Comparison of the efficacy of morning versus evening administration of olmesartan in uncomplicated essential hypertension

Efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers for nocturnal blood pressure reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) is correlated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and is an important predictor of cardiovascular death in hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVE

Nocturnal BP control is of great importance for cardiovascular risk reduction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for nocturnal BP reduction in patients with mild to moderate hypertension.

METHODS

PICOS design structure was used to formulate the data extraction. All statistical calculations and analyses were performed with R.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven studies with 13,314 participants were included. The overall analysis indicated that nocturnal BP drop varied considerably among different ARBs. Allisartan (13.04 [95% CI (-18.41, -7.68)] mmHg), olmesartan (11.67 [95% CI (-14.12, -9.21)] mmHg), telmisartan (11.11 [95% CI (-12.12, -10.11)] mmHg) were associated with greater reduction in nocturnal systolic BP. In the aspect of the nocturnal-diurnal BP drop ratio, only allisartan was greater than 1. While, the variation tendency of last 4-6 h ambulatory BP was basically consistent with nocturnal BP. Additionally, allisartan showed improvement effect in the proportion of patients with dipping BP pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that for patients with mild to moderate hypertension, allisartan, olmesartan and telmisartan have more advantages in nocturnal BP reduction among the ARBs, while allisartan can reduce nighttime BP more than daytime BP and improve the dipping pattern.

Evening versus morning dosing regimen drug therapy for hypertension

BACKGROUND

Variation in blood pressure levels display circadian rhythms. Complete 24-hour blood pressure control is the primary goal of antihypertensive treatment and reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes is the ultimate aim. This is an update of the review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of administration-time-related effects of once-daily evening versus conventional morning dosing antihypertensive drug therapy regimens on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, total adverse events, withdrawals from treatment due to adverse effects, and reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure in people with primary hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register via Cochrane Register of Studies (17 June 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 6, 2022); MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print (1 June 2022); Embase (1 June 2022); ClinicalTrials.gov (2 June 2022); Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBLD) (1978 to 2009); Chinese VIP (2009 to 7 August 2022); Chinese WANFANG DATA (2009 to 4 August 2022); China Academic Journal Network Publishing Database (CAJD) (2009 to 6 August 2022); Epistemonikos (3 September 2022) and the reference lists of relevant articles. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the administration-time-related effects of evening with morning dosing monotherapy regimens in people with primary hypertension. We excluded people with known secondary hypertension, shift workers or people with white coat hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two to four review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We resolved disagreements by discussion or with another review author. We performed data synthesis and analyses using Review Manager Web for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, serious adverse events, overall adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events, change in 24-hour blood pressure and change in morning blood pressure. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis, fixed-effect meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 RCTs in this updated review, of which two RCTs were excluded from the meta-analyses for lack of data and number of groups not reported. The quantitative analysis included 25 RCTs with 3016 participants with primary hypertension. RCTs used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (six trials), calcium channel blockers (nine trials), angiotensin II receptor blockers (seven trials), diuretics (two trials), α-blockers (one trial), and β-blockers (one trial). Fifteen trials were parallel designed, and 10 trials were cross-over designed. Most participants were white, and only two RCTs were conducted in Asia (China) and one in Africa (South Africa). All trials excluded people with risk factors of myocardial infarction and strokes. Most trials had high risk or unclear risk of bias in at least two of several key criteria, which was most prominent in allocation concealment (selection bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias). Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity across trials. No RCTs reported on cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. There may be little to no differences in all-cause mortality (after 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.42; RD 0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; very low-certainty evidence), serious adverse events (after 8 to 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.57; RD 0, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; very low-certainty evidence), overall adverse events (after 6 to 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20; I² = 37%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.02; I² = 38%; very low-certainty evidence) and withdrawals due to adverse events (after 6 to 26 weeks active treatment: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23; I² = 0%; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence was very uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the very limited data and the defects of the trials' designs, this systematic review did not find adequate evidence to determine which time dosing drug therapy regimen has more beneficial effects on cardiovascular outcomes or adverse events. We have very little confidence in the evidence showing that evening dosing of antihypertensive drugs is no more or less effective than morning administration to lower 24-hour blood pressure. The conclusions should not be assumed to apply to people receiving multiple antihypertensive drug regimens.

