Richard A Preston

University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, United States

Are you Richard A Preston?

Claim your profile

Publications (77)328.21 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Several consistent lines of evidence indicate an association between sodium sensitivity and impaired nitric oxide bioactivity. Nevertheless, whether restoring nitric oxide in humans by pharmacological means can ameliorate sodium sensitivity has not been investigated. Because nebivolol has been demonstrated to increase nitric oxide bioactivity in both laboratory and clinical investigations, we hypothesized that nebivolol might ameliorate sodium sensitivity and improve renal sodium handling in comparison to metoprolol. We therefore conducted a randomized, 2-treatment-period crossover trial in 19 Hispanic postmenopausal women with hypertension to determine the comparative effects of nebivolol versus metoprolol on (1) 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure response to an increase in dietary sodium from 5 days of low sodium to 5 days of high sodium, (2) renal natriuretic response to a 1-L saline challenge, and (3) asymmetrical dimethylarginine. Clinic blood pressure and heart rate were significantly reduced after 4 weeks of treatment with both nebivolol and metoprolol. Twenty-four-hour mean systolic blood pressure increased sharply from low sodium to high sodium for both nebivolol and metoprolol. Nevertheless, the increases in blood pressure did not differ between the 2 drugs: 7.7 (3.1, 12.3) mm Hg with metoprolol and 9.3 (4.6, 13.9) mm Hg with nebivolol (P=0.63). Furthermore, we observed no differences between the drugs in natriuretic response to saline challenge or asymmetrical dimethylarginine. In a sodium-sensitive population, at doses sufficient to produce reductions in blood pressure and heart rate, nebivolol did not demonstrate a significant effect on sodium sensitivity or sodium handling compared with metoprolol.
    Hypertension 05/2014; · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ospemifene is a nonestrogen tissue-selective estrogen agonist/antagonist approved to treat moderate to severe dyspareunia due to vulvar and vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. Three single-dose, open-label, parallel-group pharmacokinetic studies examined the pharmacokinetics of ospemifene in postmenopausal women with (1) mild hepatic impairment (n = 7), (2) moderate hepatic impairment (n = 8), and (3) severe renal impairment (n = 8) compared with a similar number of matched healthy controls. The study durations ranged from 8 to 12 days. Study participants received a single oral dose of ospemifene 60 mg on day 1 and blood samples were collected serially. The geometric mean ratios (hepatic or renal impairment/healthy) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum concentration (Cmax), respectively, of ospemifene were 90.86% (90% CI, 65.95%-125.19%) and 79.48% (90% CI, 65.95%-95.79%) in the mild hepatic impairment study; 128.62% (90% CI, 87.13%-189.88%) and 101.12% (90% CI, 66.17%-154.52%) in the moderate hepatic impairment study, and 119.63% (90% CI, 81.37%-175.88%) and 79.30% (90% CI, 52.85%-118.99%) in the severe renal impairment study. Overall, there was no clinically important effect of hepatic or renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of ospemifene, indicating that dosing does not need to be adjusted in postmenopausal women with mild or moderate hepatic impairment or in subjects with severe renal impairment.
    American journal of therapeutics 01/2014; · 1.29 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Apremilast (CC-10004), a PDE4 enzyme inhibitor, is under clinical development for the treatment of inflammatory immune-mediated disorders. Since apremilast is extensively metabolised via multiple routes, impact of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of apremilast and M12 metabolite was evaluated. Thirty-two subjects were enrolled in a two-centre, open-label, and single-dose study. Subjects with moderate hepatic impairment and their healthy matches received a single 30-mg dose and subjects with severe hepatic impairment and their healthy matches received a single 20-mg dose of apremilast. Plasma concentrations of apremilast and M12 were measured, PK parameters calculated, and statistically compared. During the study, single doses of apremilast were well tolerated, with no clinically meaningful safety findings observed. PK parameters were comparable between hepatic impaired and healthy subjects, and there was no evidence to suggest that the PK of apremilast is affected by moderate and severe hepatic impairment. Therefore, no dose adjustment is required.
