thomopoulos et al. 2015a, b) regarding appropriate first-line therapy for the treatment of hypertension, were not favourable to BBs (age was not taken into account).
Importantly, neither the USA-JNC- 8 guidelines (James et al. 2014), nor the European guidelines (Mancia et al. 2007), take age into account (hypertension in the young/middle-aged is often associated with obesity and is underpinned by high sympathetic nerve activity, and this is a situation favourable to beta-blockade, or ACE-inhibitors which reduce sympathetic nerve activity – see later). Nevertheless, Europe views first-line beta-blockade to be similar to other classes of anti-hypertensive agents, the reduction in blood pressure (BP) being the important factor. In contrast JNC-8 no longer recommends first-line beta-blockade, primarily due to the poor results of atenolol (vs losartan) in the LIFE Study (Dahlof et al. 2002) involving elderly hypertensives. The UK NICE Committee (Krause et al. 2011) does take age into account, but gives the reason for omitting BBs as a first-line treatment of younger hypertensive patients, as 1. impaired efficacy in reducing stroke-risk. 2. a tendency to precipitate diabetes, and is therefore the least cost effective option (vs ACE-Is and ARBs) (Williams 2007). Unlike the USA, its near neighbour Canada does (like the UK NICE Committee) take age into account and (unlike the UK NICE Committee) recommends first-line beta-blockade for hypertensive subjects less than 60 years old (Khan et al. 2009 May).
This review seeks to shed a little light upon a confused situation regarding the role of BBs in the treatment of hypertension, based on views already expressed by the author (Cruickshank 2013).
2 Methods
Involved utilisation of the PubMed Search up to December 31st, 2015, under the search terms
-
1.
“hypertension AND obesity AND sympathetic nerve activity”, where 191 studies were identified, from which 3 (Grassi et al. 2004; Lambert et al. 2007; Huggett et al. 2003) relevant, illustrative, recent (from year 2000) publications were selected by mutual agreement between the author and a medical colleague.
-
2.
“hypertension AND plasma noradrenaline/norepinephrine AND survival”, where 3 studies were identified, and one was selected (Peng et al. 2006). There was also reference to two recent reviews conducted by the author (Coats and Cruickshank 2014; Cruickshank 2014), relating to diuretics, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and their effects on sympathetic nerve activity and the risk of myocardial infarction; this approach provided 11 references (Menon et al. 2009; No author listed 1980; Medical Research Working Party 1985; Leren and Heigeland 1986; Fogari et al. 2000; Estacio et al. 1998; Heuser et al. 2003; Moltzer et al. 2010; Strauss and Hall 2006, 2007).
-
3.
A search was conducted under the terms “meta-analyses of beta-blockers AND hypertension AND age AND death, stroke, myocardial infarction”. This search identified 5 studies, from which two were selected, being specific to BBs (Khan and McAlister 2006; Kuyper and Kahn 2014).
3 Results
-
1.
Essential hypertension, obesity, sympathetic nervous activity, and prognostic/treatment implications.
The classic Framingham Heart Study began in 1948 with enrolment of 5209 men and women aged 28–62 years, and was enlarged in 1971 to include a further 5124 men and women who were the offspring (or their spouses) of the original participants; follow-up of subjects occurred every 2–4 years. Two of Framingham’s conclusions (Franklin et al. 2005) were 1. The development of diastolic (± systolic) hypertension was closely related to a younger age and an increased body mass index (BMI), and 2. The development of isolated systolic hypertension occurred in an older age-group, reflecting a stiffening/ageing of the arteries – Table 1. Certainly from a haemodynamic view-point, primary hypertension in the young and elderly differ markedly, with the former being linked primarily to a high cardiac output (Druktenis et al. 2007); in the elderly there is a fall in cardiac output (Palatini and Julius 2009; Sowers and Lester 2000), so that high blood pressure is dependent on an increased peripheral resistance.
Obese (defined as a BMI greater than 30 kg/m2) adolescents with hypertension experience a marked fall in BP after weight-loss following bariatric surgery, with 74 % becoming normotensive (Inge et al. 2016). In younger subjects, obesity (particularly central) is linked to a significant increase in sympathetic nerve activity (Grassi et al. 2004). The obesity-related high sympathetic nerve activity may be confined to men (Kostis et al. 2015), and be apparent mainly in muscle and kidney (Brooks et al. 2015). Obesity-related increases in sympathetic nerve activity are particularly apparent in the presence of hypertension (Lambert et al. 2007)- Fig. 1, or type-2 diabetes (Huggett et al. 2003). Even high-normal blood pressure is linked to increased muscle sympathetic nerve activity (Seravalle et al. 2015). The raised sympathetic nerve activity is associated with the release of leptin (so-called “thin hormone”) from adipose tissue; leptin acts upon the hypothalamic region of the mid-brain, resulting in increased sympathetic nerve activity (Barnes and McDougal 2014). High insulin levels, associated with obesity-related insulin resistance, also act upon the hypothalamic region, resulting in heightened sympathetic nerve activity (Coats and Cruickshank 2014; Cruickshank 2014). This has important prognostic implications, as high norepinephrine (noradrenaline) levels are associated with the atherosclerotic process (Helin et al. 1970) and (via an increased heart rate) coronary plaque rupture (Heidland and Strauer 2001a). It thus comes as no surprise that high plasma norepinephrine levels, independent of smoking and blood pressure levels, are powerful predictors of cardiovascular death and survival in 601 (354 men and 247 women) young/middle-aged hypertensive subjects (over a 6–7 year follow-up period (Peng et al. 2006) – Fig. 2. Importantly, high intra-lymphocyte beta-receptor density (Bmax) and cyclic adenosine monophosphate (AMP) levels predict (independent of BP) future myocardial infarctions, but not stroke (which relates to blood pressure) (Peng et al. 2006) – Fig. 3. In the Framingham Heart Study (Gillman et al. 1993), high resting heart rates, particularly over 85 bpm (a surrogate for increased sympathetic nerve activity), in young/middle-aged hypertensive subjects, have been shown to predict all-cause death and cardiovascular and coronary heart disease events for both hypertensive men – Fig. 4, and women over a 36 year follow-up period.