Circadian Blood Pressure Rhythm in Cardiovascular and Renal Health and Disease

Blood pressure (BP) follows a circadian rhythm, it increases on waking in the morning and decreases during sleeping at night. Disruption of the circadian BP rhythm has been reported to be associated with worsened cardiovascular and renal outcomes, however the underlying molecular mechanisms are still not clear. In this review, we briefly summarized the current understanding of the circadian BP regulation and provided therapeutic overview of the relationship between circadian BP rhythm and cardiovascular and renal health and disease.

Circadian variations in blood pressure and their implications for the administration of antihypertensive drugs: is dosing in the evening better than in the morning?

: Blood pressure (BP) follows a circadian rhythm with a physiological decrease during the night. Studies have demonstrated that nocturnal BP as well as its dipping pattern during night-time have a significant prognostic importance for mortality and the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Therefore, hypertension management guidelines recommend to ascertain that patients treated for hypertension have well controlled BP values around the clock. To improve hypertension control during the night and eventually further reduce cardiovascular events, it has been proposed by some to prescribe at least one antihypertensive medication at bedtime. In this review, we have examined the data which could support the benefits of prescribing BP-lowering drugs at bedtime. Our conclusion is that there is no convincing evidence that the administration of BP-lowering drugs in the evening provides any significant advantage in terms of quality of BP control, prevention of target organ damage or reduction of cardiovascular events. Before changing practice for unproven benefits, it would be wise to wait for the results of the ongoing trials that are addressing this issue.

Extent of asleep blood pressure reduction by hypertension medications is ingestion-time dependent: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published human trials

Combined evidence of published prospective outcome trials and meta-analyses substantiate elevated asleep blood pressure (BP) and blunted sleep-time relative BP decline (non-dipping), regardless of wake-time office BP and awake or 24 h BP means, are jointly the most highly significant independent prognostic markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and worthy therapeutic targets for prevention. Nonetheless, current guidelines continue to recommend the diagnosis of hypertension, when based on ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), rely, solely, on either the 24 h or "daytime" BP means. They also fail to recommend the time to treat patients. We conducted a systematic review of published human trials regarding ingestion-time differences in the effects of hypertension medications on asleep BP and sleep-time relative BP decline. Some 62 such trials published between 1992 and 2020, totaling 6120 hypertensive persons, evaluated 21 different single and 8 dual-fixed combination therapies. The vast (82.3%) majority of the trials substantiate the bedtime/evening vs. upon-waking/morning treatment schedule produces statistically significant better clinical benefits, including enhanced reduction of asleep systolic BP by an average 5.17 mmHg (95%CI [4.04, 6.31], P < 0.001 between treatment-time groups) without inducing sleep-time hypotension, reduced prevalence of the high CVD risk non-dipper 24 h BP pattern, improved kidney function, and reduced cardiac pathology. Furthermore, systematic and comprehensive review of the ABPM-based literature published the past 29 years reveals no single study that reported significantly better benefits of the most recommended, yet unjustified by medical evidence, morning hypertension treatment-time scheme.

Influence of hydrometeorological indices on electrolytes and trace elements homeostasis in patients with ischemic heart disease