    Int. J. of Medical Engineering and Informatics. 01/2014; 6(2):100 - 114.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) is a potent angiotensin II receptor blocker that decreases blood pressure in a dose-dependent manner. It is a pro-drug and not detected in blood after oral administration because of rapid hydrolysis to the active moiety, azilsartan (AZL). AZL undergoes further metabolism to the major metabolite M-II and minor metabolites. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of AZL and its major metabolite. METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, phase I parallel-group study which examined the single-dose (40-mg) pharmacokinetics of AZL and M-II in 24 subjects with mild, moderate, or severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis (n = 6 per group), respectively, and healthy matched subjects (n = 24). RESULTS: Renal impairment/disease did not cause clinically meaningful increases in exposure to AZL. M-II exposure was higher in all renally impaired subjects and highest in those with severe impairment (approx fivefold higher vs. control). M-II is pharmacologically inactive; increased exposure was not considered important in dose selection for AZL-M in subjects with renal impairment. Hemodialysis did not significantly remove AZL or M-II. Renal impairment had no clinically meaningful effect on the plasma protein binding of AZL or M-II. Single doses of AZL-M 40 mg were well tolerated in all subject groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the pharmacokinetic and tolerability findings, no dose adjustment of AZL-M is required for subjects with any degree of renal impairment, including end-stage renal disease.
    Clinical Pharmacokinetics 04/2013; · 5.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The debate over whether certain antihypertensive medications have benefits beyond what would be expected from their blood pressure lowering spurred the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial, which randomized 42,418 participants to chlorthalidone (15,255), amlodipine (9048), lisinopril (9054), or doxazosin (9061). We compared chlorthalidone, the active control, with each of the other three agents with respect to the primary outcome, fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction, and several other clinical endpoints. The arms were similar with respect to the primary endpoint, although some differences were found for other endpoints, most notably heart failure. Although the desire was to achieve similar blood pressure reductions in the four arms, we found some systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure differences. A natural question is to what degree can observed treatment group differences in cardiovascular outcomes be attributed to these blood pressure differences. The purpose of this paper was to delineate the problems inherent in attempting to answer this question, and to present analyses intended to overcome these problems. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Statistics in Medicine 09/2012; · 2.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A gastrointestinal-renal natriuretic signaling axis has been proposed to regulate sodium excretion in response to acute sodium ingestion. Such an axis is thought to be regulated by a gastrointestinal sodium sensor coupled to the activation/release of a natriuretic signal and could have important clinical and scientific implications. Here we systematically tested for this putative axis and the potential involvement of the gastrointestinal-derived natriuretic prohormones prouroguanylin and proguanylin in 15 healthy volunteers. There was no difference in sodium excretion following equivalent oral or intravenous sodium loads during either high- or low-sodium diets. Furthermore, serum concentrations of prouroguanylin and proguanylin did not increase, did not differ following oral or intravenous sodium, and did not correlate with sodium excretion. Thus, our results do not support an acute gastrointestinal-renal natriuretic axis or a central role for prouroguanylin or proguanylin in humans. If such an axis does exist, it is not characterized by a significant difference in the pattern of sodium excretion following either an oral or intravenous sodium load.Kidney International advance online publication, 8 August 2012; doi:10.1038/ki.2012.269.