Though sympathetic nerve activity is increased in elderly hypertension (Yamada et al. 1989; Hart and Charkoudian 2014), this is not so within the kidney (Esler et al. 1984). There is also a marked reduction in beta-receptor affinity/sensitivity in this older age-group (Feldman et al. 1984; Tenero et al. 1990), which may explain the relative lack of efficacy of beta-blockers in the elderly – (see later).
In the above context, it is notable that antihypertensive agents that increase sympathetic nerve activity in young/middle-age, perform poorly in terms of reducing cardiovascular events in this age-group. Thus, thiazide-type diuretics increase sympathetic nerve activity (Menon et al. 2009), and in 3 studies involving diuretic therapy in young/middle-aged hypertensive subjects (No author listed 1980; Medical Research Working Party 1985; Leren and Heigeland 1986) there was no reduction in the risk of myocardial infarction (No author listed 1980; Medical Research Working Party 1985), and even a significant increase (Leren and Heigeland 1986), versus randomised placebo/non-treatment. Dihydropridine calcium blockers (felodipine, amlodipine, manidipine, and lacidipine) increase heart rate and plasma norepinephrine levels (Fogari et al. 2000), and in the ABCD study (Estacio et al. 1998) the investigation was terminated prematurely due to a significant excess of myocardial infarctions in the nisoldipine, vs the enalapril, group. Likewise, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) increase sympathetic nerve activity in younger subjects (Heuser et al. 2003; Moltzer et al. 2010). Meta-analyses indicates that, in contrast to ACE-inhibitors, ARBs increase the risk of myocardial infarction (Strauss and Hall 2006; Straus and Hall 2007) Fig. 5, and in two subsequent placebo-controlled studies involving hypertension (Imai et al. 2011) and pre-hypertension plus diabetes (Haller et al. 2011), there was a significant excess if cardiovascular events in those receiving the ARB. Thus, prevention of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular events is not just about good control of BP. In contrast to ARBs, ACE-inhibition results in a reduction in sympathetic nerve activity (Noll et al. 1997) – see later.
-
2.
The role of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension; the importance of age
-
2a.
Beta-blockers and the atheromataous process
As myocardial infarction is the most common cardiovascular event in young/middle-aged essential hypertension (Medical Research Working Party 1985), it is important to note that beta-blockade is able to reverse the coronary atherosclerotic process. In a pooled analysis of four intravascular ultrasonography randomised, controlled trials in patients with coronary heart disease, over an 18–24 month time-interval, BBs (mainly atenolol and metoprolol) effected a significant (p < 0.001) regression of coronary artery atherosclerotic plaque (Sipahi et al. 2007). BBs also stabilise vulnerable coronary plaque. A study of 106 middle-aged patients who underwent coronary angiography twice within a 6 month period, revealed that high heart rates (>80 bpm) significantly increased, and BBs significantly decreased, the risk of atheromataous plaque disruption and rupture (a precursor to myocardial infarction) (Heidland and Strauer 2001b).
-
2b.
Beta-blockers and control of blood pressure in the younger subject
Beta-2 blockade results in a rise in BP of about 7/5 mm Hg (Robb et al. 1985). Thus a moderately beta-1 selective agent like atenolol is more effective in lowering BP than a non-selective BB like propranolol (Zacharias and Cowen 1977). Atenolol, in turn, is less effective in lowering BP than highly beta-1 selective bisoprolol (Neutel et al. 1993). Indeed, in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects, bisoprolol is a more effective anti-hypertensive agent than the calcium blocker amlodipine, the alpha-blocker doxazosine, the ACE-inhibitor lisinopril, and the diuretic bendrofluozide (Deary et al. 2002), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (Hiltunen et al. 2007), being at least as reno-protective as the latter (Parrinello et al. 2009).
-
2c.
Beta-blockers and reduction of hard endpoints.
As already noted, recent meta-analyses that do not take age into account, are less than complimentary to BBs (Wu et al. 2013; Prospective Studies Collaboration 2002; Wiysonge and Opie 2013; Lindholm et al. 2005; Xue et al. 2015; Thomopoulos et al. 2015a, b; Dahlof et al. 2002). One (Wu et al. 2013) suggested that BBs increase all-cause mortality; another (Lindholm et al. 2005) indicated that first-line beta-blockade did not reduce all-cause mortality and was associated with only modest reductions in cardiovascular events (vs randomised placebo or non-treatment); another (Xue et al. 2015) suggested that BBs increase the risk of stroke; another (Thomopoulos et al. 2015a) indicated that BBs were inferior to renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors in preventing cardiovascular events and stroke; and finally 2 meta-analyses (Thomopoulos et al. 2015b; Dahlof et al. 2002) concluded that BBs were less effective than other agents in preventing stroke, and that reduction in coronary heart disease and all-cause death did not achieve statistical significance.
