| EFFICACY,
SAFETY AND TOLERABILITY OF SILDENAFIL IN BRAZILIAN HYPERTENSIVE PATIENTS
ON MULTIPLE ANTIHYPERTENSIVE DRUGS
(
Download pdf )
DENILSON C. ALBUQUERQUE,
LINEU J. MIZIARA, JOSE F. K. SARAIVA, ULISSES S. RODRIGUES, ARTUR B. RIBEIRO,
MAURICIO WAJNGARTEN
Department
of Cardiology (DCA), State University of Rio de Janeiro, Department of
Cardiology (LJM), Federal University of Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Department
of Cardiology (JFKS), Pontifical Catholic University, Campinas, Sao Paulo,
Department of General Practice (USR), Salgado Filho Hospital, Rio de Janeiro,
Department of Nephrology (ABR), Federal University of Sao Paulo, UNIFESP,
CardioGeriatry Service (MW), Institute of Heart, INCOR, Sao Paulo, Brazil
ABSTRACT
Objective:
To evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of sildenafil among
Brazilian patients with hypertension treated with combinations of anti-hypertensive
drugs.
Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty
hypertensive men aged 30 to 81 years old under treatment with 2 or more
anti-hypertensive drugs and with erectile dysfunction (ED) lasting for
at least 6 months were enrolled at 7 research centers in Brazil. Patients
were randomized to receive treatment with either sildenafil or placebo
taken 1 hour before sexual intercourse (initial dose of 50 mg, adjusted
to 25 mg or 100 mg according to efficacy and toxicity). During the following
8 weeks, patients were evaluated regarding vital signs, adverse events,
therapeutic efficacy, satisfaction with treatment and use of concurrent
medications.
Results: The primary evaluation of efficacy,
which was based on responses to questions 3 and 4 of the International
Index of Erectile Function, showed significant differences regarding treatment
with sildenafil (p = 0.0002 and p < 0.0001, respectively). In the assessment
of global efficacy, 87% of the patients treated with sildenafil reported
improved erections, as compared with 37% of patients given placebos (p
< 0.0001). The other secondary evaluations supported the results favoring
sildenafil. The most frequent adverse events among patients treated with
sildenafil were headaches (11.4%), vasodilation (11.4%) and dyspepsia
(6.5%). There were no significant changes in blood pressure measurements
in both groups.
Conclusion: Sildenafil is efficacious and
safe for the treatment of hypertensive patients with ED who receive concurrent
combinations of anti-hypertensive drugs.
Key
words: erectile dysfunction; sildenafil; hypertension; anti-hypertensive
drugs
Int Braz J Urol. 2005; 31: 342-55
INTRODUCTION
Erectile
dysfunction (ED) is defined as the persistent inability to achieve and/or
maintain an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse (1). ED is multi-factorial
and associated with several risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes
mellitus, peripheral vascular and coronary artery disease, neurological
diseases, alcohol abuse, smoking, depression and others. The prevalence
of ED varies according to age and the presence of co-morbidities. In addition,
the proportion of men that report ED varies from country to country (2).
According to a recent survey, approximately 46% of Brazilian men report
some degree of ED, which may lead to an impaired quality of life in many
cases (3).
Hypertension is a public health problem
of global proportions. Although national estimates are scarce and may
not represent the overall population, regional surveys have shown that
the prevalence of hypertension in Brazil varies from 22% to 44% (4). Hypertension
is frequently accompanied by other medical problems, including dyslipidemias,
diabetes mellitus, heart disease and smoking, which may also cause or
aggravate ED. It has recently been estimated that 42% of American men
with ED are also hypertensive (5). Men with hypertension have an up to
fourfold increase in the risk of developing ED, especially with the use
of drugs such as beta-blockers and thiazides, which may have ED as side
effects (6,7). Among patients with hypertension, ED may decrease the quality
of life, self-esteem and the relationship with a partner. Although the
exact pathogenesis of ED in men with hypertension has not been fully elucidated,
in many cases psychogenic factors accompany the organic abnormalities
that are secondary to hypertension, thus contributing to the aggravation
of ED.
