S-amlodipine plus chlorthalidone vs. S-amlodipine plus telmisartan in hypertensive patients unresponsive to amlodipine monotherapy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The efficacy of a combination of a calcium channel blocker (CCB) plus chlorthalidone (diuretic) versus a CCB plus an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in patients not responding to CCB monotherapy has not been evaluated previously. We plan to compare the efficacy and safety of S-amlodipine (CCB) plus chlorthalidone versus S-amlodipine plus telmisartan (ARB) combinations among hypertension patients unresponsive to amlodipine monotherapy. METHODS/DESIGN:This study is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel, non-inferiority phase 4 study. Hypertension patients who have been treated with amlodipine (5 mg) or S-amlodipine (2.5 mg) monotherapy for ?2 weeks and whose mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) is greater than 90 mmHg will be randomized to either S-amlodipine (2.5 mg) plus chlorthalidone (25 mg) or S-amlodipine (2.5 mg) plus telmisartan (40 mg) therapy. The primary efficacy endpoint is mean sitting DBP change after 12 weeks of treatment. The study objective is to prove the non-inferiority of the former combination (test drug) as compared to the latter one (control) with a non-inferiority margin of 3 mmHg in mean DBP change. The secondary endpoints are 6-week DBP change, 6- and 12-week sitting systolic BP (SBP) change, and the attainment of the target BP (SBP?
Project description:Hypertensive patients unable to reach blood pressure (BP) targets with antihypertensive monotherapy may be switched to a combination of two medications with complementary modes of action for improved treatment response. This post hoc analysis pools data from 2812 patients, 1891 of whom were not at goal (diastolic BP [DBP] <90?mm?Hg) with amlodipine 5?mg (A5) monotherapy who subsequently switched to telmisartan 40 or 80?mg (T80)/A5 single-pill combination (SPC) or amlodipine 10?mg (A10) monotherapy, and considers an additional 921 patients, 616 of whom were not at goal with A10 monotherapy who switched to telmisartan/amlodipine SPC. Patients switched to telmisartan/amlodipine SPC achieved significantly greater BP reductions compared with continued monotherapy (P < 0.0001) with reductions of -15.2/-10.9?mm?Hg seen with T80/A5 after 8 weeks in patients switched from A5. BP goal (<140/90?mm?Hg), systolic BP goal (<140?mm?Hg), and DBP goal (<90?mm?Hg) were reached by significantly more patients with telmisartan/amlodipine than with monotherapy (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons; 56.1%, 69.7%, and 66.9%, resp., in patients who switched from A5 to T80/A5). Early use of such combination therapy should be considered to quickly reach BP targets, particularly in patients with added risk.
Project description:Objective. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the telmisartan plus amlodipine (T/A) single-pill combination (SPC) in Asian patients with hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) was not adequately controlled on either monotherapy or on low-dose combination therapy. Patients and Methods. Data are presented from five Boehringer Ingelheim-sponsored phase 3, double-blind, 8-week, studies: two studies in nonresponders to amlodipine (data pooled for amlodipine), two studies on nonresponders to telmisartan (pooled data), and one on nonresponders to low-dose T/A SPC. Results. After 8 weeks' treatment, mean reductions from the reference baseline in diastolic BP (DBP; primary endpoint), systolic BP (SBP), and SBP, DBP goal, and response rates were higher with the T/A SPC than respective monotherapies. The T80/A5 SPC resulted in greater reductions in DBP and SBP, and higher DBP goal and response rate than the low-dose T40/A5 SPC. Peripheral edema incidence was low (amlodipine 0.5%, telmisartan 0.0%, and T/A SPC 0.7%). Discussion and Conclusion. In Asian patients whose BP is not adequately controlled with telmisartan or amlodipine monotherapy, T/A SPC treatment results in greater BP reduction, and higher DBP and SBP goal and response rates. The safety and tolerability of the T/A SPC are comparable to those of the respective monotherapies and consistent with those reported in previous studies.
