Treatment of elderly hypertensive patients with a delayed-release verapamil formulation in a community-based trial

Circadian Variation in Efficacy of Medications

Although much has been learned about circadian clocks and rhythms over the past few decades, translation of this foundational science underlying the temporal regulation of physiology and behavior to clinical applications has been slow. Indeed, acceptance of the modern study of circadian rhythms has been blunted because the phenomenology of cyclic changes had to counteract the 20th century dogma of homeostasis in the biological sciences and medicine. We are providing this review of clinical data to highlight the emerging awareness of circadian variation in efficacy of medications for physicians, clinicians, and pharmacists. We are suggesting that gold-standard double-blind clinical studies should be conducted to determine the best time of day for optimal effectiveness of medications; also, we suggest that time of day should be tracked and reported as an important biological variable in ongoing clinical studies hereafter. Furthermore, we emphasize that time of day is, and should be considered, a key biological variable in research design similar to sex. In common with biomedical research data that have been historically strongly skewed toward the male sex, most pharmaceutical data have been skewed toward morning dosing without strong evidence that this is the optimal time of efficacy.

An effectiveness study comparing algorithm-based antihypertensive therapy with previous treatments using conventional and ambulatory blood pressure measurements

Effectiveness trials in hypertension enable the efficacy and safety of new drugs to be compared with previous therapy. Since these open-label trials could inadvertently be influenced by observer bias, this study has used ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) to provide a rigorous blinded end point to validate the study conclusions. The study was performed in 675 patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension despite receiving single-agent or fixed-dose combination therapy. After baseline ABPM, the previous treatment was replaced by telmisartan 40 mg daily; if control (office blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg) was not achieved in 2 weeks, the dose was increased to 80 mg, and if necessary, a fixed combination with hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was used after a further 4 weeks. ABPM was repeated after 4 weeks on final therapy. Overall, 50% of patients finished on monotherapy and 50% on combination therapy. By office measurements, there was a decrease (mean +/- SEM) of 16.8+/-0.5/10.3+/-0.3 mm Hg (p<0.001) when telmisartan-based treatment replaced previous treatment; by ABPM, the decrease was 8.2+/-0.4/5.0+/-0.2 mm Hg (p<0.001). The decreases were significant for comparisons with each of the prior drug classes. A treatment algorithm based on the angiotensin receptor blocker, telmisartan, was confirmed by the blinded end point of ABPM as an efficacious alternative to other antihypertensive regimens in clinical practice.

Can we justify goal blood pressure of <140/90 mm hg in most hypertensives?

Hypertension is a common disorder with well-recognized consequences on the heart, brain, and kidney as target organs. Guidelines espouse a treatment goal of blood pressure reduction to <140 mm Hg for the systolic pressure and <90 mm Hg for the diastolic pressure in most hypertensive patients. In this review, the basis for these recommendations, the practical achievement of these goals in various practice settings, and the risk versus the benefit of achieving such goals in most hypertensive patients are examined.