Several clinical trials have demonstrated
the efficacy of sildenafil in the treatment of ED with various causes
(8-10). Most adverse events reported in the clinical studies of sildenafil,
including headaches, flushing and nasal congestion are thought to be related
to the vasodilating properties of the drug. The incidence of these adverse
events increases with higher doses of sildenafil. The possibility of potentiating
the effect of anti-hypertensive medications has been a major concern regarding
the use of sildenafil for the treatment of hypertensive men with ED. Preliminary
clinical trials have not shown clinically significant changes in blood
pressure levels among patients who were treated with sildenafil and concurrent
anti-hypertensive medications. There is, however, little information in
the literature regarding the use of regimens of multiple anti-hypertensive
drugs (11).
The objective of the present study is to
investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of sildenafil in outpatients
with hypertension and who were on treatment with combinations of anti-hypertensive
drugs.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
Inclusion
and Exclusion Criteria
Eligible patients were men aged 18 years
or older who had had a stable sexual relationship for the previous 6 months,
with a clinical diagnosis of ED of at least 6 months’ duration,
and with hypertension that was being treated with at least 2 drugs from
any of the following classes: diuretics, alpha-blockers, beta-blockers,
angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, or calcium-channel blockers.
To be eligible for the study, patients also had to have a score ≤
25 in the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile
Function (IIEF) (12). Exclusion criteria were any of the following: concurrent
treatment with nitrates, the presence of any genital deformity or sexual
disturbance that precluded sexual intercourse, the use of any form of
treatment for ED within the 4 weeks preceding enrollment, alcohol or drug
abuse, the presence of retinitis pigmentosa, degenerative retinopathy
or any major medical condition, and the inability to fill in the event
log or comply with the study. The protocol was reviewed and approved by
the Institutional Review Boards of all participating centers, and all
patients enrolled in the study provided written informed consent.
Study
Design
Candidate patients were initially evaluated
through a complete history, including sexual function, and a complete
physical examination, including the determination of blood pressure (BP)
and heart rate in sitting and in supine position. On the initial visit,
patients also underwent laboratory exams (complete blood count, sodium,
potassium, creatinine, glucose, transaminases, cholesterol, triglycerides,
prolactin, testosterone and urinalysis) and electrocardiogram. Four weeks
later, eligible patients were randomized to receive treatment with sildenafil
or placebo. Randomization was achieved through computer-generated blocks
of random numbers. Sildenafil and placebo tablets had the same appearance
and were dispensed in identical containers. Patients were instructed to
take the study drug 1 hour before intended sexual intercourse and not
more than once daily. Based on previous studies, the initial dose of sildenafil
was 50 mg. In subsequent visits, this dose could be increased to 100 mg
or decreased to 25 mg depending on efficacy and tolerability. Patients
were evaluated 2, 4 and 8 weeks after randomization. Vital signs, the
use of concurrent medications, compliance and the results obtained with
the study treatment were assessed at each visit. Treatment could last
for a maximum of 8 weeks.
Assessment
of Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability
Patients were instructed to record in the
event log the amount of medication taken and the results achieved with
treatment. The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as those patients
who took at least one dose of a study drug and recorded at least one efficacy
measurement during treatment. In addition, the sample of patients who
could be evaluated was comprised of those with complete follow up and
responses to the IIEF questions during the study. The assessment of efficacy
was done in these patients. The primary efficacy parameter was the difference
in pre-treatment and post-treatment scores for questions 3 and 4 of the
IIEF. Secondary measures of treatment efficacy were the difference in
pre-treatment and post-treatment scores for other questions and for the
domains of the IIEF, patients’ responses to the Erectile Dysfunction
Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction questionnaire (EDITS) (13) and the
assessment of global efficacy, and the proportion of successful attempts
at sexual intercourse. Patients were instructed to register all symptoms
experienced during the study, and also to report promptly in the event
of a serious adverse effect. All cases of treatment interruption were
recorded, regardless of the cause leading to discontinuation.
Statistical
Analysis
Based on the assumption that the minimum
clinically relevant treatment difference between sildenafil (combined
dose groups) and placebo with regards to IIEF scores (questions 3 and
4) is 0.75 and that the common variance is 2.3, sample sizes of at least
65 subjects per treatment group (sildenafil and placebo) were required
to detect the specified difference between the two treatment groups, with
a power of 80% and a type I error rate of 5%. The comparisons between
groups regarding the change from baseline in IIEF questions were assessed
with unpaired Student’s t test. Mann-Whitney tests were applied
to compare the two groups regarding each question of the EDITS questionnaire.
Comparisons between sildenafil and placebo groups regarding the behavior
of BP during the study, were done using analysis of variance for repeated
measurements. Multiple comparisons were based on Wald’s statistics.
The differences between proportions of satisfactory responses in the assessment
of global efficacy were compared using the Pearson’s Chi-square
test. The proportion of successful attempts at intercourse was compared
between the two groups using a generalized estimation equation model assuming
a uniform structure for the correlation. All hypothesis testing considered
a p value ≤ 0.05 as statistically significant.
RESULTS
Patient
Characteristics
One hundred and fifty-three patients were
recruited from seven research centers in Brazil. One hundred and twenty
patients took at least on dose of the study drug; 87 of them completed
the 8 weeks of treatment and could be evaluated. Table-1 shows the main
demographic and clinical characteristics of the ITT sample at baseline.
There were no statistically significant differences in any of these characteristics
between groups. The age of the patients varied between 30 and 81 years,
the time since the start of ED varied from 0.6 and 30 years, and the time
since hypertension was diagnosed varied from 2 to 52 months. The etiology
of erectile dysfunction, which was determined on clinical grounds, was
similar between both groups, and approximately two-thirds of patients
had ED of mixed etiology.
The anti-hypertensive medication most frequently
utilized by the patients in both groups was a diuretic, followed by ACE
inhibitors, calcium-channel blockers, beta-blockers and alpha-blockers
(Figure-1). Patients remained on the same anti-hypertensive regimen for
the whole study period. Eighty-seven patients (44 in the sildenafil group
and 43 in the placebo group) took 2 anti-hypertensive drugs, 27 patients
(15 in the sildenafil group and 12 in the placebo group) took 3 anti-hypertensive
drugs, and 6 (2 in the sildenafil group and 4 in the placebo group) took
4 or more anti-hypertensive drugs. The most frequent co-morbidities were
dyslipidemias, diabetes mellitus and ischemic heart disease. The baseline
electrocardiogram was considered normal in 43% of the patients; the most
frequent abnormalities in the remaining cases were arrhythmias, aberrant
electric conduction and ventricular hypertrophy. There were no significant
changes in the electrocardiograph readings between both groups.
Therapeutic
Efficacy
At the conclusion of the study, 33 patients
(54.1%) were taking 50 mg of sildenafil, 24 (39.3%) were taking 100 mg,
and 4 patients (6.6%) were taking 25 mg. For patients taking the placebo,
the proportions were 20.3%, 74.6% and 5.1% respectively. Compared with
patients that took the placebo, patients treated with sildenafil had more
ability to achieve an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse (p =
0.0002), and also to maintain erections during the sexual intercourse
period (p < 0.0001) (Table-2). Similarly, the differences between the
scores for other IIEF questions before and after treatment, favored the
group treated with sildenafil. As shown in Table-3, with the exception
of questions 6, 9 and 11 of the IIEF (frequency of intercourse, ejaculation
and desire), all other differences achieved statistical significance.
When the questions were grouped and the differences were analyzed according
to the IIEF domain, there was a significant difference favoring sildenafil
in four of the five IIEF domains; the only domain for which no such difference
was evident was the sexual desire domain (Figure-2).
The secondary efficacy analyses confirmed the
superiority of sildenafil over placebo for the treatment of ED in patients
who are on multiple anti-hypertensive drugs. There were significant differences
favoring sildenafil in all 11 questions of the EDITS questionnaire, and
all statistical comparisons between the two groups yielded p values of
< 0.007. The assessment of global efficacy showed that 87% of the patients
treated with sildenafil reported improvement in their erections; this
same proportion was 37% among patients that took the placebo (p < 0.0001).
The analysis of event logs demonstrated statistically significant differences
between the two groups in the proportions of successful attempts at sexual
intercourse. Among patients treated with sildenafil, successful attempts
were reported in 54%, 61% and 73% of the times after 2, 4 and 8 weeks
of treatment. Among patients that took the placebo, these same proportions
were 13%, 20% and 29% (p < 0.0001 for the comparison between groups
at each time point).