One hundred patients with ischemic heart disease and 70 healthy subjects were on unified regimen. Urine was collected with 4-h proportions during 3-5 days (72-120 h). Each portion of urine was analyzed for macro- (Na, K, P, Cl, Ca, Mg) and microelements (Fe, Cu, Zn, Cr, Cd, V). Temporal structure (biological and hydrometeorological indices) parameters have been estimated by nonlinear least squares method for sinusoidal rhythms and dispersion analysis for nonsinusoidal rhythms. Data of weather indices were received from the hydrometeorological service of the Republic of Armenia in 2015 at 3-h intervals. Statistically significant rhythms were observed in healthy subjects in 91% cases of 593 rhythmological investigations of water-mineral homeostasis. Acrophases of water-mineral homeostasis mostly had individual nature. Healthy subjects' rhythms of water-mineral excretion were depending on rhythms of hydrometeorological indices and were characterized with significant correlative connections. Acrophases of indices of water-mineral homeostasis mostly were outstripping the acrophases of the rhythms of hydrometeorological indices. Chronostructure of water-mineral homeostasis in patients with ischemic heart disease was characterized with infradian and circadian fluctuations. In case of individuals with ischemic heart disease, statistically significant correlative connections between rhythms of water-mineral excretion and rhythms of hydrometeorological indices differ in comparison with the results of practically healthy individuals. In patients with ischemic heart disease, acrophases of biorhythms often were concurrent or delayed relative to the acrophases of the rhythms of hydrometeorological indices.

Chronotherapy for Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the emerging knowledge that circadian rhythmicity exists in every cell and all organ systems, there is increasing interest in the possible benefits of chronotherapy for many diseases. There is a well-documented 24-h pattern of blood pressure with a morning surge that may contribute to the observed morning increase in adverse cardiovascular events. Historically, antihypertensive therapy involves morning doses, usually aimed at reducing daytime blood pressure surges, but an absence of nocturnal dipping blood pressure is also associated with increased cardiovascular risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

To more effectively reduce nocturnal blood pressure and still counteract the morning surge in blood pressure, a number of studies have examined moving one or more antihypertensives from morning to bedtime dosing. More recently, such studies of chronotherapy have studied comorbid populations including obstructive sleep apnea, chronic kidney disease, or diabetes. Here, we summarize major findings from recent research in this area (2013-2017). In general, nighttime administration of antihypertensives improved overall 24-h blood pressure profiles regardless of disease comorbidity. However, inconsistencies between studies suggest a need for more prospective randomized controlled trials with sufficient statistical power. In addition, experimental studies to ascertain mechanisms by which chronotherapy is beneficial could aid drug design and guidelines for timed administration.

Time of administration important? Morning versus evening dosing of valsartan

Objective:

Studies suggest that bedtime dosing of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker shows a more sustained and consistent 24-h antihypertensive profile, including greater night-time blood pressure (BP) reduction. We compared the antihypertensive effects of morning (a.m.) and evening (p.m.) dosing of valsartan on 24-h BP.

Methods:

This 26-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of valsartan 320 mg, dosed a.m. or p.m., versus lisinopril 40 mg (a.m.), a long-acting ACE-inhibitor, in patients with grade 1–2 hypertension and at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. Patients (n = 1093; BP = 156 ± 11/91 ± 8 mmHg; 62 years, 56% male, 99% white) received (1 : 1 : 1) valsartan 160 mg a.m. or p.m. or lisinopril 20 mg a.m. for 4 weeks, then force-titrated to double the initial dose for 8 weeks. At Week 12, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg was added for 14 weeks if office BP was more than 140/90 mmHg and/or ambulatory BP more than 130/80 mmHg.

Results:

Mean 24-h ambulatory SBP change from baseline to Weeks 12 and 26 was comparable between valsartan a.m. (–10.6 and –13.3 mmHg) and p.m. (–9.8 and –12.3 mmHg) and lisinopril (–10.7 and –13.7 mmHg). There was no benefit of valsartan p.m. versus a.m. on night-time BP, early morning BP and morning BP surge. Evening dosing also did not improve BP lowering in patients requiring add-on HCTZ or in nondippers at baseline. All treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusion:

Once-daily dosing of valsartan 320 mg results in equally effective 24-h BP efficacy, regardless of dosing time.

Trial Registration:

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00241124.