Two meta-analyses that do take age into account (Khan and McAlister 2006; Kuyper and Kahn 2014) arrive at very different conclusions to meta-analyses that do not. One meta-analysis (Khan and McAlister 2006) included 8 randomised placebo-controlled studies, and 9 randomised studies involving active agents (Williams 2007; Medical Research Working Party 1985; The IPPPSH Collaborative Group 1985; Coope and Warrender 1986; Dahlof et al. 1991; MRC Working Party 1992; Trial of secondary prevention with atenolol after transient ischemic attack or nondisabling stroke. The Dutch TIA Trial Study Group. Stroke 24:543–548 1993; Eriksson et al. 1995; Wilhelmsen et al. 1987; UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998; Hansson et al. 1999a, b, 2000; Zanchetti et al. 2002; Pepine et al. 2003; Black et al. 2003; Dahlof et al. 2005). Compared to randomised placebo, in the younger/middle-aged hypertensive subject, with a mean age less than 60 years old, (admittedly and arbitrary cut-off point re definition of young/middle-aged) BBs were significantly superior to placebo in reducing the risk of death/stroke/MI – Fig. 6; with only a positive trend in the elderly – Fig. 7. When compared to randomised comparator antihypertensive drugs, there was a trend favouring BBs in younger hypertensive subjects Fig. 8, in contrast to those older than 60 years old, where BBs were significantly less effective in reducing the risk of death/stroke/myocardial infarction –Fig. 9. The other meta-analysis (Kuyper and Kahn 2014) involved 21 studies, comprising the same 17 studies as the first meta-analysis (Khan and McAlister 2006), plus an extra 4 studies in the younger group (3 studies compared propranolol with diuretic therapy (Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents 1982; Berglund et al. 1986; Yurenev et al. 1992), and the fourth – AASK study (Wright et al. 2002), compared metoprolol with amlodipine and ramipril in Black American hypertensive patients with renal disease). The conclusion was that in the young/middle-aged (less than 60 years old) both atenolol and non-atenolol beta-blockers were similarly effective in reducing cardiovascular endpoints, while in the elderly, atenolol (no other BBs have been studied) was associated with an increased risk of stroke. The second meta-analysis did not include the most recent results of the AASK study (Norris et al. 2006) in younger/middle-age subjects, which showed that metoprolol, amlodipine, and ramipril were similarly effective in reducing cardiovascular outcomes after 4 years of follow-up.
BBs thus have no role to play as first-line agents in the elderly hypertensive subject, unless myocardial ischemia is also present (Pepine et al. 2003), where atenolol was equivalent to the calcium blocker verapamil. The role of BBs in the elderly is as second-line therapy to either diuretics or calcium blockers, as evidenced in the MRC-elderly study (MRC Working Party 1992) and the large ALLHAT (The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group 2002) and SHEP (SHEP Cooperative Research Group 1991) studies, especially in the presence of the metabolic syndrome (SHEP Cooperative Research Group 1991).
-
3.
Beta-blockers and prevention of stroke and all-cause death in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects; dispelling some myths
There is a perception that BBs do not reduce all-cause mortality (Wu et al. 2013; Prospective Studies Collaboration 2002; Wiysonge and Opie 2013; Lindholm et al. 2005), and are relatively ineffective in reducing the risk of stroke (Krause et al. 2011; Xue et al. 2015; Thomopoulos et al. 2015a, b; Dahlof et al. 2002; Williams 2007; Khan et al. 2009 May), in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects. The UKPDS-39 (UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998) and MRC-1 (Medical Research Working Party 1985) studies give no credence to these perceptions. Concerning stroke-risk reduction in MRC-1 (Medical Research Working Party 1985) in non-smoking men, both non-selective propranolol and the diuretic bendrofluazide, vs randomised placebo, reduced the risk of stroke by 54 %. In UKPDS-38 (U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998), where smoking was not taken into account, tight control (either atenolol or captopril) of blood pressure, vs less tight control (difference 10/5 mm hg), resulted in a significant 44 % reduction in the risk of stroke. UKPDS-39 (UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998) examined the effect of atenolol and captopril in reducing macrovascular and microvascular complications over a 9 year follow-up period. Figure 10 shows the effect of the 2 agents in reducing the 7 primary endpoints (plus heart failure- a secondary end point) vs less-tight control of blood pressure. It is apparent that all 8 trends favoured the BB (over the ACE-I) which reduced stroke-risk by about 50 %, peripheral arterial disease-related endpoints by about 60 %, microvascular (kidney and eye) endpoints by about 45 %, and heart failure by about 65 %. Thus, the UKPDS-39 (UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998) results, like MRC-1 (Medical Research Working Party 1985), deny totally the claim that BBs are relatively ineffective in preventing stroke in young/middle-aged hypertensive subjects.
The UKPDS patients were monitored for a further 10 years, with a median total follow-up time of 14.5 years (Holman et al. 2008). The trends favouring the beta-blocker over the ACE-inhibitor tended to persist, but now, in the case of all-cause death, there was a significant 23 % reduction in favour of atenolol – Fig. 11. There is thus no truth in the claim that BBs do not reduce all cause death (Wu et al. 2013; Prospective Studies Collaboration 2002; Wiysonge and Opie 2013; Lindholm et al. 2005).
In middle-aged patients with pre/mild hypertension plus stable myocardial ischemia (von Armin and for the TIBBS Investigators 1996), randomised to either highly beta-1 selective (cardioselective) bisoprolol or nifedipine SR, at 1 year follow-up, event-free survival was significantly superior in those randomised to bisoprolol.
-
4.
The possible mechanism of the reduction in all-cause death by long-term beta-blockade (in middle-age)
In UKPDS-39, apart from all-cause death, all other benefits of atenolol (relative to ACE-I) noted after the initial study (UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998), tended to diminish with time (mean follow-up time 14.5 years) (Holman et al. 2008). So what other factors might be in evidence?