Safety
and Tolerability
Adverse
Events
The analysis of safety and tolerability
was based on the ITT sample of 120 patients. Twenty-two patients had their
treatment with the study drug discontinued. Only 3 patients (1 treated
with sildenafil and 2 with placebo) had their treatments interrupted due
to adverse events. In all other cases, discontinuation of treatment was
due to insufficient clinical response (1 case in the sildenafil group
and 7 in the placebo group) or other reasons (7 cases in the sildenafil
group and 4 in the placebo group). Adverse events were registered in 82%
of the patients treated with sildenafil and in 40% of the patients that
took placebo. Of all these events, only 4 in each group were graded as
severe. Table-4 shows the most frequent adverse events that were considered
related to study drugs. Among patients treated with sildenafil, the most
common adverse events were headache (11.4% of the patients), vasodilation
(11.4%) and dyspepsia (6.5%). Four patients had serious adverse events
according to protocol definitions (cerebrovascular accident, pulmonary
edema/heart failure, atrial fibrillation/arrhythmia and polytrauma); the
former 3 events occurred in patients treated with sildenafil, and the
latter occurred in a patient that was taking placebo. None of these events
were deemed to be related to the study drugs. The case of poly-trauma
was secondary to a car accident, and this patient died during the study.
Behavior
of the Blood Pressure (BP)
Figures-3 to 6 show patients’ BP behavior
during the 4 weeks of eligibility assessment and the 8 weeks of treatment,
both in the supine (Figures-3 and 4) and seating (Figures-5 and 6) positions.
There were no significant changes between the BP measurements when patients
treated with sildenafil or placebo were compared. In both groups, there
were progressive decreases in both systolic and diastolic BP readings
during the study.
COMMENTS
Several
organic and psychological factors interact to maintain a normal erectile
function (1,14). Penile erection is a hemodynamic event that depends on
the relaxation of the smooth muscle cells of the trabeculae and arterioles
of the corpora cavernosa. In response to sexual stimulation, non-adrenergic
non-cholinergic nerve fibers and arteriolar endothelial cells of the penis
release nitric oxide (NO), a potent vasodilator that stimulates the activity
of guanylate cyclase and leads to an increase in cyclic guanosine-3',5'-monophosphate
(cGMP). The ultimate effect is calcium depletion from the cytosolic space
and cavernous smooth muscle relaxation. Phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5), an
enzyme that is present in the corpora cavernosa, inactivates cGMP, thus
terminating NO-cGMP-mediated smooth muscle relaxation. Inhibition of PDE5
enhances penile erection by preventing cGMP degradation (15). Sildenafil
is a potent and selective inhibitor of PDE5 (16).
There is abundant evidence pointing to the
relationship between ED and atherosclerosis and its risk factors. Abnormalities
in blood flow to the penis, which are frequent in patients with atherosclerosis
and diabetes mellitus, are a common factor underlying organic ED. Approximately
40% of patients with ED who are older than 50 years have associated atherosclerosis.
It is also estimated that ED occurs in approximately 50% of patients with
diabetes, regardless of the type; in these patients, the incidence of
ED seems to correlate with age and the severity of diabetes (17,18). Patients
with conventional risk factors for atherosclerotic coronary artery disease,
such as smoking, low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and
diabetes, are at increased risk for developing ED (19).
Most adverse events reported in the clinical
studies of sildenafil have been dose-dependent and secondary to vasodilation;
among such events, headache, flushing and nasal congestion are the most
frequent. The effects of sildenafil on BP have been well characterized
(20-23). In physiological conditions, sildenafil may lead to a mild to
moderate decrease in BP. In normotensive men, doses of 100 mg of sildenafil
may decrease systolic BP by up to 8-10 mm Hg, and diastolic BP by up to
3-6 mm Hg (21). The hypotensive effect of sildenafil may also be seen
among patients with hypertension, although its magnitude may not be clinically
significant in comparison to pretreatment BP levels (22,23). The peak
hypotensive effect of sildenafil typically occurs approximately one hour
after ingestion, and coincides with peak plasma levels. In healthy men,
the BP decreases induced by sildenafil return to pretreatment levels within
4 to 8 hours; these decreases are usually asymptomatic (20).