Project description:BACKGROUND:To compare the fixed-dose combination (FDC) of amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg with valsartan 160?mg monotherapy for efficacy and safety in hypertensive patients. METHODS:We designed this double-blind, randomized, and noninferiority trial in which patients with elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and/or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were randomly assigned to receive amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg FDC or valsartan 160?mg monotherapy for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was changes in office SBP and DBP from baseline to 8 weeks. Twenty-four-hour blood pressure (BP) and the incidence of adverse events were recorded. RESULTS:A total of 42 patients underwent randomization. At 8 weeks, office SBP changes were -16.5 ± 15.5 mmHg (p < 0.001) with amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg FDC and -6.9 ± 11.4 mmHg (p = 0.012) with valsartan 160?mg monotherapy while corresponding changes in office DBP were -9.8 ± 7.7 mmHg (p < 0.001) and -2.5 ± 6.6 mmHg (p = 0.095), respectively. The between-group differences were -9.6 mmHg (95% CI, -18.1 to -1.1; p = 0.028) for SBP and -7.3 mmHg (95% CI, -11.8 to -2.8; p = 0.002) for DBP. Furthermore, reductions in both 24-hour SBP (-9.2 mmHg; 95% CI, -16.4 to -2.1; p = 0.013) and DBP (-4.6 mmHg; 95% CI, -9.2 to -0.1; p = 0.048) were consistently greater with amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg FDC than with valsartan 160?mg. Overall, 27 and 23 adverse events occurred in the amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg FDC group and in the valsartan 160?mg monotherapy group, respectively. The majority were mild and were not related to study medications. There were no significant differences in safety between two treatments. CONCLUSION:Efficacy of amlodipine/valsartan 5/80?mg FDC was superior to that of valsartan 160?mg monotherapy while both treatments were well-tolerated.
Project description:Two 8-week, randomized, double-blind, controlled studies previously evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of single-pill combinations of telmisartan 40-80 mg/amlodipine 5-10 mg (T40-80/A5-10) in patients with hypertension not at diastolic blood pressure (DBP) goal (DBP <90 mm Hg) after 6 weeks of amlodipine 5 mg monotherapy (A5) (TEAMSTA-5) or amlodipine 10 mg monotherapy (A10) (TEAMSTA-10). The long-term (?6 months) tolerability and efficacy of single-pill combinations of T40-T80/A5-A10 have now been evaluated in 2 open-label studies in patients who had successfully completed either TEAMSTA-5 or TEAMSTA-10 (TEAMSTA-5 and TEAMSTA-10 Follow-Ups).In the TEAMSTA-5 Follow-Up, 976 patients whose blood pressure was not initially controlled by taking A5 received T40/A5 for 4 or 8 weeks, with consecutive uptitration to T80/A5 if DBP was ?90 mm Hg. In TEAMSTA-10 Follow-Up, 838 patients not initially achieving blood pressure control using A10 received T40/A10 for 4 weeks before randomization to T40/A10 or T80/A10; after 4 weeks, patients randomized to T40/A10 with DBP ?90 mm Hg were uptitrated to T80/A10. In both studies, add-on antihypertensive medication was allowed if DBP was not at goal.Treatment compliance in both follow-up studies was ?98.4%. Single-pill combinations of T40-T80/A5-A10 resulted in additional clinically relevant blood pressure reductions and 67% to 93% of patients achieved DBP goal (<90 mm Hg); only 1% to 19% of patients received additional medication for hypertension, of whom 29% to 76% achieved DBP goal. Long-term treatment with T40-T80/A5-A10 was well tolerated, with comparable adverse event profiles for all telmisartan/amlodipine combinations. The most common drug-related adverse events were peripheral edema (1.9%-3.9%) and dizziness (1.5% in the T80/A5 group only); these were consistent with the known tolerability profiles of telmisartan/amlodipine combinations. Overall treatment discontinuation rates due to adverse events were low (0.7%-1.5%).In patients not achieving DBP goal with either A5 or A10 monotherapy, the vast majority achieved DBP goal with single-pill combinations of T40-T80/A5-A10. Long-term treatment was well tolerated with high compliance, promoting treatment adherence regardless of telmisartan/amlodipine dose. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00614380 (TEAMSTA-5 Follow-up) and NCT00624052 (TEAMSTA-10 Follow-up).