BBs have been observed by several authors, to modify the initiation and spread of various cancers. Certainly stress has been noted to hasten cancer-progression, probably via activation of tumour-associated beta-receptors by epinephrine and norepinephrine (Cole and Sood 2012; Fitzgerald 2012). Thus, beta-blockade has been noted to benefit 1. Breast cancer and prevent metastases (Cakir et al. 2002; Barron et al. 2011; Melhem-Bertrandt et al. 2011) 2. Colon cancer (Takezaki et al. 2001; Perrone et al. 2008) 3. Pancreatic cancer (Weddle et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2010) 4. Melanoma (De Giorgi et al. 2012) 5. Lung cancer (Al-Wadei et al. 2012) 6. Neuroblastoma (Pasquier et al. 2013) 7. Prostate cancer (Perron et al. 2004; Grytli et al. 2013) –Table 2. This likely anti-cancer property of BBs is particularly important in the context of the increased risk of cancer in middle-aged hypertensive subjects (Harding et al. 2016).
-
5.
The important beta-blocker/smoking interaction in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects
In three major prospective, randomised, hard-endpoint studies in middle-aged hypertensive subjects, cigarette smoking played a vital role in modifying the potential of the BB to reduce the risk of a cardiovascular event. The MRC-1 study (Medical Research Working Party 1985) compared non-selective propranolol with a thiazide diuretic and placebo, in 17,354 subjects, of whom 30 % of men and 25 % of women were smokers, over a 5 year follow-up period. The IPPPSH study (The IPPPSH Collaborative Group 1985) compared non-selective oxprenolol with placebo, in 6357 subjects, of whom 29 % were smokers, over a 3–5 year follow-up period. The MAPPY study (Wikstrand et al. 1991) (an extension of the HAPPHY study (Wilhelmsen et al. 1987)) compared moderately selective metoprolol with a thiazide diuretic, in 3156 subjects, of whom 34 % were smokers, followed-up for 4 years.
In the case of myocardial infarction (about 3 times more common than stroke in the young/middle-aged hypertensive subject (Medical Research Working Party 1985)), the ability of the BB to reduce the risk of an event by 33–49 % (vs randomised placebo or diuretic therapy) in non-smokers, was not observed in smokers (Medical Research Working Party 1985; The IPPPSH Collaborative Group 1985; Wikstrand et al. 1991). Indeed, in the case of non-selective propranolol and oxprenolol, the risk of myocardial infarction was actually increased by 13–35 % in smokers – Fig. 12. A similar result relating to stroke was also noted in MRC-I (Medical Research Working Party 1985). In the MRC-elderly study (MRC Working Party 1992), atenolol (vs randomised placebo) increased the rate of cardiovascular events by 38 % in smokers, compared to a modest 16 % reduction in non-smokers.
How can these events relating to smokers be explained and avoided? Cigarette smoking is linked to a two-to threefold increase in plasma epinephrine (adrenaline) levels (Cryer et al. 1976). Epinephine stimulates beta-1, beta-2, and alpha receptors, and in the presence of non-selective beta-blockers (and to a lesser extent with only moderately beta-selective agents like metoprolol and atenolol) there is unopposed (total or partial) alpha-vasoconstriction, resulting in an increase in blood pressure (Tarnow and Muller 1991). This increase in blood pressure is about 30 mm Hg for non-selective BBs, and about 9–10 mm Hg for a moderately selective agent like metoprolol, compared to no change in blood pressure (vs control) with a highly beta-1 selective beta-blocker like bisoprolol (which permits full beta-2 stimulation-induced vasodilatation) (Wellstein et al. 1986; Smith and Teitler 1999). Thus, the adverse BB/hypertensive/smoking interaction can be avoided by high beta-1 selectivity (cardioselectivity).
-
6.
The gender debate
The proven benefit of beta-blockade in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects has been confined to men. In the MRC-1 trial (Medical Research Working Party 1985), the reduction in all-cause death (vs placebo) was confined to active treatment (both diuretic and beta-blocker therapy) in men only (there was an increase in women). Also in the MRC-1 trial, the 33 % reduction in coronary events in non-smoking men was confined to propranolol. Likewise in the IPPPSH study (The IPPPSH Collaborative Group 1985) involving young/middle-age hypertensive subjects, oxprenolol (vs placebo) significantly reduced cardiac events only in men, the opposite being the case for women. In the MAPHY study in male younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects, metoprolol significantly reduced the risk of coronary events only in non-smokers. In the UKPDS-39 study (UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group 1998), 45 % were women, but the significant effects of atenolol (vs less-tight control of BP) were not analysed in terms of sexual gender.
-
7.
Beta-blockers and Black hypertensive subjects
Black hypertensive patients usually have low plasma renin levels (Cruickshank and Prichard 1994), which were thought to account for the poor antihypertensive effect of propranolol, vs diuretics, in middle-aged Black subjects (Hammond et al. 1978). In contrast, highly beta-1 selective bisoprolol lowered BP equally in White and Black middle-aged hypertensive patients (Frishman et al. 1995; Prisant and Mensah 1996).
In the AASK Study (Norris et al. 2006), involving 1094 middle-aged African American patients with hypertension and renal dysfunction, after 4 years follow-up metoprolol, ramipril, and amlodipine all had similar effects in reducing the cumulative incidence of composite cardiovascular outcomes.
-
8.
The importance of first-line therapy
The outcome of a drug trial is dependent on which therapy is given first-line. A classic example is the MRC-elderly study (MRC Working Party 1992). In that randomised placebo-controlled trial, there were 2 active, randomised therapy groups, namely 1. first-line diuretic, followed by (if necessary) add-on beta-blocker (atenolol), and 2. first-line beta-blocker, followed by (if necessary) add-on diuretic. Only first-line diuretic/second-line beta-blocker therapy was associated with significant risk-reduction regarding stroke, coronary events, and all cardiovascular events.
