Claim Your New User Special: Get your second month free ▶ Second Month Free

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

Medtronic
Express Scripts
Merck
AstraZeneca
Dow
Mallinckrodt

Last Updated: May 26, 2022

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR LOPRESSOR


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard

All Clinical Trials for Lopressor

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00123604 ↗ Vascular Effects of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol in Hypertensive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Completed GlaxoSmithKline Phase 4 2004-06-01 The purpose of this study is to compare the vascular effects of two commonly used blood pressure medications, carvedilol and metoprolol in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.
NCT00123604 ↗ Vascular Effects of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol in Hypertensive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Completed St. Paul Heart Clinic Phase 4 2004-06-01 The purpose of this study is to compare the vascular effects of two commonly used blood pressure medications, carvedilol and metoprolol in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.
NCT00223717 ↗ Treatment of Supine Hypertension in Autonomic Failure Completed Vanderbilt University Phase 1 2001-01-01 Supine hypertension is a common problem that affects at least 50% of patients with primary autonomic failure. Supine hypertension can be severe, and complicates the treatment of orthostatic hypotension. Drugs used for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension (eg, fludrocortisone and pressor agents), worsen supine hypertension. High blood pressure may also cause target organ damage in this group of patients. The pathophysiologic mechanisms causing supine hypertension in patients with autonomic failure have not been defined. In a study, we, the investigators at Vanderbilt University, examined 64 patients with AF, 29 with pure autonomic failure (PAF) and 35 with multiple system atrophy (MSA). 66% of patients had supine systolic (systolic blood pressure [SBP] > 150 mmHg) or diastolic (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > 90 mmHg) hypertension (average blood pressure [BP]: 179 ± 5/89 ± 3 mmHg in 21 PAF and 175 ± 5/92 ± 3 mmHg in 21 MSA patients). Plasma norepinephrine (92 ± 15 pg/mL) and plasma renin activity (0.3 ± 0.05 ng/mL per hour) were very low in a subset of patients with AF and supine hypertension. (Shannon et al., 1997). Our group has showed that a residual sympathetic function contributes to supine hypertension in patients with severe autonomic failure and that this effect is more prominent in patients with MSA than in those with PAF (Shannon et al., 2000). MSA patients had a marked depressor response to low infusion rates of trimethaphan, a ganglionic blocker; the response in PAF patients was more variable. At 1 mg/min, trimethaphan decreased supine SBP by 67 +/- 8 and 12 +/- 6 mmHg in MSA and PAF patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). MSA patients with supine hypertension also had greater SBP response to oral yohimbine, a central alpha2 receptor blocker, than PAF patients. Plasma norepinephrine decreased in both groups, but heart rate did not change in either group. This result suggests that residual sympathetic activity drives supine hypertension in MSA; in contrast, supine hypertension in PAF. It is hoped that from this study will emerge a complete picture of the supine hypertension of autonomic failure. Understanding the mechanism of this paradoxical hypertension in the setting of profound loss of sympathetic function will improve our approach to the treatment of hypertension in autonomic failure, and it could also contribute to our understanding of hypertension in general.
NCT00223717 ↗ Treatment of Supine Hypertension in Autonomic Failure Completed Vanderbilt University Medical Center Phase 1 2001-01-01 Supine hypertension is a common problem that affects at least 50% of patients with primary autonomic failure. Supine hypertension can be severe, and complicates the treatment of orthostatic hypotension. Drugs used for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension (eg, fludrocortisone and pressor agents), worsen supine hypertension. High blood pressure may also cause target organ damage in this group of patients. The pathophysiologic mechanisms causing supine hypertension in patients with autonomic failure have not been defined. In a study, we, the investigators at Vanderbilt University, examined 64 patients with AF, 29 with pure autonomic failure (PAF) and 35 with multiple system atrophy (MSA). 66% of patients had supine systolic (systolic blood pressure [SBP] > 150 mmHg) or diastolic (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > 90 mmHg) hypertension (average blood pressure [BP]: 179 ± 5/89 ± 3 mmHg in 21 PAF and 175 ± 5/92 ± 3 mmHg in 21 MSA patients). Plasma norepinephrine (92 ± 15 pg/mL) and plasma renin activity (0.3 ± 0.05 ng/mL per hour) were very low in a subset of patients with AF and supine hypertension. (Shannon et al., 1997). Our group has showed that a residual sympathetic function contributes to supine hypertension in patients with severe autonomic failure and that this effect is more prominent in patients with MSA than in those with PAF (Shannon et al., 2000). MSA patients had a marked depressor response to low infusion rates of trimethaphan, a ganglionic blocker; the response in PAF patients was more variable. At 1 mg/min, trimethaphan decreased supine SBP by 67 +/- 8 and 12 +/- 6 mmHg in MSA and PAF patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). MSA patients with supine hypertension also had greater SBP response to oral yohimbine, a central alpha2 receptor blocker, than PAF patients. Plasma norepinephrine decreased in both groups, but heart rate did not change in either group. This result suggests that residual sympathetic activity drives supine hypertension in MSA; in contrast, supine hypertension in PAF. It is hoped that from this study will emerge a complete picture of the supine hypertension of autonomic failure. Understanding the mechanism of this paradoxical hypertension in the setting of profound loss of sympathetic function will improve our approach to the treatment of hypertension in autonomic failure, and it could also contribute to our understanding of hypertension in general.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for Lopressor

Condition Name

Condition Name for Lopressor
Intervention Trials
Hypertension 11
Healthy 6
Atrial Fibrillation 5
Atrial Flutter 2
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for Lopressor
Intervention Trials
Hypertension 10
Atrial Fibrillation 5
Pure Autonomic Failure 2
Atrial Flutter 2
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for Lopressor

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for Lopressor
Location Trials
United States 31
Canada 4
France 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for Lopressor
Location Trials
Minnesota 4
Florida 3
Tennessee 3
West Virginia 3
Nebraska 2
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for Lopressor

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for Lopressor
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 4 11
Phase 3 2
Phase 2/Phase 3 1
[disabled in preview] 2
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for Lopressor
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 19
Terminated 3
Unknown status 2
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for Lopressor

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for Lopressor
Sponsor Trials
Mylan Pharmaceuticals 4
Forest Laboratories 4
Vanderbilt University 3
[disabled in preview] 3
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for Lopressor
Sponsor Trials
Other 26
Industry 13
NIH 3
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

Baxter
Mallinckrodt
McKesson
Express Scripts
Boehringer Ingelheim
McKinsey

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.