Lopressor is a beta-adrenergic receptor blocking agent. In vitro and in vivo
animal studies have shown that it has a preferential effect on beta1
adrenoreceptors, chiefly located in cardiac muscle. This preferential effect
is not absolute, however, and at higher doses, Lopressor also inhibits beta2
adrenoreceptors, chiefly located in the bronchial and vascular musculature.
Clinical pharmacology studies have confirmed the beta-blocking activity of
metoprolol in man, as shown by (1) reduction in heart rate and cardiac output
at rest and upon exercise, (2) reduction of systolic blood pressure upon exercise,
(3) inhibition of isoproterenolinduced tachycardia, and (4) reduction of reflex
orthostatic tachycardia.
Relative beta1 selectivity has been confirmed by the following:
(1) In normal subjects, Lopressor is unable to reverse the beta2
-mediated vasodilating effects of epinephrine. This contrasts with the effect
of nonselective (beta1 plus beta2) beta blockers, which
completely reverse the vasodilating effects of epinephrine. (2) In asthmatic
patients, Lopressor reduces FEV1 and FVC significantly less than
a nonselective beta blocker, propranolol, at equivalent beta1-receptor
blocking doses.
Lopressor has no intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, and membrane-stabilizing
activity is detectable only at doses much greater than required for beta blockade.
Lopressor crosses the blood-brain barrier and has been reported in the CSF in
a concentration 78% of the simultaneous plasma concentration. Animal and human
experiments indicate that Lopressor slows the sinus rate and decreases AV nodal
conduction.
In controlled clinical studies, Lopressor has been shown to be an effective
antihypertensive agent when used alone or as concomitant therapy with thiazide-type
diuretics, at dosages of 100-450 mg daily. In controlled, comparative, clinical
studies, Lopressor has been shown to be as effective an antihypertensive agent
as propranolol, methyldopa, and thiazide-type diuretics, and to be equally effective
in supine and standing positions.
The mechanism of the antihypertensive effects of beta-blocking agents has not
been elucidated. However, several possible mechanisms have been proposed: (1)
competitive antagonism of catecholamines at peripheral (especially cardiac)
adrenergic neuron sites, leading to decreased cardiac output; (2) a central
effect leading to reduced sympathetic outflow to the periphery; and (3) suppression
of renin activity.
By blocking catecholamine-induced increases in heart rate, in velocity and
extent of myocardial contraction, and in blood pressure, Lopressor reduces the
oxygen requirements of the heart at any given level of effort, thus making it
useful in the long-term management of angina pectoris. However, in patients
with heart failure, beta-adrenergic blockade may increase oxygen requirements
by increasing left ventricular fiber length and end-diastolic pressure.
Although beta-adrenergic receptor blockade is useful in the treatment of angina
and hypertension, there are situations in which sympathetic stimulation is vital.
In patients with severely damaged hearts, adequate ventricular function may
depend on sympathetic drive. In the presence of AV block, beta blockade may
prevent the necessary facilitating effect of sympathetic activity on conduction.
Beta 2-adrenergic blockade results in passive bronchial constriction by interfering
with endogenous adrenergic bronchodilator activity in patients subject to bronchospasm
and may also interfere with exogenous bronchodilators in such patients.
In controlled clinical trials, Lopressor, administered two or four times daily,
has been shown to be an effective antianginal agent, reducing the number of
angina attacks and increasing exercise tolerance. The dosage used in these studies
ranged from 100-400 mg daily. A controlled, comparative, clinical trial showed
that Lopressor was indistinguishable from propranolol in the treatment of angina
pectoris.
In a large (1,395 patients randomized), double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical
study, Lopressor was shown to reduce 3-month mortality by 36% in patients with
suspected or definite myocardial infarction.
Patients were randomized and treated as soon as possible after their arrival
in the hospital, once their clinical condition had stabilized and their hemodynamic
status had been carefully evaluated. Subjects were ineligible if they had hypotension,
bradycardia, peripheral signs of shock, and/or more than minimal basal rales
as signs of congestive heart failure. Initial treatment consisted of intravenous
followed by oral administration of Lopressor or placebo, given in a coronary
care or comparable unit. Oral maintenance therapy with Lopressor or placebo
was then continued for 3 months. After this double-blind period, all patients
were given Lopressor and followed up to 1 year.
The median delay from the onset of symptoms to the initiation of therapy was
8 hours in both the Lopressor- and placebo-treatment groups. Among patients
treated with Lopressor, there were comparable reductions in 3-month mortality
for those treated early (=8 hours) and those in whom treatment was started later.
Significant reductions in the incidence of ventricular fibrillation and in chest
pain following initial intravenous therapy were also observed with Lopressor
and were independent of the interval between onset of symptoms and initiation
of therapy.