4 Summary and Recommendations
There is disagreement amongst leading Guideline Committees around the world on the role of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension. Unless age is taken into account, wrong conclusions will arise. Meta-analyses that do not consider age as a factor have been unfavourable to beta-blockers. By contrast, meta-analyses that include age as a factor, show that beta-blockers perform well in the younger/middle-age group (less than 60 years) in terms of preventing death/stroke/myocardial infarction (vs randomised placebo and other antihypertensive drugs).
Diastolic hypertension in younger/middle-aged subjects is closely associated with over-weight/obesity and high sympathetic nerve activity. High sympathetic drive (independent of blood pressure) and high resting heart rates are linked to premature cardiovascular events and death in young/middle-aged hypertension. Anti-hypertensive drugs that increase sympathetic nerve activity (diuretics, dihydropyridine calcium blockers, and ARBs) are thus inappropriate first-line agents in younger/middle-aged hypertensive subjects. In this younger group, first-line beta-blockade was superior to placebo and diuretics in preventing myocardial infarction (certainly in non-smoker males). Beta-blockade was also at least as good as ACE-inhibition in reducing the risk of all 7 hard end-points (vs less-tight control of BP), including a 50 % reduction in stroke-risk, and was significantly superior in preventing all-cause death after long-term follow-up (beta-blockers have anti-cancer properties).
Thus, beta-blockade is a highly reasonable first-line choice in the treatment of the younger/middle-aged hypertensive subject (certainly in non-smoker men). There is an urgent need for leading Guide-line Committees to be aware of the importance of obesity and the sympathetic nervous system in hypertension in the young/middle-aged (and treatment implications), and for there to be a general consensus on the role of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension.
Abbreviations
- BP:
-
blood pressure
- BB:
-
beta-blocker
References
Al-Wadei HA, Al-wadei MH, Schuller HM (2012) Cooperative regulation of non-small cell lung carcinoma by nicotinic and beta-adrenergic receptors: a novel target for intervention. PLoS One 7:e29915. Epub 2012
Barnes MJ, McDougal DH (2014) Leptin into the rostral ventral lateral medulla (RVLM) augments renal sympathetic nerve activity and blood pressure. Front Neurosci 8:232
Barron TL, Conolly RM, Sharp L, Bennett K, Visvanathan K (2011) Beta-blockers and breast cancer mortality: a population-based study. J Clin Oncol 29:2635–2644
Berglund G, Andersin O, Widgren B (1986) Low-dose antihypertensive treatment with a thiazide diuretic is not diabetogenic. Acta Med Scand 220:419–424
Black HR, Elliot WJ, Grandits G, Grambcsh P, Lucente T, White WB et al (2003) Principal results of the Controlled Onset Verapamil Investigation Of Cardiovascular End Points (CONVINCE) Trial. JAMA 289:2073–2082
Brooks VL, Shi Z, Holwerda SW, Fadel PJ (2015) Obesity-induced increases in sympathetic nerve activity: sex matters. Auton Neurosci 187:18–26. doi:10.1016/j.Autoneu.2014.11.006, Epub 2014 Nov 20
Cakir Y, Plummer HK, Tithof PK, Schuller HM (2002) Beta-adrenergic and arachidonic acid-mediated growth regulation of human breast cancer cell lines. Int J Oncol 21:153–157
Coats AJS, Cruickshank JM (2014) Hypertensive subjects with type-2 diabetes, the sympathetic nervous system, and treatment implications. Int J Cardiol 174:702–709
Cole SW, Sood AK (2012) Molecular pathways: beta-adrenergic signaling in cancer. Clin Cancer Res 18:1201–1206
Coope J, Warrender TS (1986) Randomised trial of treatment of hypertension in elderly patients in primary care. BMJ 293:1145–1151
Cruickshank JM (2013) Essential hypertension. People’s Publishing House, Shelton
Cruickshank JM (2014) The unholy alliance between obesity, type-2 diabetes, the sympathetic nervous system, and hypertension in young/middle-aged subjects. J Mol Genet Med S1. http://dd.org/10.4172/1747-0862.S1-016
Cruickshank JM, Prichard BNC (1994) Beta-blockers in clinical practice (2nd edn). Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 1–351
Cryer PE, Haymond MW, Satiago JV, Shar SP (1976) Norepinephrine and epinephrine release and adrenergic mediation of smoking-associated hemodynamic and metabolic events. N Engl J Med 295:573–577
Dahlof B, Lindholm LH, Hansson L, Schersten B, Ekbom T, Wester PO (1991) Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with hypertension (STOP-Hypertension). Lancet 338:1281–1285
Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, Julius S, Beevers G, Faire U et al (2002) LIFE Study Group. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 359:995–1003
Dahlof B, Sever PS, Poulter NR et al (2005) Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandanavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 366:895–906
De Giorgi V, Gandini S, Grazzini M, Benemai S, Marchionni N, Geppetti P (2012) Beta-blockers: a new and emerging treatment for melanoma. Recenti Prog Med 103:11–16
Deary AJ, Schumann AL, Murfeet H, Haydock SF, Foo RS, Brown MJ (2002) Double-blind, placebo controlled crossover comparison of 5 classes of drugs. J Hypertens 20:771–777
Druktenis JS, Roman MJ, Fabsitz RR, Lee ET, Best LG, Russel M et al (2007) Cardiac and systemic hemodynamic characteristics of hypertension and prehypertension in adolescents and young adults. The Strong Heart Study. Circulation 115:221–227
Eriksson S, Olofsson B-O, Wester P-O, for the TEST Study Group (1995) Atenolol in secondary prevention after stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 5:21–25