Effect of Olmesartan-Based Therapies on Therapeutic Indicators Obtained Through Out-of-Office Blood Pressure

Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) correlates more significantly with hypertension-associated cardiovascular mortality and morbidity than BP obtained in the doctor's office. Assessing ambulatory BP, either through 24-h monitoring or through protocolized self-measurement at home, is essential in diagnosing and monitoring patients with hypertension. Several ambulatory BP-derived indicators are related with cardiovascular prognosis. These include 24-h, daytime and nighttime BP measurements, BP measurements obtained through home self-measurement, dipping status, morning surge, and BP variability. The objective of this article was to review the effect of olmesartan-based antihypertensive therapy on the main risk variables obtained when assessing ambulatory BP.

Treatment of hypertension with chronotherapy: is it time of drug administration?

OBJECTIVE

To review evidence for dosing antihypertensives at bedtime and possible cardiovascular risk reduction.

DATA SOURCES

A PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials database literature search (1990-September 2014) limited to human subjects was performed using the search terms hypertension, chronotherapy, ambulatory blood pressure, morning administration, evening administration, and antihypertensives. Additional references were identified from literature citations.

STUDY SELECTION

All prospective studies assessing cardiovascular outcomes or comparing morning to evening administration of antihypertensives were selected.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Compared with morning administration, dosing one or more antihypertensive medications at bedtime helps induce a normal circadian blood pressure pattern and reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality in individuals with hypertension. Similar results have been reported in high-risk individuals with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and resistant hypertension. A lack of diversity among studied populations and reliance on subgroup analyses are among the limitations of these data. All antihypertensive medications have not been studied in chronotherapy and do not uniformly achieve desired results. The most substantial evidence exists for medications affecting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite growing evidence and promise as a cost-effective strategy for reducing cardiovascular risk, chronotherapy is not uniformly recommended in the treatment of hypertension. Careful selection of patients and antihypertensives for chronotherapy is required. Further investigation is needed to evaluate the definitive impact of chronotherapy on cardiovascular outcomes.

Different chronotherapeutic effects of valsartan and olmesartan in non-dipper hypertensive patients during valsartan treatment at morning

This study was undertaken to evaluate the differences in chronotherapeutic effects of angiotensin-II receptor blockers, valsartan and olmesartan in hypertensive patients with non-dipper blood pressure (BP) pattern during valsartan at morning. Ninety four patients were enrolled, and 40 patients were judged to be non-dippers. In these patients, same dose of valsartan was changed to evening (Val-E, n = 12), or olmesartan (equivalent dose of valsartan) was given at morning (Olm-M, n = 13) or evening (Olm-E, n = 15) for 4 months. BP decreased during sleep and increased during waking hours in Val-E group. In Olm-M and Olm-E groups, BP decreased during sleep and waking hours. Percent reduction in BP at night-time compared to BP at waking hours significantly increased after changing the dose regimen in each group. Serum creatinine decreased and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) elevated in Olm-M and Olm-E, but not Val-E groups. Positive correlation between systolic BP (SBP) during sleep and serum creatinine, and negative correlation between SBP during sleep and eGFR were detected. These data suggest that dipper BP pattern could be obtained by chronotherapeutic approach using valsartan and olmesartan in non-dipper patients with valsartan at morning. Morning and evening olmesartan, but not evening valsartan improved renal function in these patients.

The angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker olmesartan preferentially improves nocturnal hypertension and proteinuria in chronic kidney disease

