Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Perhexiline in the Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease

  • Review Article
  • Published:
American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perhexiline was introduced about 30 years ago and rapidly gained a reputation for efficacy in the management of angina pectoris. However, hepatic and neurological adverse effects associated with perhexiline administration led to a marked decline in its use. The drug was originally classified as a coronary vasodilator, and later as a calcium channel antagonist, but recent data suggests that it acts as a cardiac metabolic agent, through inhibition of the enzyme, carnitine palmitoyltransferase-1 (CPT-1).

Given the drugs’s unique anti-ischemic action and favorable hemodynamic profile, together with an improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying the adverse effects of the drug and the clear clinical need for additional therapies in refractory patients, perhexiline is currently being re-appraised as a potentially useful agent in the management of severe myocardial ischemia.

Perhexiline is being considered for registration or re-registration in a number of countries and is being evaluated in a large-scale clinical trial in elderly patients with aortic stenosis and myocardial ischemia. This systematic review examines the evidence from available published literature in relation to the efficacy and tolerability of perhexiline in the treatment of cardiac disease.

While there is a lack of well designed controlled trials using objective end-points to determine efficacy (almost all trials used a crossover design, included small numbers of patients and had limited statistical analysis of results), there is consistency in the data available that perhexiline is considerably more effective than placebo when used as monotherapy. Furthermore, it affords additional symptom relief in those already receiving maximal conventional anti-anginal therapy. However, there is a paucity of trials demonstrating the efficacy of low dosages of perhexiline (100 to 200 mg/day) in patients with refractory angina pectoris. Available evidence also suggests that the incidence of adverse events can be minimised, and the efficacy maintained, by keeping plasma perhexiline concentrations within a therapeutic range (150 to 600 μg/L).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bleifer DJ, Bleifer SB, Okun R. Perhexiline maleate in angina pectoris. Geriatrics 1972; 27(9): 109–15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Brown MJ, Horowitz JD, Mashford ML. A double blind trial of perhexiline maleate in the prophylaxis of angina pectoris. Med J Aust 1976; 1(9): 260–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Burns-Cox CJ, Chandrasekhar KP, Ikram H, et al. Clinical evaluation of perhexiline maleate in patients with angina pectoris. BMJ 1971; 4(787): 586–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cunha GP, Lopes M, Maranhao MFC, et al. Perhexiline maleate in the treatment of angina pectoris. Arq Bras Cardiol 1975; 28(3): 379–87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Datey KK, Dalvi CP. Advances in drug therapy of angina pectoris, with special references to perhexiline maleate. Indian Heart J 1974; 26(1): 1–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Martins de Oliveira J, Jose de Almeida Amado Jnr NJ. Perhexiline maleate in the treatment of angina pectoris. Hospital (Rio J) 1970; 77: 1511–8

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gitlin N, Nellen M. Perhexiline maleate in the treatment of angina pectoris: a double blind trial. Postgrad Med J 1973; (Apr Suppl.): 100–4

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goebel G, Mannes GA, Kafka W, et al. Treatment of angina pectoris with perhexiline maleate. Herz 1977; 2(3): 289–97

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hamdan G, Vargas G, Gomez EA, et al. Experience with the use of perhexiline in patients with chronic coronary insufficiency: preliminary report. Postgrad Med J 1973; Apr Suppl. 49(3): 87–90

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horgan JH, O’Callaghan WG, Teo KK. Therapy of Angina Pectoris with low dose perhexiline. J Cardiovas Pharmacol 1981; 3(3): 566–72

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hoekenga MT, Bunde CA, Cawein MJ, et al. Clinical results with a new anti-anginal drug: Perhexiline maleate. Postgrad Med J 1973; Apr Suppl. 49(3): 95–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Luccioni R, Trigano JA. Clinical and statistical evaluation of the effect of perhexiline maleate in patients with chronic angina. Postgrad Med J 1973; Apr Suppl. 49(3): 92–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Morgans CM, Rees JR. The Action of perhexiline maleate in patients with angina. Am Heart J 1973; 86(3): 329–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lyon L, Nevins MA, Fisch S, et al. Perhexiline maleate in treatment of angina pectoris. Lancet 1971; (7712) 1272–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nogueira A, Bozza A, Britto AHX, et al. Multicentre study with perhexiline maleate in angina pectoris. Arq Bras Cardiol 1976; 29(6): 509–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pepine CJ, Schang SJ, Bemiller CR. Effects of perhexiline on symptomatic and haemodynamic responses to exercise in patients with angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 1974; 33: 806–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Roberts LN, Mason GP. Clinical trial of a new anti-anginal drug: Perhexiline maleate. J Clin Pharmacol 1972; 12(89): 342–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. White HD, Lowe JB. Anti-anginal efficacy of perhexiline maleate in patients refractory to β-adrenoreceptor blockade. Int J Cardiol 1983; 3(2): 145–55

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Winsor T. Clinical evaluation of perhexiline maleate. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1970; 11(1): 85–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ferlemann HJ, Krehan L, Kaltenbach M. The effect of perhexiline maleate on the exercise EKG of patients with coronary heart disease. Z Kardiol 1979; 68(12): 826–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Linkesch W, Glogar D, Niederberger M. Clinical advocacy of perhexiline maleate in the presence of stable angina pectoris. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1978; 90(16): 598–603

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Schang SJ, Pepine CJ. Long term anti-anginal response of ischaemic heart disease patients to perhexiline [abstract]. Clin Res 1975; 23: 8A

    Google Scholar 

  23. Day LJ, Sowton E. The treatment of angina pectoris. A trial of perhexiline maleate in patients with angiographically normal coronary arteries. Practitioner 1978; 220(1320): 965–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kucuruza I. Clinical evaluation of perhexiline maleate. Patients with angina pectoris. Presented at 29th Brazilian Cardiology Congress Fortaleza, 1973; Jul 8–14

  25. Morledge J. Effects of perhexiline maleate in angina pectoris: A double blind clinical evaluation with ECG-treadmill exercise testing. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 64–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Reiterer W. Exercise tolerance of patients with coronary heart disease under treatment with perhexiline maleate (double-blind study). Herz/Kreisl 1976; 8: 132–39

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cole PL, Beamer AD, McGowan N, et al. Efficacy and safety of perhexiline maleate in refractory angina. Circulation 1990; 81(4): 1260–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cherchi A, Bina M, Raffo M, et al. Influence of perhexiline on the effort tolerance test in angina pectoris. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 67–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Libretti A, Gregorini L, Valentini R, et al. Double blind clinical trial with perhexiline in outpatients with angina pectoris. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 105–7

    Google Scholar 

  30. Labriola E. Comparative clinical study of perhexiline maleate and prenylamine in the treatment of chronic coronary insufficiency. Clin Therap 1975; 72(4): 337–51

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Corsini G, Correale E, Oriani G, et al. Clinical experience with perhexiline maleate in the treatment of angina pectoris. G Ital Cardiol 1975; 5(1): 73–86

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Armstrong ML. A comparative study of perhexiline, beta-adrenergic blocking agents and placebos in the management of angina pectoris. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 108–11

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Armstrong ML, Brand D, Emmett AJ, et al. A multicentre trial of perhexiline maleate, beta blocker and placebo in angina pectoris. Med J Aust 1974; 2(11): 389–93

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Dalla Volta S, Episcopo U, Gemelli A, et al. Treatment of angina pectoris with perhexiline maleate. Clinical assessment in a double blind trial with placebo and prenylamine as controls. Minerva Cardioangiol 1976; 24(2): 137–47

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Dettori AG, Malagnino G, Oriani G, et al. Perhexiline versus prenylamine. A controlled clinical trial in coronary insufficiency. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 113–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Abastado M. Controlled double-blind study in non-crossed treatment, trimetazidine/perhexiline maleate. Gaz Med Fr 1980; 87: 3490–92