Esler MO, Jennings GL, Johns J, Burke F, Little PJ, Leonard P (1984) Estimation of “total” renal, cardiac and splanchnic sympathetic nervous tone in essential hypertension from measurements of noradrenaline release. J Hypertens Suppl 2(3):S123–S125
Estacio RO, Jeffers BW, Hiatt W, Biggerstaff SL, Gifford N, Schrier RW (1998) The effect of nisoldipine as compared with enalapril on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes and hypertension. N Engl J Med 338:645–652
Feldman RD, Limbird LE, Nadeau J, Robertson D, Wood AJ (1984) Alteration in leukocyte beta-receptor affinity with aging. A potential explanation for altered beta-adrenergic sensitivity in the elderly. N Engl J Med 310:815–819
Fitzgerald PJ (2012) Beta-blockers, norepinephrine, and cancer: an epidemiological viewpoint. Clin Epidemiol 4:151–156
Fogari R, Zoppi A, Coradi L, Preti P, Malalamani GD, Muellini A (2000) Effects of different dihydropyridine calcium antagonists on plasma norepinephrine in essential hypertension. J Hypertens 18:1871–1875
Franklin SS, Pio JR, Wong ND, Larson MG, Leip EP, Vasan RS et al (2005) Predictors of new-onset diastolic and systolic hypertension. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 111:1121–1127
Frishman WH, Burris JF, Mroczek WJ, Weir MR, Alemayehu D, Simon JS et al (1995) First-line therapy option with low-dose bisoprolol fumarate and low-dose hydrochlorthiazide in patients with stage 1 and stage 11 systemic hypertension. J Clin Pharmacol 35:182–188
Gillman MW, Kannel WB, Belanger A (1993) Influence of heart rate on mortality among persons with hypertension: the Framingham Study. Am Heart J 125:1148–1154
Grassi G, Dell Oro R, Facchini A, Quarti Trevano F, Bolla GB, Mancia G (2004) Effect of central and peripheral body fat distribution on sympathetic and baroreflex functionin obese normotensives. J Hypertens 22:236–239
Grytli HH, Fagerland MW, Fossa SD, Tasken KA, Hanheim LL (2013) Use of beta-blockers is associated with prostate cancer-specific survival in prostate cancer patients on androgen deprivation therapy. Prostate 73:250–260
Haller H, Ito S, Izzo JL, Januszewicz A, Katayama S, Menne J et al (2011) Olmesartan for the delay or prevention of microalbuminuria in type-2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 364:907–917
Hammond JJ, Kirkendall WM, Zama A, Thomas JC, Overturf ML (1978) Pindolol, propranolol and chlorthalidone in moderate hypertension. Pharmacologist 20:189
Hansson L, Linholm LH, Niskanen L, Lanke J, Hedner T, Niklason A et al (1999a) Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project(CAPP)randomised trial. Lancet 353:611–616
Hansson L, Lindholm LH, Ekbom T, Dahlof B, Lanke J, Schersten B et al (1999b) Randomised trial of old and new antihypertensive drugs in elderly patients: cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension-2 study. Lancet 354:1751–1756
Hansson L, Hedner T, Lund-Johansen P, Kjeldsen SE, Lindholm LH, Syvertsen JO et al (2000) Randomised of effects of calcium antagonists compared with diuretics and beta-blockers on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality: the Nordic Diltiazem (NORDIL) study. Lancet 356:359–365
Harding JL, Sooriyakumaran M, Anstey KJ, Adam R, Balkau B, Brennan-Olsen S et al (2016) Hypertension, antihypertensive treatment and cancer incidence and mortality: a pooled collaborative analysis of 12 Australian and New Zealand cohorts. J Hypertens 34:149–155
Hart EC, Charkoudian N (2014) Sympathetic neural regulation of blood pressure: influence of sex and age. Physiology (Bethesda) 29:8–15
Heidland UE, Strauer BE (2001) Left ventricular muscle mass and elevated heart rate are associated with coronary plaque disruption. Circulation 104:1477–1482
Helin P, Lorenzen I, Garbash C, Matthiessen ME (1970) Atheroscerosis in rabbit aorta induced by noradrenaline. The importance of the duration of noradrenaline action. Atherosclerosis 12:125–132
Heuser K, Vitkovsky J, Raasch W, Schmieder R, Schobel HP (2003) Elevation of sympathetic activity by eprosartan in young male subjects. Am J Hypertens 16:658–664
Hiltunen TP, Suonsyrja T, Hanilla-Handelberg T, Paarvonen KJ, Miettinen HE, Strandberg T et al (2007) Predictors of antihypertensive drug responses: initial data from a placebo-controlled, randomesed, cross-over study with foue antihypertensive drugs (The GENRES Study). Am J Hypertens 20(3):311–318
Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Neil HA, Matthews DR (2008) Long-term follow-up after tight control of blood pressure in type-2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 359:1565–1576
Huggett RJ, Scott EM, Gilbey SG, Stoker JB, Macintosh AF, Mary DA (2003) Impact of type-2 diabetes on sympathetic neural mechanisms in hypertension. Circulation 108:3097–4101
Imai E, Chan JC, Ito S, Yamasaki T, Kobayashi F, Hanada M et al (2011) Effects of olmesartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in type-2 diabetes with overt nephropathy: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study. Diabetologia 54:2978–2986
Inge TH, Courcoulas AP, Jenkins TM, Michalski MP, Helmrath MA, Brandt MD et al (2016) Weight loss and health status 3 years after bariatric surgery in adolescents. N Engl J Med 374:113–123
James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, Cushman WC, Dennison-Himmelfarb C, Handler J et al (2014) 2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults. Report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA 311:507–520
Khan N, McAlister FA (2006) Re-examining the efficacy of beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis. CMAJ 174:1737–1742
Khan NA, Hemmelgarn B, Herman RJ, Bell CM, Mahon JL, Leiter LA et al (2009) The 2009 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part 2 – therapy. Can J Cardiol 25(5):287–298
Kostis V, Nilsson P, Grassi G, Mancia G, Redon J, Luft F et al (2015) New developments in the pathogenesis of obesity-induced hypertension. J Hypertens 33:1499–1508