Accumulated evidence suggests that an altered ambulatory blood pressure (BP) profile, particularly elevated nighttime BP, reflects target organ injury and is a better predictor of further cardiorenal risk than the clinic BP or daytime BP in hypertensive patients complicated by chronic kidney disease (CKD). In this study, we examined the beneficial effects of olmesartan, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB), on ambulatory BP profiles and renal function in hypertensive CKD patients. Forty-six patients were randomly assigned to the olmesartan add-on group (n=23) or the non-ARB group (n=23). At baseline and after the 16-week treatment period, ambulatory BP monitoring was performed and renal function parameter measurements were collected. Although the baseline clinic BP levels and the after-treatment/baseline (A/B) ratios of clinic BP levels were similar in the olmesartan add-on and non-ARB groups, the A/B ratios of ambulatory 24-h and nighttime BP levels in the olmesartan add-on group were significantly lower. Furthermore, the A/B ratios of urinary protein, albumin and type IV collagen excretion in the olmesartan add-on group were significantly lower than those in the non-ARB group (urinary protein excretion, 0.72±0.41 vs. 1.45±1.48, P=0.030; urinary albumin excretion, 0.73±0.37 vs. 1.50±1.37, P=0.005; urinary type IV collagen excretion, 0.87±0.42 vs. 1.48±0.87, P=0.014) despite comparable A/B ratios for the estimated glomerular filtration rate in the two groups. These results indicate that in hypertensive patients with CKD, olmesartan add-on therapy improves the ambulatory BP profile via a preferential reduction in nighttime BP with concomitant renal injury inhibition.

Administration-time differences in effects of hypertension medications on ambulatory blood pressure regulation

Specific features of the 24-h blood pressure (BP) pattern are linked to progressive injury of target tissues and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. Several studies have consistently shown an association between blunted asleep BP decline and risk of fatal and nonfatal CVD events. Thus, there is growing focus on ways to properly control BP during nighttime sleep as well as during daytime activity. One strategy, termed chronotherapy, entails the timing of hypertension medications to endogenous circadian rhythm determinants of the 24-h BP pattern. Significant and clinically meaningful treatment-time differences in the beneficial and/or adverse effects of at least six different classes of hypertension medications, and their combinations, are now known. Generally, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are more effective with bedtime than morning dosing, and for dihydropyridine derivatives bedtime dosing significantly reduces risk of peripheral edema. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system is highly circadian rhythmic and activates during nighttime sleep. Accordingly, evening/bedtime ingestion of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) benazepril, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril, perindopril, quinapril, ramipril, spirapril, trandolapril, and zofenopril exerts more marked effect on the asleep than awake systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP means. Likewise, the bedtime, in comparison with morning, ingestion schedule of the angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs irbesartan, olmesartan, telmisartan, and valsartan exerts greater therapeutic effect on asleep BP, plus significant increase in the sleep-time relative BP decline, with the additional benefit, independent of drug terminal half-life, of converting the 24-h BP profile into a more normal dipping pattern. This is the case also for the bedtime versus upon-awakening regimen of combination ARB-CCB, ACEI-CCB, and ARB-diuretic medications. The chronotherapy of conventional hypertension medications constitutes a new and cost-effective strategy for enhancing the control of daytime and nighttime SBP and DBP levels, normalizing the dipping status of their 24-h patterning, and potentially reducing the risk of CVD events and end-organ injury, for example, of the blood vessels and tissues of the heart, brain, kidney, and retina.

Comparison of effects of angiotensin II receptor blocker on morning home blood pressure and cardiorenal protection between morning administration and evening administration in hypertensive patients: the COMPATIBLE study

Whether the time of administering the angiotensin receptor antagonist olmesartan influences antihypertensive and renoprotective effectiveness remains unclear. This study compared the effects of olmesartan on morning home blood pressure (MHBP), office BP (OBP) and renoprotective parameters between morning and evening administration. A total of 218 patients with primary hypertension were randomly assigned to receive olmesartan once daily in the morning (morning-dose group) or evening (evening-dose group), and 188 completed the study protocol (morning-dose group, n=95; evening-dose group, n=93). In both groups, morning home systolic BP, morning home diastolic BP, office systolic BP and office diastolic BP decreased significantly. There was no significant difference between the groups in MHBP or OBP after 6 months of treatment. The urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) decreased from 13.9 to 6.9 mg g(-1) (geometric means, P<0.001) in the morning-dose group and from 14.4 to 9.1 mg g(-1) (P<0.001) in the evening-dose group. The changes in UACR after treatment did not differ significantly between the groups. SV1+RV5 decreased significantly from baseline to 6 months in the morning-dose group (P<0.001) and the evening-dose group (P<0.01), and did not differ significantly between the groups. In conclusion, olmesartan effectively decreased MHBP, OBP, SV1+RV5 and UACR regardless of whether the drug was administered in the morning or in the evening. Our results suggest that olmesartan can be prescribed once daily, either in the morning or in the evening.