    Google Scholar 

  37. McClellan KJ and Plosker GL. Trimetazidine: a review of its use in stable angina pectoris and other coronary conditions. Drugs 1999 Jul; 58(1): 143–57

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Laurens L. Perhexiline maleate, a major anti-anginal drug. Med Gen 1975; 1: 78 81–9

    Google Scholar 

  39. Horowitz JD, Sia STB, Macdonald PS, et al. Perhexiline maleate treatment for severe angina pectoris- correlations with pharmacokinetics. Int J Cardiol 1986; 13(2): 219–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Unger SA, Robinson MA, Horowitz JD. Perhexiline improves symptomatic status in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis. Aust N Z J Med 1997; 27(1): 24–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Pilcher J, Cooper JD, Turnell DC, et al. Investigations of long-term treatment with perhexiline maleate using therapeutic monitoring and electromyography. Ther Drug Monit 1985; 7(1): 54–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Abaza A, Cattan D, Aziza C, et al. Reversible Side Effects after Administration of Perhexiline. Nouv Presse Med 1973; 2(42): 2820 [letter]

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Laplane D, Bousser MG. Polyneuropathy during perhexiline maleate therapy. Int J Neurol 1981; 15(3–4): 293–300

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mabin D, Penther Ph, Perrot J, et al. Bordeaux Med 1982; 15: 891–7

    Google Scholar 

  45. Poupon R, Rosensztajn L, Prudhomme deSaint-Maur P, et al. Digestion 1980; 20(3): 145–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Paliard P, Vitrey D, Fournier G, et al. Perhexiline maleate induced hepatitis. Digestion 1978; 17(5): 419–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Bousser MG, Bouche P, Brochard C, et al. Peripheral neuropathies due to perhexiline maleate. Coeur Med Interne 1976; 15(2): 181–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Erhart G, Aulonge JP, Leutenegger M, et al. Drug Vigilance Procedure when Hypoglycaemia due to Perhexiline maleate occurs. Therapie 1981; 36(3): 281–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Dally S, Assan R, Lagier G, et al. Hypoglycaemia in two patients treated with perhexiline maleate. Nouv Presse Med 1977; 6: 1643–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Singlas E, Goujet MA, Simon P. Perhexiline maleate: relationships between side effects, plasma concentrations and rate of metabolism. Nouv Presse Med 1978; 7: 1631–2

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Singlas E, Goujet MA, Simon P. Pharmacokinetics of perhexiline maleate in anginal patients with and without peripheral neuropathy. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1978; 14(3): 195–201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Anon. Adverse reactions to perhexiline. Drug Ther Bull 1977; 15(17): 68

    Google Scholar 

  53. Lorentz IT, Shortall M. Perhexilene neuropathy: a report of two cases. Aust N Z J Med 1983; 13(5): 517–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Forbes GB, Rake MO, Taylor DJ. Liver damage due to perhexiline maleate. J Clin Pathol 1979; 326(12): 1282–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Cooper JD, Turnell DC, Pilcher J, et al. Therapeutic monitoring of the antianginal drug perhexiline maleate. Ann Clin Biochem 1985; 22(6): 614–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Singlas E, Simon P. The contribution of pharmacokinetics in explaining a drugss’ side effects: the case of perhexiline. Therapie 1981; 36: 285–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Cooper RG, Evans DAP, Whibley EJ. Polymorphic hydroxylation of perhexiline maleate in man. J Med Genet 1984; 21: 27–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Morgan MY, Reshef R, Shah RR, et al. Impaired oxidation of debrisoquine in patients with perhexiline therapy. Gut 1984; 25(10): 1057–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Fardeau M, Tome FM, Simon P. Muscle and nerve changes induced by perhexiline maleate in man and mice. Muscle Nerve 1979; 2: 24–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Satz N, Tauber M, Streuli R, Spycher MA, Maurer R. Perhexiline induced hepatitis. Hepatogastroenterology 1991; 38(4): 314–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Pessayre D, Larrey D. Acute and chronic drug-induced hepatitis. Ballieres Clin Gastroenterol 1988; 2: 385–422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Pollet S, Hauw JJ, Escourolle R, et al. Peripheral nerve Lipid abnormalities in patients on perhexilene maleate [letter]. Lancet 1977; 1(8024): 1258