Krause T, Lovibond K, Caufield M, McCormak T, Williams B (2011) Management of hypertension: summary of NICE guidelines. BMJ 343:d4891.doi:10.1136/bmj:d4891
Kuyper LM, Kahn NA (2014) Atenolol vs non-atenolol beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol 30(suppl 5):S47–S53
Lambert E, Straznicky N, Schlaich M, Esler MP, Haikerwal D, Brencley D et al (2007) Differing pattern of sympathoexcitation in normal- weight and obesity-related hypertension. Hypertension 50:862–868
Leren P, Heigeland A (1986) Coronary heart disease and treatment of hypertension. The Oslo Study. Am J Med 80:3–6
Lindholm LH, Carlberg B, Samuelsson O (2005) Should beta-blockers remain the first choice in the treatment of primary hypertension? A meta-analysis. Lancet 366:1545–1553
Mancia G, De Backer G, Dominiczak A, Cifcova R, Fagard R, Gernano G et al (2007) 2007 Guidelines forthe management of arterial hypertension. The task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 28:1462–1536
Medical Research Working Party (1985) MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: principle results. BMJ 291:97–104
Melhem-Bertrandt A, Chavez-Macgreggor LX, Brown EN, Lee RT, Meric-Bernstam F et al (2011) Beta-blocker use is associated with improved relapse-free survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 29:2645–2652
Menon DV, Arbique D, Wang Z, Adam-Huet B, Auchus RJ, Vongpatanasin W (2009) Differential effects of chlorthalidone versus spironolactone on muscle sympathetic nerve activity in hypertensive patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94:1361–1366
Moltzer E, Mattace Raso FU, Karamermer Y, Boersma E, Webb GD, Simoons ML et al (2010) Comparison of candesartan versus metoprolol for treatment of systemic hypertension after repaired aortic coarctation. Am J Cardiol 105:217–222
MRC Working Party (1992) Medical Research Council trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults.: principal results. BMJ 304:405–412
Neutel JM, Smith DH, Ram CV, Kaplan NM, Papademetriou V, Fagan TC et al (1993) Application of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in differentiating between antihypertensive agents. Am J Med 94:181–187
No author listed (1980) The Australian therapeutic trial in hypertension. Report by the Management Committee. Lancet 1:1261–1267
Noll G, Wenzel RR, de Marchi S, Shaw S, Luscher TF (1997) Differential effects of captopril and nitrates on muscle sympathetic nerve activity in volunteers. Circulation 95:2286–2292
Norris K, Bourgoigne J, Gassman J, Hibert L, Middleton J, Phillips RA et al (2006) Cardiovascular outcomes in the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK) Trial. Am J Kidney Dis 48:739–751
Palatini P, Julius S (2009) The role of cardiac autonomic function in hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Curr Hypertens Rep 11:199–205
Parrinello G, Paterna S, Torres D, Di Pasquale P, Mezzero M, La Rocca G et al (2009) One year renal and cardiac effect of bisoprolol versus losartan in recently diagnosed hypertensive patients. Clin Drug Investig 29:591–600
Pasquier E, Street J, Pouchy C, Carre M, Gifford AJ, Murray J et al (2013) Beta-blockers increase response to chemotherapy via direct anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic mechanisms in neuroblastoma. Br J Cancer 108:2485–2494
Peng Y-X, Shan J, Qi XY, Qi XY, Zhang SJ, Ma SP, Wang N et al (2006) The catecholamine-beta-adrenoceptor-cAMP system and prediction of cardiovascular events in hypertension. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 33:27–231
Pepine CJ, Handberg EM, Cooper-DeHoff RM, Marks RG, Kowey P, Messerli FH et al (2003) A calcium antagonist vs a non-calcium antagonist hypertension treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease. The International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST): a randomised controlled trial. JAMA 290:2805–2816
Perron L, Bairati L, Harel F, Meyer F (2004) Antihypertensive drug use and the risk of prostate cancer (Canada). Cancer Causes Control 15:535–541
Perrone MG, Notanicola M, Caruso MG, Tutino V, Scilimati A (2008) Upregulation of beta-3adrenergic receptor mRNA in human colon cancer: a preliminary study. Oncology 75:224–229
Prisant LM, Mensah GA (1996) Use of beta-adrenergic receptor blockers in blacks. J Clin Pharmacol 36:867–873
Prospective Studies Collaboration (2002) Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 360:1903–1913
Robb OJ, Petrie JC, Webster J, Harry J (1985) ICI 118,551 does not reduce blood pressure in hypertensive patients responsive to atenolol and propranolol. Br J Clin Pharmacol 19:541–542
Seravalle G, Lonati L, Buzzi S, Cairo M, Quarti Trevano F, Dell’Oro R et al (2015) Sympathetic nerve traffic and baroreflex function in optimal, normal, and high-normal blood pressure states. J Hypertens 33(7):1411–1417. doi:10.1097/HJH.000000000000567
SHEP Cooperative Research Group (1991) Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. JAMA 265:3255–3264
Sipahi I, Tuzcu M, Wolski KE, Nicholls SJ, Schoenhagen P, Hu B et al (2007) Beta-blockers and progression of coronary atherosclerosis: pooled analysis of 4 intravascular ultrasonography trials. Am Int Med 147:10–18
Smith C, Teitler M (1999) Beta-blocker selectivity at cloned human beta-1 and beta-2 adrenergic receptors. Carsiovasc Drugs Ther 13:126–127
Sowers JR, Lester M (2000) Hypertension, hormones and aging. J Lab Clin Med 135:379–386
Straus MH, Hall AS (2007) Renin-angiotensin system and cardiovascular talk. Lancet 370:23–24
Strauss MH, Hall AS (2006) Angiotensin receptor blockers may increase the risk of myocardial infarction. Circulation 114:838–854
Takezaki T, Hamajima N, Maisuo K, Tanaka R, Hirai T, Kato T et al (2001) Association of polymorphisms in the beta-2 and beta-3 adrenoceptor genes with risk of colorectal cancer in Japanese. Int J Clin Oncol 6:117–122
Tarnow J, Muller RK (1991) Cardiovascular effects of low-dose epinephrine infusions in relation to the extent of pre-operative beta-blockade. Anaesthesiology 74:1035–1043
Tenero DM, Bottorf MB, Burlew BS, Williams JB, Lalande RL (1990) Altered beta-adrenergic sensitivity and protein binding to I-propranolol in the elderly. Cardiovasc Pharmacol 16:702–707
The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group (2002) Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomised to ACE-inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic. JAMA 288:2981–2997
The IPPPSH Collaborative Group (1985) Cardiovascular risk and risk factors in a randomised trial of treatment based on the beta-blocker oxprenolol: the International prospective primary prevention study in hypertension (IPPPSH). J Hypertens 3:379–392
Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A (2015a) Effects of blood pressure-lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: 4. Effects of various classes of antihypertensive drugs –Overview and meta-analysis. J Hypertens 33:195–211
Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A (2015b) Effects of blood pressure-lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: head-to-head comparisons of various classes of antihypertensive drugs – overview and meta-analyses. J Hypertens 33:1321–1341
Trial of secondary prevention with atenolol after transient ischemic attack or nondisabling stroke. The Dutch TIA Trial Study Group. Stroke 24:543–548 (1993)
U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group (1998) Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type-2 diabetes. UKPDS 38. BMJ 317:703–713
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group (1998) Efficacy of atenolol and captopril reducing risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications of type-2 diabetes: UKPDS 39. BMJ 317:713–720
Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents (1982) Comparison of propranolol and hydrochlorthiazide for the initial treatment of hypertension. Results of long-term therapy. JAMA 248:2004–2011
von Armin T, for the TIBBS Investigators (1996) Prognostic significance of transient ischemic episodes: response to treatment shows improve prognosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 28:20–24
Weddle D, Tiihoff P, Williams M, Schuller HM (2001) Beta-adrenergic growth regulation of human cancer cell lines derived from pancreatic ductal carcinomas. Carcinogenesis 22:473–479
Wellstein A, Palm D, Belz GG (1986) Affinity and selectivity of beta-adrenoceptor antagonists in vitro. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 8(Suppl):S36–S40
Wikstrand J, Warnold T, Tuomilehto J, Olsson G, Barber HJ, Eliasson K et al (1991) Metoprolol versus diuretics in hypertension. Morbidity results from MAPHY study. Hypertension 17:579–588
Wilhelmsen L, Bergland G, Elmfeldt D, Fitzsimons T, Holzgreve H, Hosie J et al (1987) Beta-blockers versus diuretics in hypertensive men: main results from the HAPPHY trial. J Hypertens 5:561–572
Williams B (2007) The obese hypertensive. The weight of evidence against beta-blockers. Circulation 115:1973–1974
Wiysonge CS, Opie LH (2013) Beta-blockers as initial therapy for hypertension. JAMA 310:1851–1852
Wright JT, Bakris GL, Green T (2002) Effect of blood pressure lowering and antihypertensive drug class on progression of hypertensive kidney disease. Results from the AASK trial. JAMA 288:2421–2431
Wu H-Y, Huang J-W, Lin H-J, Liao WC, Peng YS, Hung KY et al (2013) Comparative effectiveness of renin-angiotensin system blockers and of other antihypertensive drugs in patients with diabetes: systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis. BMJ 347:f6008. doi:10.1136/bmj.f6008
Xue H, Lu Z, Tang, WL, Pang LW, Wang GM, Wong GW et al (2015). First-line drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system versus other first-line antihypertensive drug classes for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD008170. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008170.pub2
Yamada Y, Miyajima E, Tochicubo O, Matsukawa T, Isshi M (1989) Age related changes in muscle sympathetic nerve activity in essential hypertension. Hypertension 13:870–877
Yurenev AP, Dyakonova HG, Novikov ID (1992) Management of essential hypertension in patients with different degrees of left ventricular hyperterophy. Multicentre trial. Am J Hypertens 6(S):182S–189S
Zacharias FJ, Cowen KJ (1977) Comparison of propranolol and atenolol in hypertension. Postgrad Med J 53:111–113
Zanchetti A, Bond MG, Henning M, Neiss A, Mancia G, Dal Palu C et al (2002) Calcium antagonist lacidipine slows down progression asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis. Principal results of the European lacidipine study on atherosclerosis (ELSA), a randonised, double-blind, long-term trial. Circulation 106:2422–2427
Zhang D, Ma QY, Hu HT, Zhang M (2010) Beta2-adrenergic antagonists suppress pancreatic cancer cell invasion by inhibiting CREB, NFkB and AP-1. Cancer Biol Ther 10:19–29
Conflicts of Interest
The author has no conflicts of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cruickshank, J.M. (2016). The Role of Beta-Blockers in the Treatment of Hypertension. In: Islam, M.S. (eds) Hypertension: from basic research to clinical practice. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology(), vol 956. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/5584_2016_36
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/5584_2016_36
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44250-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44251-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)