Some authors have attempted to investigate
the safety of the concurrent administration of sildenafil and anti-hypertensive
drugs. Most of the studies reported to date have looked at one anti-hypertensive
agent used in isolation. Studies with diuretics, alpha-blockers, beta-blockers,
ACE inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, and calcium-channel
blockers have shown that these agents may usually be given concurrently
with sildenafil with no clinically significant hypotensive effect (22).
Mild (2 to 4 mm Hg) decreases in systolic and diastolic BP have been seen
among patients with hypertension who were on treatment with single anti-hypertensive
drugs and who took sildenafil (24). In addition, the type and frequency
of adverse events seen in such patients have not differed from those that
are seen among patients who are not in treatment for hypertension (24,25).
Sildenafil does not seem to have pharmacodynamic interactions with anti-hypertensive
drugs that act through NO-independent mechanisms (23,25,26).
There is relatively little information in
the literature regarding the use of sildenafil in patients with hypertension
who are being treated with combinations of anti-hypertensive drugs (11).
Kloner et al. have found no difference in the frequency of adverse events
in patients taking sildenafil who were on treatment with one, two or three
anti-hypertensive drugs. In that study, the concurrent use of sildenafil
and multiple anti-hypertensive agents led to no apparent increase in the
frequency or severity of angina, myocardial infarction or other serious
cardiac events (27).
In the present study, the use of sildenafil
significantly improved the erectile function of Brazilian men with hypertension
who were under treatment with multiple anti-hypertensive drugs. As compared
with patients who took a placebo, patients treated with sildenafil had
significant improvements in their ability to achieve and maintain an erection.
Secondary assessments confirmed the superiority of sildenafil that led
to global improvements in 87% of the patients. This proportion of improvement
is similar to that seen in other studies of sildenafil, including those
in patients without hypertension. The present study also confirms that
sildenafil produces no significant effect on sexual desire. Importantly,
our study demonstrates the safety and tolerability of sildenafil in patients
with hypertension who are under treatment with combinations of anti-hypertensive
drugs. Treatment with sildenafil was well tolerated, and dose adjustments
during the study possibly contributed to a reduction in the frequency
of adverse events. As in other studies, headache, vasodilation and dyspepsia,
typically of mild intensity, were the most frequent treatment-related
adverse events. Interestingly, the effects of sildenafil on BP were not
different from those produced by placebo.
CONCLUSION
In
conclusion, our results indicate that sildenafil is efficacious, safe
and well tolerated in the treatment of ED in patients with hypertension
who are being treated with combinations of anti-hypertensive drugs.
Drs.
Ari Timerman, João C. F. Braga and
Marcus Malachias collaborated on the study.
REFERENCES
- NIH Consensus Conference. Impotence. NIH Consensus Development Panel
on Impotence. JAMA. 1993; 270: 83-90.
- Rosen RC, Fisher WA, Eardley I, Niederberger C, Nadel A, Sand M,
et al.: The multinational Men’s Attitudes to Life Events and Sexuality
(MALES) study: I. Prevalence of erectile dysfunction and related health
concerns in the general population. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004; 20: 607-17.
- Moreira ED Jr, Lobo CF, Diament A, Nicolosi A, Glasser DB: Incidence
of erectile dysfunction in men 40 to 69 years old: results from a population-based
cohort study in Brazil. Urology. 2003; 61: 431-6.
- Mion D Jr, Nobre F, Kohlmann O, Jr, Machado CA, Gomes MAM, Amodeo
C, et al.: IV Brazilian Guideline in Arterial Hypertension [in Portuguese].
(2002) Available at http://www.sbh.org.br/documentos/index.asp (accessed
19 October 2004).
- Seftel AD, Sun P, Swindle R: The prevalence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia,
diabetes mellitus and depression in men with erectile dysfunction. J
Urol. 2004; 171: 2341-5.
- Feldman HA, Johannes CB, Derby CA, Kleinman KP, Mohr BA, Araujo AB,
et al.: Erectile dysfunction and coronary risk factors: prospective
results from the Massachusetts Male Aging Study. Prev Med. 2000; 30:
328-38.