    Kidney International 08/2012; · 8.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Boceprevir is a novel inhibitor of the hepatitis C virus NS3 protease and was recently approved for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C infection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of impaired hepatic or renal function on boceprevir pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability. We conducted two open-label, single-dose, parallel-group studies comparing the safety and pharmacokinetics of boceprevir in patients with varying degrees of hepatic impairment compared with healthy controls in one study and patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on haemodialysis with healthy controls in the other. Patients with hepatic impairment (mild [n = 6], moderate [n = 6], severe [n = 6] and healthy controls [n = 6]) received a single dose of boceprevir (400 mg) on day 1, and whole blood was collected at selected timepoints up to 72 hours postdose to measure plasma drug concentrations. Patients with ESRD and healthy subjects received a single dose of boceprevir 800 mg orally on days 1 and 4, with samples for pharmacokinetic analyses collected at selected timepoints up to 48 hours postdose on both days. In addition, 4 hours after dosing on day 4, patients with ESRD underwent haemodialysis with arterial and venous blood samples collected up to 8 hours postdose. In the hepatic impairment study, there was a trend toward increased mean maximum (peak) plasma concentration (C(max)) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of boceprevir with increasing severity of liver impairment. Point estimates for the geometric mean ratio for C(max) ranged from 100% in patients with mild hepatic impairment to 161% in patients with severe hepatic impairment, with the geometric mean ratio for AUC ranging from 91% in patients with mild hepatic impairment to 149% for patients with severe hepatic impairment, relative to healthy subjects. The mean elimination half-life (t(1/2;)) and median time to C(max) (t(max)) values of boceprevir were similar in healthy subjects and patients with hepatic impairment. In the renal impairment study, mean boceprevir C(max) and AUC values were comparable in patients with ESRD and in healthy subjects, with point estimates for the geometric mean ratio of 81% and 90%, respectively, compared with healthy subjects. Mean t(1/2;), median t(max) and mean apparent oral total clearance (CL/F) values were similar in healthy subjects and patients with ESRD. Boceprevir exposure was also similar in patients with ESRD on day 1 (no dialysis) and day 4 (dialysis beginning 4 hours postdose), with point estimates for the geometric mean ratio of C(max) and AUC to the last measurable sampling time (AUC(last)) on day 1 compared with day 4 of 88% and 98%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in one patient with severe hepatic impairment (mild vomiting) and two patients with ESRD (moderate ventricular extrasystoles, flatulence and catheter thrombosis). In the present studies, the pharmacokinetic properties of boceprevir were not altered to a clinically meaningful extent in patients with impaired liver or renal function. These data indicate that boceprevir dose adjustment is not warranted in patients with impaired hepatic function or ESRD, including those receiving dialysis. Boceprevir is not removed by haemodialysis.
    Clinical Pharmacokinetics 07/2012; 51(9):619-28. · 5.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: CKD is common among older patients. This article assesses long-term renal and cardiovascular outcomes in older high-risk hypertensive patients, stratified by baseline estimated GFR (eGFR), and long-term outcome efficacy of 5-year first-step treatment with amlodipine or lisinopril, each compared with chlorthalidone. This was a long-term post-trial follow-up of hypertensive participants (n=31,350), aged ≥55 years, randomized to receive chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril for 4-8 years at 593 centers. Participants were stratified by baseline eGFR (ml/min per 1.73 m(2)) as follows: normal/increased (≥90; n=8027), mild reduction (60-89; n=17,778), and moderate/severe reduction (<60; n=5545). Outcomes were cardiovascular mortality (primary outcome), total mortality, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke, heart failure, and ESRD. After an average 8.8-year follow-up, total mortality was significantly higher in participants with moderate/severe eGFR reduction compared with those with normal and mildly reduced eGFR (P<0.001). In participants with an eGFR <60, there was no significant difference in cardiovascular mortality between chlorthalidone and amlodipine (P=0.64), or chlorthalidone and lisinopril (P=0.56). Likewise, no significant differences were observed for total mortality, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke, or ESRD. CKD is associated with significantly higher long-term risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in older hypertensive patients. By eGFR stratum, 5-year treatment with amlodipine or lisinopril was not superior to chlorthalidone in preventing cardiovascular events, mortality, or ESRD during 9-year follow-up. Because data on proteinuria were not available, these findings may not be extrapolated to proteinuric CKD.
    Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 04/2012; 7(6):989-1002. · 5.07 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 04/2012; · 5.07 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this open-label, randomized, multiple-dose, two-treatment crossover study, 24 postmenopausal women with moderate to severe atrophic vaginitis received 0.3 mg conjugated estrogens daily for 14 days: 7 days orally (0.3 mg tablet) and 7 days vaginally (0.5 g cream). Steady-state plasma concentrations of E2 and estrone were one-third lower after vaginal versus oral administration of conjugated estrogens.
    Fertility and sterility 05/2010; 94(6):2365-8. · 3.97 Impact Factor
  • Source
    David Afshartous, Richard A. Preston
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We revisit the problem of determining confidence interval widths for the comparison of means. For the independent two-sample (two-sided) case, Goldstein and Healy (1995) draw attention to the fact that comparisons based on 95% error bars are not very effective in assessing the statistical significance of the difference in means and derive the correct confidence interval for such a comparison. We provide an extension to Goldstein and Healy (1995) to account for the correlation structure and unequal variances. We use the results to develop rules of thumb for evaluating differences, in an exploratory manner, like Moses (1987) and Cumming (2009), from the independent case. We illustrate the method for the simple comparison of two means in a real data set, provide R code that may be easily implemented in practice, and discuss the extension of the method to other applied problems.
    Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 01/2010; · 1.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate posaconazole pharmacokinetics in subjects with different degrees of hepatic impairment compared with matched healthy subjects. A total of 37 subjects were enrolled in this open-label, single-dose, parallel-group study; 19 with hepatic impairment and 18 healthy subjects with matching demographics. Each subject received a single 400-mg oral dose of posaconazole after a high-fat meal. Blood samples for analysis were taken up to 648 h ( approximately 4 weeks) postdose. Compared with maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) values in matched subjects with normal hepatic function, values were higher among subjects with moderate hepatic impairment (517 vs. 724 ng/mL) but lower among subjects with severe hepatic impairment (608 vs. 403 ng/mL). No clear trend toward increased or decreased exposure was observed with increasingly severe hepatic impairment, and extensive overlap occurred between normal and hepatically impaired subjects. Therefore, pharmacokinetic variables C(max) and area under the curve from time 0 to the time of final quantifiable sample (AUC(tf)) values were pooled for subjects with hepatic impairment. Pooled C(max) values were similar to the pooled normal groups (607 vs. 605 ng/mL), whereas there was an overall 36% increase in exposure (AUC(tf)) for the pooled hepatic impairment group compared with the pooled normal group. Posaconazole was well-tolerated, with six (33%) healthy subjects and six (32%) hepatically impaired subjects reporting adverse events. The data from this small single-dose study suggest posaconazole is safe. Furthermore, although limited by the small number of subjects enrolled, the authors feel that dose adjustments are probably not necessary in patients with hepatic impairment; however, physicians should continue to monitor posaconazole use in patients with hepatic impairment.
    Current Medical Research and Opinion 11/2009; 26(1):1-7. · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The combination of an aldosterone receptor antagonist added to an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor has been demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular and renal end points in hypertensive humans but can produce hyperkalemia in the common clinical setting of impaired renal function. We investigated the effects of dual therapy on acute and chronic potassium handling in hypertensive humans with renal impairment by conducting a randomized crossover clinical trial of 4 weeks of 40 mg lisinopril/25 mg spironolactone versus placebo in 18 participants with a glomerular filtration rate of 25 to 65 mL/min. Study end points, following an established protocol, were hourly determinations of dynamic renal potassium excretion (mmol/h) and serum potassium (mmol/L) after 35 mmol oral potassium challenge in addition to ambulatory potassium concentration. After 4 weeks, ambulatory potassium concentration was 4.87 mmol/L with lisinopril/spironolactone versus 4.37 with placebo (P<0.001). Lisinopril/spironolactone produced only a modest 0.44 mmol/h reduction in stimulated potassium excretion (P=0.03) but a substantial 0.67 mmol/L increase in serum potassium (P<0.001) in response to 35 mmol potassium; these findings are consistent with impaired extrarenal/transcellular potassium disposition. We found the increase in serum potassium after an oral potassium challenge to be a strong predictor of the increase in ambulatory potassium with lisinopril/spironolactone. Our study suggests that dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockade may impair extrarenal/transcellular potassium disposition in addition to reducing potassium excretion in humans with renal impairment, and that acute changes in dynamic potassium handling are predictive of chronic changes in ambulatory potassium concentration with dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockade.
    Hypertension 04/2009; 53(5):754-60. · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Blood pressure (BP) control rates and number of antihypertensive medications were compared (average follow-up, 4.9 years) by randomized groups: chlorthalidone, 12.5-25 mg/d (n=15,255), amlodipine 2.5-10 mg/d (n=9048), or lisinopril 10-40 mg/d (n=9054) in a randomized double-blind hypertension trial. Participants were hypertensives aged 55 or older with additional cardiovascular risk factor(s), recruited from 623 centers. Additional agents from other classes were added as needed to achieve BP control. BP was reduced from 145/83 mm Hg (27% control) to 134/76 mm Hg (chlorthalidone, 68% control), 135/75 mm Hg (amlodipine, 66% control), and 136/76 mm Hg (lisinopril, 61% control) by 5 years; the mean number of drugs prescribed was 1.9, 2.0, and 2.1, respectively. Only 28% (chlorthalidone), 24% (amlodipine), and 24% (lisinopril) were controlled on monotherapy. BP control was achieved in the majority of each randomized group-a greater proportion with chlorthalidone. Over time, providers and patients should expect multidrug therapy to achieve BP <140/90 mm Hg in a majority of patients.