Project description:Hypertension remains a significant health burden in the United States, with almost one in three adults affected, and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular and renal disease. The goal of antihypertensive treatment is to reduce cardiovascular and renal morbidity and mortality by reducing blood pressure (BP). Guidelines recommend a target BP of <140/90 mmHg, with a more stringent goal of <130/80 mmHg for patients with diabetes and chronic renal disease. However, BP goal attainment rates remain low and most patients require therapy with two or more antihypertensive agents. Combination antihypertensive therapy usually employs agents from different classes, thus benefitting from complementary mechanisms of action to achieve greater BP control with fewer side effects. Patient adherence to therapy is enhanced by formulating treatments as fixed-dose (single-pill) combinations. One example is the combination of amlodipine, a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB), with olmesartan medoxomil, an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB). Here, the rationale for the use of CCB/ARB combination therapy is discussed, as well as the pharmacology and tolerability of the amlodipine/olmesartan medoxomil combination and its efficacy in terms of achieving BP goal in patients with hypertension. Advantages of its use from the patient's perspective are also discussed.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>While there are consensus recommendations for managing calcium channel blocker (CCB) toxicity, reports on angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) toxicity and management are limited. Herein, we report a case of catecholamine-refractory hypotension due to CCB and ARB overdose.<h4>Case presentation</h4>A 54-year-old woman with underlying hypertension was brought to the emergency department after she attempted suicide by ingesting 345 mg of amlodipine, a CCB, and 340 mg of olmesartan, an ARB. She was hypotensive, which was considered vasodilatory because of high cardiac and low systemic vascular resistance indices. Hypotension persisted despite the administration of norepinephrine and epinephrine. Intravenous calcium gluconate, glucagon, and high-dose insulin euglycemia therapy, which were initiated because CCB toxicity was suspected, failed to raise her blood pressure. The presence of normal anion-gap metabolic acidosis and the fact that the patient remained hypotensive suggested that the hypotension might have been due to the effect of ARB. Vasopressin was finally administered, which improved her hemodynamic status. She was weaned off all vasopressors on day 3.<h4>Discussion</h4>There is no consensus recommendation for ARB toxicity. Since chronic use of ARBs at conventional doses can block the sympathetic nervous and renin-angiotensin systems, catecholamines may not effectively increase blood pressure in cases of hypotension due to ARB overdose, for which vasopressin could be indicated.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Vasopressin could be an option for treating hypotension secondary to ARB and CCB toxicity when catecholamines and treatment for CCB toxicity fail.
Project description:Many angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy patients need at least two agents to control blood pressure (BP). We investigated whether initiating intensive treatment with combination amlodipine/valsartan was superior to moderate treatment with amlodipine/valsartan in patients previously uncontrolled on ARB monotherapy.In this 12-week study, patients aged at least 18 years on ARB (other than valsartan) for at least 28 days (with treatment-naïve patients or those not controlled on agents other than an ARB treated with open-label olmesartan 20 or 40 mg, respectively, for 28 days) and with uncontrolled mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP; ? 150-<200 mmHg) were randomized to amlodipine/valsartan 5/320 mg (n = 369) or 5/160 mg (n = 359). At week 2, the dose was increased to 10/320 mg in the intensive arm. Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was added to both arms at week 4. Optional up-titration with hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg at week 8 was allowed if MSSBP was more than 140 mmHg.At baseline, mean office sitting BP was comparable in the intensive (163.9/95.5 mmHg) and moderate (163.3/95.0 mmHg) groups. Intensive treatment provided greater BP reductions versus moderate treatment (P < 0.05) from week 4 (-23.0/-10.4 versus -19.2/-8.7 mmHg; primary endpoint) to week 12 (-29.0/-14.8 versus -25.3/-12.3 mmHg). Adverse events were reported by a similar percentage of patients in both groups (36.3% intensive, 37.6% moderate); peripheral edema was more common with intensive versus moderate treatment (8.7 versus 4.5%; P = 0.025).Initiating treatment with an intensive dose of amlodipine/valsartan provides significantly greater BP lowering versus moderate treatment in hypertensive patients unresponsive to ARB monotherapy. Both treatment regimens were generally well tolerated based on adverse event reports, but the lack of routine laboratory testing after screening limits conclusions on tolerability.