The precise mechanism of action of Lopressor in patients with suspected or
definite myocardial infarction is not known.
In this study, patients treated with metoprolol received the drug both very
early (intravenously) and during a subsequent 3-month period, while placebo
patients received no beta-blocker treatment for this period. The study thus
was able to show a benefit from the overall metoprolol regimen but cannot separate
the benefit of very early intravenous treatment from the benefit of later beta-blocker
therapy. Nonetheless, because the overall regimen showed a clear beneficial
effect on survival without evidence of an early adverse effect on survival,
one acceptable dosage regimen is the precise regimen used in the trial. Because
the specific benefit of very early treatment remains to be defined however,
it is also reasonable to administer the drug orally to patients at a later time
as is recommended for certain other beta blockers.
Pharmacokinetics
In man, absorption of Lopressor is rapid and complete. Plasma levels following
oral administration, however, approximate 50% of levels following intravenous
administration, indicating about 50% first-pass metabolism.
Plasma levels achieved are highly variable after oral administration. Only
a small fraction of the drug (about 12%) is bound to human serum albumin. Metoprolol
is a racemic mixture of R- and S-enantiomers. Less than 5% of an oral dose of
Lopressor is recovered unchanged in the urine; the rest is excreted by the kidneys
as metabolites that appear to have no clinical significance. The systemic availability
and half-life of Lopressor in patients with renal failure do not differ to a
clinically significant degree from those in normal subjects. Consequently, no
reduction in dosage is usually needed in patients with chronic renal failure.
Lopressor is extensively metabolized by the cytochrome P450 enzyme system in
the liver. The oxidative metabolism of Lopressor is under genetic control with
a major contribution of the polymorphic cytochrome P450 isoform 2D6 (CYP2D6).
There are marked ethnic differences in the prevalence of the poor metabolizers
(PM) phenotype. Approximately 7% of Caucasians and less than 1% Asian are poor
metabolizers.
Poor CYP2D6 metabolizers exhibit several-fold higher plasma concentrations
of Lopressor than extensive metabolizers with normal CYP2D6 activity. The elimination
halflife of metoprolol is about 7.5 hours in poor metabolizers and 2.8 hours
in extensive metabolizers. However, the CYP2D6 dependent metabolism of Lopressor
seems to have little or no effect on safety or tolerability of the drug. None
of the metabolites of Lopressor contribute significantly to its beta-blocking
effect.
Significant beta-blocking effect (as measured by reduction of exercise heart
rate) occurs within 1 hour after oral administration, and its duration is dose-related.
For example, a 50% reduction of the maximum registered effect after single oral
doses of 20, 50, and 100 mg occurred at 3.3, 5.0, and 6.4 hours, respectively,
in normal subjects. After repeated oral dosages of 100 mg twice daily, a significant
reduction in exercise systolic blood pressure was evident at 12 hours.
Following intravenous administration of Lopressor, the urinary recovery of
unchanged drug is approximately 10%. When the drug was infused over a 10-minute
period, in normal volunteers, maximum beta blockade was achieved at approximately
20 minutes. Doses of 5 mg and 15 mg yielded a maximal reduction in exercise-induced
heart rate of approximately 10% and 15%, respectively. The effect on exercise
heart rate decreased linearly with time at the same rate for both doses, and
disappeared at approximately 5 hours and 8 hours for the 5-mg and 15-mg doses,
respectively.
Equivalent maximal beta-blocking effect is achieved with oral and intravenous
doses in the ratio of approximately 2.5:1.
There is a linear relationship between the log of plasma levels and reduction
of exercise heart rate. However, antihypertensive activity does not appear to
be related to plasma levels. Because of variable plasma levels attained with
a given dose and lack of a consistent relationship of antihypertensive activity
to dose, selection of proper dosage requires individual titration.
In several studies of patients with acute myocardial infarction, intravenous
followed by oral administration of Lopressor caused a reduction in heart rate,
systolic blood pressure, and cardiac output. Stroke volume, diastolic blood
pressure, and pulmonary artery end diastolic pressure remained unchanged.
In patients with angina pectoris, plasma concentration measured at 1 hour is
linearly related to the oral dose within the range of 50-400 mg. Exercise heart
rate and systolic blood pressure are reduced in relation to the logarithm of
the oral dose of metoprolol. The increase in exercise capacity and the reduction
in left ventricular ischemia are also significantly related to the logarithm
of the oral dose.
In elderly subjects with clinically normal renal and hepatic function, there
are no significant differences in Lopressor pharmacokinetics compared to young
subjects.
Last updated on RxList: 8/6/2008