    Journal of Clinical Hypertension 10/2008; 10(10):751-60. · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • David Afshartous, Richard A Preston
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical research studies often collect data via repeated measurements of collected urine. Unfortunately, the accuracy of timed urine collections is limited by the presence of a residual volume of urine remaining in the bladder following each timed void due to incomplete emptying of the bladder. This residual urine volume adds significant imprecision to the urine collection method, rendering an important and fundamental clinical research tool inaccurate. We present an unbiased method to estimate the residual bladder volumes via a mathematical model of the bladder process. Regardless of the substance of primary interest, the model leverages conservation of mass and conservation of concentration principles towards a substance of secondary interest in order to solve a system of recursive equations, resulting in our Recursive Residual Estimation method to predict the residual volumes at each time point. We verify the model on simulated patients and also investigate the sensitivity of the model to initial value specification.
    Statistical Methods in Medical Research 06/2008; 18(2):119-30. · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    R A Preston, D Afshartous, A B Alonso
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both selective and nonselective cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors can reduce potassium excretion and can produce or exacerbate hyperkalemia.1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 We investigated whether there is a difference between the effects of nonselective COX-1/COX-2 inhibitors and selective COX-2 inhibitors on provoked dynamic renal potassium excretion. We apply a mixed-effects model statistical approach that allows investigation of drug-induced delays in reaching maximal potassium excretion, blunting/flattening of potassium handling curves, and shift/separation in potassium handling at peak potassium excretion.
    Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics 03/2008; 84(2):208-11. · 6.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Guidelines stress the importance of the simultaneous management of multiple cardiovascular risk factors. This can in part be achieved by coadministration of lipid-lowering and antihypertensive treatments. Potential pharmacodynamic interaction between drugs should be investigated as part of developing single-pill combinations. The Respond trial assessed whether combining amlodipine to treat hypertension and atorvastatin to treat dyslipidemia affected the action of either monotherapy. A total of 1660 hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia received 1 of 15 combinations of amlodipine (placebo, 5, or 10 mg) and atorvastatin (placebo, 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg) in a 3 x 5 factorial randomized, placebo-controlled design. At 8 weeks, combination-treated patients experienced dose-related and statistically significant reductions in systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and Framingham risk score. Overall, coadministered atorvastatin and amlodipine was well tolerated and without adverse pharmacodynamic interaction; combination treatment did not affect the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering efficacy and safety of atorvastatin, or the systolic blood pressure-lowering efficacy and safety of amlodipine.
    The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 01/2008; 47(12):1555-69. · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effects of combination hormone therapy of drospirenone (DRSP), a novel progestin with antialdosterone properties, and 17beta-estradiol (E2) on hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics versus placebo were investigated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Thirty-six postmenopausal women with stage 1 hypertension maintained on 25 mg of HCTZ once daily were randomized to receive either 3 mg of DRSP/1 mg of E2 or placebo once daily for 4 weeks. Plasma HCTZ, serum DRSP, E2, potassium, aldosterone, and plasma renin activity were determined at baseline and after 4 weeks. Results showed that the combination of DRSP/E2 plus 25 mg of HCTZ is safe and well tolerated in hypertensive postmenopausal women. The pharmacokinetics of HCTZ were not affected by coadministration of DRSP/E2. The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals ([HCTZ + DRSP/E2]/[HCTZ + placebo]) for HCTZ (a) area under the serum/plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours and (b) maximum plasma concentration were 101 (90.7, 112) and 103 (92.8, 115), respectively. In the HCTZ + DRSP/E2 group, serum potassium, aldosterone, and plasma renin activity all increased in a manner marginally consistent with a beneficial antialdosterone effect, counteracting the HCTZ-induced potassium loss and lowering both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. No dose adjustment is required when DRSP/E2 is added to antihypertensive therapy with HCTZ in hypertensive postmenopausal women.