Project description:This study examined the effects of increasing the thiazide diuretic dose in a fixed-dose ARB/diuretic combination in patients with uncontrolled hypertension despite 6 weeks' open-label treatment with the ARB/diuretic combination, telmisartan 80 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg (T80/H12.5). 713 patients with trough seated DBP =90 mmHg were then randomized to 8 weeks' double-blind treatment with telmisartan 80 mg and an increased dose of 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide (T80/H25) or T80/H12.5. Adjusted mean seated DBP changes from baselines of 95.3 (T80/H25) and 95.0 mmHg (T80/H12.5) were -7.1 and --5.5 mmHg (difference: 1.6 mm Hg), respectively (P=.0012). Changes in systolic blood pressure from 147.9 mmHg (T80/H25) and 147.4 mmHg (T80/H12.5) were -9.8 and -7.1 mmHg (difference: 2.7 mm Hg) (P=.0003). Adverse events occurred in 31.5% (T80/H25) and 29.6% (T80/H12.5), with serious events in 1.4% and 0.8%, respectively. Hypokalemia was rare. These results show that higher-dose thiazide diuretic in combination with T80 in patients with hypertension uncontrolled by T80/H12.5 provides additional blood pressure reductions and is well tolerated.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Patients with hypertension often require a combination of three antihypertensive agents to achieve blood pressure control, but very few single-pill triple combinations are available. The aim of this study was to determine whether a single-pill triple combination of perindopril, indapamide, and amlodipine was as effective as a dual-pill combination of perindopril/indapamide plus separate amlodipine at reducing blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled, essential hypertension.<h4>Methods</h4>This international, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted in men or women aged ≥18 years old with confirmed essential hypertension (SBP ≥140 and <160 mmHg and DBP ≥90 and <100 mmHg), uncontrolled on maximal dose antihypertensive monotherapy or with a single dose of dual therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to: single-pill triple combination of perindopril 5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg/amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind/Aml) or dual-pill combination perindopril 5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg + amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind + Aml) once daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in office supine SBP and DBP from baseline to week 12. The proportion of responders defined as those with normalized BP (SBP <140 mmHg and DBP <90 mmHg), and/or decrease of SBP ≥20 mmHg, and/or decrease of DBP ≥10 mmHg at week 12 (W12) compared with baseline was also assessed. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change in office supine SBP and DBP, response, and BP control at weeks 4 and 8. The tolerability of the treatments was also assessed.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 148 patients were randomized: 75 to Per/Ind/Aml and 73 to Per/Ind + Aml. Mean supine SBP and DBP were 149.1 ± 4.7 and 94.1 ± 3.1 mmHg, respectively, with no relevant between-group difference. At week 12, both triple-therapy regimens were associated with clinically significant reductions in SBP compared with baseline (-21.5 ± 11.7 and -20.0 ± 12.9 mmHg, respectively). Reductions in office supine DBP were also clinically significant (-15.3 ± 7.8 and -14.8 ± 9.0 mmHg, respectively). The proportion of treatment responders was high in both groups: 89.2 and 87.1%, respectively. The reduction in office supine SBP/DBP was already evident at week 4 and maintained for the duration of the study in both groups. The majority of patients were treatment responders at week 4 (89.2 and 82.9%, respectively) and had achieved BP control (87.8 vs. 78.6%, respectively), which was maintained until week 12 in both treatment groups. Both treatments were well tolerated with no between-group differences.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In adult patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension on treatment, single-pill triple-combination therapy with Per/Ind/Aml is as effective as the same dose dual-pill combination of Per/Ind + Aml. Both treatments were associated with clinically significant BP reductions compared with baseline and were well tolerated. Clinical trials number: http://www.controlled-trials.com ISRCTN: 16442558.<h4>Funding</h4>Les Laboratoires Servier.
Project description:To evaluate the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy and safety of CKD-828, a fixed-dose combination of S-amlodipine (the more active isomer of amlodipine besylate, which is calcium channel blocker) and telmisartan (long acting angiotensin receptor blocker), in patients with hypertension inadequately controlled with S-amlodipine monotherapy.Eligible patients (N=187) who failed to respond after 4-week S-amlodipine 2.5 mg monotherapy (sitting diastolic blood pressure [sitDBP] ?90 mmHg) to receive CKD-828 2.5/40 mg (n=63), CKD-828 2.5/80 mg (n=63), or S-amlodipine 2.5 mg (n=61) for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint, mean sitDBP change from baseline to Week 8, was compared between the combination (CKD-828 2.5/40 mg and CKD-828 2.5/80 mg) and S-amlodipine monotherapy groups. The safety was assessed based on adverse events, vital signs, and physical examination findings.After the 8-week treatment, changes in sitDBP/systolic BP (SBP) were -9.67±6.50/-12.89±11.78, -10.72±6.19/-13.79±9.41, and -4.93±7.26/-4.55±11.27 mmHg in the CKD-828 2.5/40 mg (P<0.0001/P<0.0001), CKD-828 2.5/80 mg (P<0.0001/P<0.0001), and S-amlodipine 2.5 mg (P<0.0001/P=0.0027) groups, respectively, which were all significant BP reductions. At Week 8, the CKD-828 2.5/40 mg (sitDBP/SBP: P=0.0002/P<0.0001) and CKD-828 2.5/80 mg (sitDBP/SBP: P=0.0001/P<0.0001) showed superior BP-lowering effects to S-amlodipine 2.5 mg (P<0.001). At Week 4, all groups showed significant antihypertensive effects but both CKD-828 combinations (CKD-828 2.5/40 mg and CKD-828 2.5/80 mg) exhibited superior BP-lowering effects to that of S-amlodipine 2.5 mg (sitDBP/SBP: P=0.0028/P=0.0001 and P<0.0001/P=0.0012, respectively). The adverse event incidence was significantly lower in the CKD-828 2.5/40 mg (9.52%, P=0.0086) than in the S-amlodipine 2.5 mg group (27.87%) and increasing the telmisartan dose induced no unexpected adverse events, suggesting the safety of CKD-828.CKD-828 is an effective and safe option for patients with inadequate responses to S-amlodipine monotherapy.