| Title |
A Review of Nebivolol Pharmacology and Clinical Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drugs, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40265-015-0435-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin Fongemie, Erika Felix-Getzik |
| Abstract |
Nebivolol is a highly selective β1-adrenergic receptor antagonist with a pharmacologic profile that differs from those of other drugs in its class. In addition to cardioselectivity mediated via β1 receptor blockade, nebivolol induces nitric oxide-mediated vasodilation by stimulating endothelial nitric oxide synthase via β3 agonism. This vasodilatory mechanism is distinct from those of other vasodilatory β-blockers (carvedilol, labetalol), which are mediated via α-adrenergic receptor blockade. Nebivolol is approved for the treatment of hypertension in the US, and for hypertension and heart failure in Europe. While β-blockers are not recommended within the current US guidelines as first-line therapy for treatment of essential hypertension, nebivolol has shown comparable efficacy to currently recommended therapies in lowering peripheral blood pressure in adults with hypertension with a very low rate of side effects. Nebivolol also has beneficial effects on central blood pressure compared with other β-blockers. Clinical data also suggest that nebivolol may be useful in patients who have experienced erectile dysfunction while on other β-blockers. Here we review the pharmacological profile of nebivolol, the clinical evidence supporting its use in hypertension as monotherapy, add-on, and combination therapy, and the data demonstrating its positive effects on heart failure and endothelial dysfunction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 155 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 10% |
| Researcher | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 17% |
| Unknown | 54 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 25% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 23 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 57 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2023.
All research outputs
#5,081,319
of 24,945,754 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#764
of 3,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,960
of 267,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#14
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,945,754 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,985 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.