    The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 11/2007; 47(10):1292-302. · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Uncontrolled severe hypertension is associated with alarming rates of cardiovascular events but the mechanisms of vascular injury are not well understood. Recent investigative interest has focused on platelet activation and platelet P-selectin (CD62P) as direct mediators of vascular inflammation and injury. We investigated the association of extreme blood pressure (BP) elevation with platelet P-selectin and fibrinolytic markers in high risk patients with severe hypertension. Cross-sectional comparison of platelet CD62, tissue plasminogen activator antigen (tPA), and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 activity (PAI-1) among 3 BP groups: untreated severely hypertensive patients (SHT; n=18), untreated mildly hypertensive patients (MHT; n=19), and normotensive controls (NT; n=16). Platelet CD62 was greatest in SHT (p=0.00008) and showed a strong correlation with both systolic (p=0.0002, r=0.52) and diastolic (p=0.0003, r=0.52) BP. tPA was greater in SHT than MHT or NT (ANOVA; p=0.02) and correlated with diastolic BP but not SBP. PAI-1 did not correlate with either SBP or DBP but was related to body mass index, diabetes, and dyslipidemia. Platelet CD62 demonstrated a strong and graded association with both systolic and diastolic BP that persisted in the presence of multiple concomitant risk factors. The association of BP with CD62P was stronger than with either PAI-1 or tPA-Ag. Platelet activation and platelet CD62 increase in a BP-dependent manner and this relationship persists at extreme levels of BP. Platelet activation and platelet CD62 may participate in the accelerated target organ injury observed in high risk patients with severe hypertension.
    Atherosclerosis 06/2007; 192(1):148-54. · 3.71 Impact Factor
  • Robert J Noveck, Richard A Preston, Suzanne K Swan
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the differences in the pharmacokinetics and cardiac safety of ebastine and its active metabolite, carebastine, in patients with normal and impaired renal function. Twenty-four patients with varying degrees of renal impairment (mild, moderate or severe: n = 8 per group) and 12 healthy subjects participated in an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study. Ebastine 20mg was administered orally once daily for 5 days. Plasma concentrations of ebastine and carebastine were determined for 24 hours on day 1 and for 72 hours on day 5 by using a validated sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay with a minimum quantifiable limit of 0.05 ng/mL for ebastine and 1.00 ng/mL for carebastine. Renal function was assessed by measuring 24-hour creatinine clearance (CL(CR)) at baseline. Cardiac and general safety parameters were also monitored. The pharmacokinetics of ebastine were not modified by renal impairment. No correlation between ebastine pharmacokinetics and renal function, as expressed by CL(CR) assessed 2 days prior to dosing, was observed. Comparison of the plasma exposure and the elimination half-life of ebastine and carebastine between groups showed no significant differences. Therefore, no apparent accumulation of ebastine and carebastine occurred, and steady-state concentrations of ebastine and carebastine were predictable from single-dose pharmacokinetics for both healthy subjects and patients with renal impairment, even though the variability between the groups was large. In addition, no differences were observed in the safety of ebastine between patients with renal impairment and healthy subjects when assessing adverse events, vital signs, laboratory parameters or ECGs. Ebastine was generally well tolerated in subjects with impaired renal function. No clinically important pharmacokinetic or safety differences were observed between patients with renal impairment and healthy subjects with normal renal function.
    Clinical Pharmacokinetics 02/2007; 46(6):525-34. · 5.49 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

1k Citations
328.21 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 1990–2013
    • University of Miami
      • • Department of Medicine
      • • Miller School of Medicine
      Coral Gables, FL, United States
  • 2012
    • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
      Maryland, United States
    • Case Western Reserve University
      • Division of Nephrology and Hypertension
      Cleveland, OH, United States
    • Jackson Memorial Hospital
      Miami, Florida, United States
  • 2005
    • UConn Health Center
      • Pat and Jim Calhoun Cardiology Center
      Farmington, CT, United States
  • 1988–2005
    • University of Miami Miller School of Medicine
      • • Division of Hospital Medicine
      • • Division of Clinical Pharmacology
      Miami, FL, United States
  • 2004
    • Rush University Medical Center
      • Department of Preventive Medicine
      Chicago, IL, United States
  • 2002
    • Clinical pharmacology of Miami
      Miami, Florida, United States
  • 1996
    • James A. Haley Veterans Hospital
      Tampa, Florida, United States
  • 1992–1996
    • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
      Washington, Washington, D.C., United States