Evening versus morning dosing regimen drug therapy for hypertension

BACKGROUND

Variation in blood pressure levels display circadian rhythms. The morning surge in blood pressure is known to increase the risk of myocardial events in the first several hours post awakening. A systematic review of the administration-time-related-effects of evening versus morning dosing regimen of antihypertensive drugs in the management of patients with primary hypertension has not been conducted.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the administration-time-related-effects of antihypertensive drugs administered as once daily monotherapy in the evening versus morning administration regimen on all cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity and reduction of blood pressure in patients with primary hypertension.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL on Ovid (4th Quarter 2009), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to October 2009), EMBASE (1974 to October 2009), the Chinese Biomedical literature database (1978 to 2009) and the reference lists of relevant articles. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing the administration-time-related effects of evening with morning dosing monotherapy regimens in patients with primary hypertension were included. Patients with known secondary hypertension, shift workers or white coat hypertension were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Data synthesis and analysis were done using RevMan 5.1. Random effects meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 1,993 patients with primary hypertension met the inclusion criteria for this review - ACEIs (5 trials), CCBs (7 trials), ARBs (6 trials), diuretics (2 trials), alpha-blockers (1 trial), and beta-blockers (1 trial). Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity across trials.No RCT reported on all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular morbidity and serious adverse events.There was no statistically significant difference for overall adverse events (RR=0.78, 95%CI: 0.37 to 1.65) and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR=0.53, 95%CI: 0.26 to 1.07).No significant differences were noted for morning SBP (-1.62 mm Hg, 95% CI: -4.19 to 0.95) and morning DBP (-1.21 mm Hg, 95% CI: -3.28 to 0.86); but 24-hour BP (SBP: -1.71 mm Hg, 95% CI: -2.78 to -0.65; DBP: -1.38 mm Hg, 95% CI: -2.13 to -0.62) showed a statistically significant difference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No RCT reported on clinically relevant outcome measures - all cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity and morbidity. There were no significant differences in overall adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events among the evening versus morning dosing regimens. In terms of BP lowering efficacy, for 24-hour SBP and DBP, the data suggests that better blood pressure control was achieved with bedtime dosing than morning administration of antihypertensive medication, the clinical significance of which is not known.

Circadian rhythms in blood pressure regulation and optimization of hypertension treatment with ACE inhibitor and ARB medications

Specific features of the 24 h-blood pressure (BP) pattern are linked to the progressive injury of target tissues and risk of cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Studies have consistently shown an association between blunted asleep BP decline and increased incidence of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. Thus, there is growing interest in how to achieve better BP control during nighttime sleep in addition to during daytime activity, according to the particular requirements of each hypertension patient. One approach takes into consideration the endogenous circadian rhythm-determinants of the 24-h BP pattern, especially, the prominent day-night variation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, which activates during nighttime sleep. A series of clinical studies have demonstrated a different effect of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors benazepril, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril, perindopril, quinapril, ramipril, spirapril, and trandolapril when routinely ingested in the morning vs. the evening. In most cases, the evening schedule exerts a more marked effect on the asleep than awake BP means. Similarly, a once-daily evening, in comparison to morning, ingestion schedule of the angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) irbesartan, olmesartan, telmisartan, and valsartan exerts greater therapeutic effect on asleep BP, plus significant increase in the sleep-time relative BP decline, with normalization of the circadian BP profile toward a more dipping pattern, independent of drug terminal half-life. Chronotherapy, the timing of treatment to body rhythms, is a cost-effective means of both individualizing and optimizing the treatment of hypertension through normalization of the 24-h BP level and profile, and it may constitute an effective option to reduce cardiovascular risk.