- Chew KK, Earle CM, Stuckey BG, Jamrozik K, Keogh EJ: Erectile dysfunction
in general medicine practice: prevalence and clinical correlates. Int
J Import Res. 2000; 12: 41-5.
- Goldstein I, Lue TF, Padma-Nathan H, Rosen RC, Steers WD, Wicker
PA: Oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Sildenafil
Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1998; 338: 1397-404. Erratum in: N Engl J
Med 1998; 339: 59.
- Moore RA, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ: Sildenafil (Viagra) for erectile
dysfunction: a meta-analysis of clinical trial reports. BMC Urol. 2002;
2: 6.
- Glina S, Bertero E, Claro JA, Damiao R, Faria G, Fregonesi A, et
al.: Efficacy and safety of flexible-dose oral sildenafil citrate (Viagra)
in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in Brazilian and Mexican men.
Int J Impot Res. 2002; 14 (Suppl 2): S27-S32.
- Cheitlin MD, Hutter AM, Brindis RG, Ganz P, Kaul S, Russell RO Jr,
et al.: Use of sildenafil (Viagra) in patients with cardiovascular disease.
Technology and Practice Executive Committee. Circulation. 1999; 99:
168-77. Erratum in: Circulation 1999; 100: 2389.
- Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A:
The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional
scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997; 49: 822-30.
- Lewis R, Bennett CJ, Borkon WD, Boykin WH, Althof SE, Stecher VJ,
et al.: Patient and partner satisfaction with Viagra (sildenafil citrate)
treatment as determined by the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment
Satisfaction Questionnaire. Urology. 2001; 57: 960-5.
- Benet AE, Melman A: The epidemiology of erectile dysfunction. Urol
Clin North Am. 1995; 22: 699-709.
- Anderson KE, Wagner G: Physiology of penile erection. Physiol Rev.
1995; 75: 191-236.
- Boolell M, Allen MJ, Ballard SA, Gepi-Attee S, Muirhead GJ, Naylor
AM, et al.: Sildenafil: an orally active type 5 cyclic GMP-specific
phosphodiesterase inhibitor for the treatment of penile erectile dysfunction.
Int J Import Res. 1996; 8: 47-52.
- Rubin A, Babbott D: Impotence and diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 1958;
168: 498-500.
- McCulloch DK, Campbell IW, Wu FC, Prescott RJ: The prevalence of
diabetic impotence. Diabetologia. 1980; 18: 279-83.
- Feldman HA, Goldstein I, Hatzichristou DG, Krane RJ, McKinlay JB:
Impotence and its medical and psychosocial correlates: results of Massachusetts
Male Aging Study. J Urol. 1994; 151: 54-61.
- Jackson G, Benjamin N, Jackson N, Allen MJ: Effects of sildenafil
citrate on human hemodynamics. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 83: 13C-20C.
- Morales A, Gingell C, Collins M, Wicker PA, Osterloh IH: Clinical
safety of oral sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in the treatment of erectile
dysfunction. Int J Import Res. 1998; 10: 69-73; discussion 73-4.
- Zusman RM, Morales A, Glasser DB, Osterloh IH: Overall cardiovascular
profile of sildenafil citrate. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 83: 35C-44C.
- Kloner RA, Zusman RM: Cardiovascular effects of sildenafil citrate
and recommendations for its use. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 84: 11N-17N.
- Zusman RM, Prisant LM, Brown MJ: Effect of sildenafil citrate on
blood pressure and heart rate in men with erectile dysfunction taking
concomitant antihypertensive medication. Sildenafil Study Group. Am
J Hypertens. 2000; 18: 1865-9.
- Kloner RA, Brown M, Prisant LM, Collins M: Effect of sildenafil in
patients with erectile dysfunction taking antihypertensive therapy.
Sildenafil Study Group. Am J Hypertens. 2001; 14: 70-3.
- Webb DJ, Freestone S, Allen MJ, Muirhead GJ: Sildenafil citrate and
blood-pressure-lowering drugs: results of drug interaction studies with
an organic nitrate and a calcium antagonist. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 83:
21C-28C.
- Kloner RA, Brown M, Sildenafil Study Group: Safety of sildenafil
citrate in men with erectile dysfunction taking multiple antihypertensive
agents. Am J Hypertens. 1999; 12: 37A.
__________
DISCLAIMER
Pfizer, Inc. supported the study.