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Stewart S, Voss DW, Northey DL, et al. Relationship between plasma perhexiline concentration and symptomatic status during short-term perhexiline therapy. Ther Drug Monit 1996; 18: 635–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Button IK, Davies HR, Zeitz CJ, et al. Adverse reactions to perhexilene during short and long term therapy [abstract]. Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand; 1993 Oct

  65. Horowitz JD, Button IK, Wing L, et al. Is perhexiline essential for the optimal manangement of angina pectoris? Aust N Z J Med 1995; 25: 111–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Pillans PI. Drug associated hepatic reactions in New Zealand: 21 years experience. N Z Med J 1996; 109:315–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Albin H, Pere JC, Begaud B, et al. Drug hepatitis and its imputability. Experience at the Bordeaux Aquitaine Pharmacovigilance Centre. Therapie 1981; 36: 477–82

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Jean-Pastor MJ, Jougland J. Survey of drug induced hepatic injuries collected by a French drug surveillance organisation. Therapie 1984; 39: 493–500

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Coulter DM. Study of reasons for cessation of therapy with perhexilene maleate, sodium valproate and labetalol in the intensified adverse reaction reporting scheme. N Z Med J 1981; 93(677): 81–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. McQueen EG. New Zealand committee on adverse drug reactions: Fifteenth annual report 1980. N Z Med J 1981; 93: 194–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Schmitt J, Jacquier A, Schmidt Cl, et al. Results of three and a half years of drug surveillance in an internal medicine department. Ann Med Nancy 1980; 19: 713–6

    Google Scholar 

  72. Medvedowsky JL. Clinical tolerance of perhexiline maleate. Merrell Touraude, editors. Conception and Realisation Elpe Productions, Paris, 123-6, 1974

  73. Alderman CF, Hundermark JD, Soetratma TW. Interaction of serotonin re-uptake inhibitors with perhexiline. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 1997; 31: 601–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Garson WP, Gulin RC, Phear DN. Clinical experience with perhexiline maleate in 46 patients with angina. Postgrad Med J 1973 Apr; 49 Suppl. 3: 90–2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Portal RW, Emanuel RW. Phenindione hepatitis complicating anticoagulant therapy. BMJ 1961; 2: 1318–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Kennedy JA, Unger SA, Horowitz JD. Inhibition of carnitine palmitoyltransferase-1 in rat heart and liver by perhexiline and amiodarone. Biochem Pharmacol 1996; 52: 273–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Schmidt-Schweda S, Holubarsch C. First clinical trial with etomoxir in patients with chronic congestive heart failure. Clin Sci 2000; 99: 27–35

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Willoughby SR, Chirkov YY, Kennedy JA, et al. Inhibition of long-chain fatty acid metabolism does not affect platelet aggregation responses. Eur J Pharmacol 1998; 356(2–3): 207–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Kennedy JA, Kiosoglous AJ, Murphy GA, et al. Effect of perhexiline and oxfenicine on myocardial function and metabolism during low-flow ischemia/reperfusion in the isolated rat heart. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2000; 36(6): 794–801

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine/Department of Medicine, Monash University, Prahran, Victoria, Australia

    Sheila M. Killalea (Associate Professor) & Henry Krum (Head of Clinical Pharmacology)

Authors
  1. Sheila M. Killalea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henry Krum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henry Krum.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Killalea, S.M., Krum, H. Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Perhexiline in the Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 1, 193–204 (2001). https://doi.org/10.2165/00129784-200101030-00005

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00129784-200101030-00005

Keywords

Search

Navigation