Do restless legs syndrome (RLS) and periodic limb movements of sleep (PLMS) play a role in nocturnal hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk of renally impaired patients?

Hypertension can cause or promote renal failure and is related to cardiovascular mortality, the major cause of death in patients with renal impairment. Changes in the circadian BP pattern, particularly the blunting or reversal of the nocturnal decline in BP, are common in chronic renal failure. These changes in turn are among the major determinants of left ventricular hypertrophy. Using a chronobiological approach, it is possible to obtain better insight into the reciprocal relationship between hypertension, renal disease, and increased cardiovascular risk of renal patients. Disruption of the normal circadian rhythm of rest/activity may be hypothesized to underlie the high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of such patients. Epidemiological studies reveal that hemodialysis patients experience poor subjective sleep quality and insomnia and, in comparison to healthy persons, are more likely to show shorter sleep duration and lower sleep efficiency. Sleep apnea may be present and is usually investigated in these patients; however, the prevalence of restless legs syndrome (RLS), which is high in dialysis patients and which has been associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease in the general population, could also play a role in the pathogenesis of sleep-time hypertension in renal patients. Careful assessment of sleep quality, in particular, diagnostic screening for RLS and periodic limb movements (PLM) in renal patients, is highly recommended. In renal failure, attention to sleep quality and related perturbations of the sleep/wake cycle may help prevent the occurrence and progression of cardiovascular disease.

Administration-time-dependent effects of olmesartan on the ambulatory blood pressure of essential hypertension patients

Previous studies established that a single daily dose of olmesartan remains effective for the entire 24 h without alteration of the day-night blood pressure (BP) pattern. On the other hand, the administration of valsartan or telmisartan at bedtime, as opposed to upon wakening, improves the sleep-time relative BP decline toward a greater dipper pattern without loss of 24 h efficacy. Yet to be determined is whether this administration-time-dependent efficacy is a class-related feature, characteristic of all angiotensin-receptor-blocker (ARB) medications. We studied 123 grade 1 and 2 hypertensive patients, 46.6+/-12.3 yrs of age, randomly assigned to receive olmesartan (20 mg/day) as a monotherapy either upon awakening or at bedtime for three months. BP was measured by ambulatory monitoring for 48 consecutive hours before and after treatment. The 24 h BP reduction was similar for both treatment times. Administration of olmesartan at bedtime, however, was significantly more efficient than morning administration in reducing the nocturnal BP mean. The sleep-time relative BP decline was slightly reduced with olmesartan ingestion upon awakening but significantly increased with ingestion at bedtime, thus reducing the prevalence of non-dipping from baseline by 48%. Olmesartan administration at bedtime, as opposed to in the morning, improved the awake/asleep BP ratio toward a greater dipper pattern without loss of 24 h efficacy. Nocturnal BP regulation was significantly better achieved with bedtime as compared to morning dosing of olmesartan. These effects are comparable to those previously reported for valsartan and telmisartan, thus suggesting that they may be class-related features of ARB medications in spite of differences in their half-life kinetics. These administration-time-dependent effects should be taken into account when prescribing ARB medications for treatment of essential hypertension.

Optimal time to take once-daily oral medications in clinical practice

Currently only a few package inserts of once-daily medications specially define the dosing time, although sporadic studies have demonstrated administration time-dependent effects on the therapeutic outcome. Some chronotherapeutic approaches aim to diminish the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and hence better tolerance and medication compliance whereas most of the chronotherapies are recommended to improve therapeutic efficacy. The administration time-dependent efficacy seems not a common feature of drugs within the similar therapeutic or structural class and it is related to kinds of drugs, pathophysiologic status, clinical symptoms and feedback from patients. Doctors, pharmacists and nurses should know what kind of drug has requirement for optimal dosing time, and realize that better efficacy and lower incidence of ADRs may be achieved by rational arrangement of administration schedule. In order to promote medication compliance, it is essential to provide patient education regarding differences between conventional and chronotherapeutic approaches and pathophysiologic benefits of chronotherapy.