Efficacy and Tolerability of Amlodipine Camsylate/Losartan 5/100-mg Versus Losartan/Hydrochlorothiazide 100/12.5-mg Fixed-Dose Combination in Hypertensive Patients Nonresponsive to Losartan 100-mg Monotherapy

Efficacy of single-pill combination in uncontrolled essential hypertension: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.

Efficacy and safety of single-pill amlodipine/losartan versus losartan in patients with inadequately controlled hypertension after losartan treatment: a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase III clinical trial

Objective

Single-pill amlodipine besylate (AML) plus losartan (LOS) has been used to treat inadequately controlled hypertension after antihypertensive monotherapy; however, relevant data in China are limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of single-pill AML/LOS and LOS alone in Chinese patients with inadequately controlled hypertension after LOS treatment.

Methods

In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled phase III clinical trial, patients with inadequately controlled hypertension after 4 weeks of LOS treatment were randomized to receive daily single-pill AML/LOS (5/100 mg, AML/LOS group, N = 154) or LOS (100 mg, LOS group, N = 153) tablets for 8 weeks. At weeks 4 and 8 of treatment, sitting diastolic and systolic blood pressure (sitDBP and sitSBP, respectively) and the BP target achievement rate were assessed.

Results

At week 8, the sitDBP change from baseline was greater in the AML/LOS group than in the LOS group (-8.84 ± 6.86 vs. -2.65 ± 7.62 mmHg, P < 0.001). In addition, the AML/LOS group also showed greater sitDBP change from baseline to week 4 (-8.77 ± 6.60 vs. -2.99 ± 7.05 mmHg) and sitSBP change from baseline to week 4 (-12.54 ± 11.65 vs. -2.36 ± 10.33 mmHg) and 8 (-13.93 ± 10.90 vs. -2.38 ± 12.71 mmHg) (all P < 0.001). Moreover, the BP target achievement rates at weeks 4 (57.1% vs. 25.3%, P < 0.001) and 8 (58.4% vs. 28.1%, P < 0.001) were higher in the AML/LOS group than those in the LOS group. Both treatments were safe and tolerable.

Conclusion

Single-pill AML/LOS is superior to LOS monotherapy for controlling BP and is safe and well tolerated in Chinese patients with inadequately controlled hypertension after LOS treatment.

Comparison of effects between calcium channel blocker and diuretics in combination with angiotensin II receptor blocker on 24-h central blood pressure and vascular hemodynamic parameters in hypertensive patients: study design for a multicenter, double-blinded, active-controlled, phase 4, randomized trial

Background

Hypertension is a risk factor for coronary heart disease and stroke, and is one of the leading causes of death. Although over a billion people are affected worldwide, only half of them receive adequate treatment. Current guidelines on antihypertensive treatment recommend combination therapy for patients not responding to monotherapy, but as the number of pills increase, patient compliance tends to decrease. As a result, fixed-dose combination drugs with different antihypertensive agents have been developed and widely used in recent years. CCBs have been shown to be better at reducing central blood pressure and arterial stiffness than diuretics. Recent studies have reported that central blood pressure and arterial stiffness are associated with cardiovascular outcomes. This trial aims to compare the efficacy of combination of calcium channel blocker (CCB) or thiazide diuretic with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB).

Methods

This is a multicenter, double-blinded, active-controlled, phase 4, randomized trial, comparing the antihypertensive effects of losartan/amlodipine and losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in patients unresponsive to treatment with losartan. The primary endpoint is changes in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) after 4 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints are changes in msSBP, mean 24-h ambulatory mobile blood pressure, mean 24-h ambulatory mobile central SBP, mean 24-h ambulatory carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, ambulatory augmentation index, and microalbuminuria/proteinuria after 20 weeks of treatment. The sample size will be 119 patients for each group in order to confer enough power to test for non-inferiority regarding the primary outcome.

Conclusion

The investigators aim to prove that combination of a CCB with ARB shows non-inferiority in lowering blood pressure compared with a combination of thiazide diuretic and ARB. We also hope to distinguish the subset of patients that are more responsive to certain types of combination drugs. The results of this study should aid physicians in selecting appropriate combination regimens to treat hypertension in certain populations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02294539. Registered 12 November 2014.