A second multicenter trial used the SOLVD protocol for study of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients. SOLVD- Prevention patients, who had left ventricular ejection fraction =35% and no history of symptomatic heart failure, were randomized to placebo (n=2117) or enalapril (n=2111) and followed for up to 5 years. The majority of patients in the SOLVD-Prevention trial had a history of ischemic heart disease. A history of myocardial infarction was present in 80 percent of patients, current angina pectoris in 34 percent, and a history of hypertension in 37 percent. No statistically significant mortality effect was demonstrated in this population. Enalapril-treated subjects had 32% fewer first hospitalizations for heart failure, and 32% fewer total heart failure hospitalizations. Compared to placebo, 32 percent fewer patients receiving enalapril developed symptoms of overt heart failure. Hospitalizations for cardiovascular reasons were also reduced. There was an insignificant reduction in hospitalizations for any cause in the enalapril treatment group (for enalapril vs. placebo, respectively, 1166 vs. 1201 first hospitalizations, 2649 vs. 2840 total hospitalizations), although the study was not powered to look for such an effect.

The SOLVD-Prevention trial was not designed to determine whether treatment of asymptomatic patients with low ejection fraction would be superior, with respect to preventing hospitalization, to closer follow-up and use of enalapril at the earliest sign of heart failure. However, under the conditions of follow-up in the SOLVD-Prevention trial (every 4 months at the study clinic; personal physician as needed), 68% of patients on placebo who were hospitalized for heart failure had no prior symptoms recorded which would have signaled initiation of treatment.

The SOLVD-Prevention trial was also not designed to show whether enalapril modified the progression of underlying heart disease.

In another multicenter, placebo-controlled trial (CONSENSUS) limited to patients with NYHA Class IV congestive heart failure and radiographic evidence of cardiomegaly, use of enalapril was associated with improved survival. The results are shown in the following table.

In both CONSENSUS and SOLVD-Treatment trials, patients were also usually receiving digitalis, diuretics or both.

Clinical Pharmacology in Pediatric Patients

A multiple dose pharmacokinetic study was conducted in 40 hypertensive male and female pediatric patients aged 2 months to =16 years following daily oral administration of 0.07 to 0.14 mg/kg enalapril maleate. At steady state, the mean effective half-life for accumulation of enalaprilat was 14 hours and the mean urinary recovery of total enalapril and enalaprilat in 24 hours was 68% of the administered dose. Conversion of enalapril to enalaprilat was in the range of 63-76%. The overall results of this study indicate that the pharmacokinetics of enalapril in hypertensive children aged 2 months to =16 years are consistent across the studied age groups and consistent with pharmacokinetic historic data in healthy adults.

In a clinical study involving 110 hypertensive pediatric patients 6 to 16 years of age, patients who weighed < 50 kg received either 0.625, 2.5 or 20 mg of enalapril daily and patients who weighed =50 kg received either 1.25, 5, or 40 mg of enalapril daily. Enalapril administration once daily lowered trough blood pressure in a dose-dependent manner. The dose-dependent antihypertensive efficacy of enalapril was consistent across all subgroups (age, Tanner stage, gender, race). However, the lowest doses studied, 0.625 mg and 1.25 mg, corresponding to an average of 0.02 mg/kg once daily, did not appear to offer consistent antihypertensive efficacy. In this study, VASOTEC was generally well tolerated.

Bookmark this page: