Lopressor/clinical studies

Lopressor®
Black Box Warning
Adult Indications and Dosage   FDA-Labeled Use   Off-Label Use
Pediatric Indications and Dosage   FDA-Labeled Use   Off-Label Use
Contraindications
Warnings
Adverse Reactions   Clinical Trials Experience   Postmarketing Experience
Drug Interactions
Use in Specific Populations   Pregnancy   Labor and Delivery   Nursing Mothers   Pediatric Use   Geriatric Use   Gender   Race   Renal Impairment   Hepatic Impairment   Females of Reproductive     Potential and Males   Immunocompromised Patients
Routes and Preparations   Routes   Preparations
IV Compatibility
Overdosage
Pharmacology   Mechanism of Action   Structure   Pharmacodynamics   Pharmacokinetics   Nonclinical Toxicology
Clinical Studies
How Supplied
Images   Drug Images   Package & Label Display Panel
Patient Information   Patient Information from FDA   Patient Information from NLM
Combined Alcohol Use
Look-Alike Drug Names
Drug Shortage Status
Price

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief:

Clinical Studies

Hypertension

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 oral 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, to be equally effective in supine and standing positions.

Angina Pectoris

In controlled clinical trials, Lopressor, administered orally 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 oral 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.

Myocardial Infarction

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.

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.