_________________________
Received: November 24, 2004
Accepted after revision: May 16, 2005
_______________________
Correspondence address:
Dr. Denilson Campos Albuquerque
Rua Voluntários da Pátria, 445 / 1402
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 22270-000, Brazil
Fax: + 55 21 2266-2606
E-mail: albuquerque@doctor.com
EDITORIAL COMMENT
Many
researchers have suggested that erectile dysfunction (ED) co-exists with
other diseases because they share common risk factors. Based on published
studies, ED has been found in patients with hypertension, hyperlipidemia,
diabetes mellitus, depression, ischemic heart disease, coronary heart
disease, peripheral vascular disease etc. However, published information
on the prevalence of these concurrent diseases in men with ED has been
limited in terms of the number or sample size of the studies.
ED
is common among men taking anti-hypertensive drugs to control blood pressure.
Actually, ED could be caused either by hypertension itself, by the anti-hypertensive
drugs or by the combination of both.
The
impact of ED on the patient’s quality of life is much more important
than the impact of hypertension itself. Because of this, any well conducted
study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the 5 PDE inhibitors is very
welcome.
Although
this is a sponsored study, it was well designed and it is important for
to emphasize that even patients receiving multiple anti-hypertensive drugs
can be treated with 5 PDE inhibitors. The results found in the present
study are quite promising. Otherwise, perhaps a more reasonable success
rate in such patients (presenting cardiovascular diseases) would be around
70% (1).
Furthermore,
despite the knowledge that these drugs are safe even in critical patients
and in doses as high as 400 mg 4 times a day (2), the expected side effects
in this population seems to reach 40% (1).
In
any event, the message of the study is that 5 PDE inhibitors are safe
and present a high success rate even in critical patients with hypertension
who are being treated with multiple anti-hypertensive drugs.
REFERENCES
1. Pickering TG, Shepherd
AM, Puddey I, Glasser DB, Orazem J, Sherman N, et al.: Sildenafil citrate
for erectile dysfunction in men receiving multiple antihypertensive agents:
a randomized controlled trial. Am J Hypertens. 2004; 17: 1135-42.
2. Paez RP, Araújo WF, Hossne Jr NA, Neves AL, Vargas GF, Aguiar
LF, et al.: Sildenafil improves right ventricular function in a cardiac
transplant recipient. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2005; 84: 176-8.
Dr. Joaquim
de Almeida Claro
Division of Urology, Section of Andrology
Federal University of Sao Paulo, UNIFESP
Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
EDITORIAL COMMENT
This
well-designed study and clearly written paper is another important Brazilian
contribution to the international urological literature. Previously, there
was scant information on the effects of sildenafil in hypertensive patients
who are taking multiple antihypertensive agents. This report demonstrates
that sildenafil is efficacious and safe for the treatment of erectile
dysfunction (ED) in men taking various combinations of antihypertensive
drugs. The report also demonstrates that despite its vasodilatory action,
sildenafil does not complicate treatment or interfere with control of
hypertension in these men.
This
is important information because it might have been predicted that men
with hypertension severe enough to require multiple antihypertensive agents
would have more advanced ED, which is more difficult to treat successfully.
In fact, analyzing the data presented in the tables, the pre-treatment
scores on the erectile function domain (questions 1-5 and 15) of the International
Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) were 12.26 and 12.93 in the placebo
and sildenafil groups. These pre-treatment scores are slightly lower than
the pre-treatment scores seen in most other sildenafil clinical trials,
suggesting that the men in this study might have had slightly more severe
ED than men in other studies. The post-treatment score on the erectile
function domain in the placebo group in this study rose only to 14.75,
demonstrating a mild placebo effect, while the post-treatment score in
the sildenafil group rose to 24.14, clearly demonstrating the efficacy
of sildenafil. The score of 24.14 is somewhat higher than has been reported
in most other sildenafil clinical trials, showing that sildenafil is as
effective in men using multiple antihypertensive agent combinations as
in many other groups of men with ED.
The
authors are to be congratulated for completing an excellent study that
fills one of the gaps in the international literature on sexual medicine.
Dr. Ira
D. Sharlip
Clinical Professor of Urology
University of California San Francisco
San Francisco, California, USA
|