Fixed-dose vs free-dose combinations for the management of hypertension-An analysis of 81 958 patients

Three spectrophotometric quantitative analysis of bisoprolol fumarate and telmisartan in fixed-dose combination utilizing ratio spectra manipulation methods

Hypertension is a chronic condition with multiple drug regimens. Limiting these medicines is critical to patient compliance. Therefore, bisoprolol and telmisartan were recently developed in a fixed-dose combination to control blood pressure. The UV absorption spectra of bisoprolol and telmisartan overlapped significantly. Thus, three spectrophotometric methods have been developed for simultaneous determination of bisoprolol and telmisartan without prior separation. Method A is ratio difference of ratio spectra (RD), which measures the amplitude difference between (210-224) nm for bisoprolol and between (255-365) nm for telmisartan. Method B, the first derivative of ratio spectra (1DD), measures amplitude signals at 232 and 243 nm for bisoprolol and telmisartan, respectively. Method C is the mean centering of ratio spectra (MC), which measures the mean-centered ratio spectra's values at 223 nm for bisoprolol and 245 nm for telmisartan. The applied methods showed good linearity 2-20 µg/mL for bisoprolol, 4-32 µg/mL for telmisartan, with sufficient accuracy and precision. The methods were sensitive, with LOD values of 0.243 µg/mL and 0.596 µg/mL in RD method, 0.313 µg/mL and 0.914 µg/mL in 1DD method, and 0.406 and 0.707 µg/mL in MC method for bisoprolol and telmisartan, respectively, the methods were validated per ICH criteria. The novel methods are precise and accurate and can be used for routine analysis and quality control of bisoprolol and telmisartan in pure and dosage form. Furthermore, the greenness of the approaches was evaluated using Analytical Greenness assessment (AGREE), and the suggested method received a high greenness score.

Impact of single-pill combinations versus free-equivalent combinations on adherence and persistence in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Hypertension is a leading cause of death and disease burden followed by dyslipidemia. Their asymptomatic nature leads to low adherence and persistence to treatments. A systematic literature review (SLR) investigated the impact of single-pill-combinations (SPC) compared to free-equivalent combination (FEC) on adherence, persistence, clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and patient-reported outcomes, in patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia, or both.

METHODS

MEDLINE, MEDLINE-IN-PROCESS, Embase, and Cochrane were searched from inception until 11 May 2021, for studies comparing SPC against FEC in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. Patient characteristics, study design, therapies, measures of adherence or persistence, clinical outcomes, and follow-up were extracted.

RESULTS

Among 52 studies identified in the SLR, 27 (n = 346,030 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. SPCs were associated with significantly improved adherence compared with FEC, as assessed through medication-possession-ratio ≥80% (odds ratio (OR) 0.42, p < 0.01) and proportion of days covered ≥80% (OR 0.45, p < 0.01). SPC also improved persistence (OR 0.44, p < 0.01) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction (mean difference -1.50, p < 0.01) compared with the FEC.

CONCLUSIONS

SPC use resulted in significantly improved adherence, persistence, and SBP levels compared with FEC in patients with hypertension. The findings support SPC use in reducing the burden of hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Ibuprofen/acetaminophen fixed-dose combination as an alternative to opioids in management of common pain types

Opioids are frequently used first line to manage acute pain in a variety of settings; however, the use of nonprescription analgesics for acute pain is recognized by experts as a practical and effective opioid-sparing strategy. Variations in dosages and formulations and a lack of standardization in reporting clinical data hinder the awareness of nonprescription treatments and recommendation of their use before opioids and other prescription options. A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of two common nonprescription analgesics, ibuprofen (IBU) and acetaminophen (APAP), is an appealing alternative to opioids in acute pain settings with a range of potential benefits. This narrative review evaluates the evidence in support of IBU/APAP FDCs containing IBU (≤1200 mg/day) and APAP (≤4000 mg/day), the nonprescription maximum daily doses in Canada and the United States, as alternatives to opioids and as a means to reduce the need for rescue opioid medication in acute pain management. A literature search was performed to identify clinical studies that directly compared IBU/APAP FDCs with opioids or nonopioids and measured the need for opioid rescue therapy in acute pain. Across studies, IBU/APAP FDCs consistently demonstrated pain relief similar to or better than opioid and nonopioid comparators and reliably reduced the use of rescue opioids with fewer adverse events. Based on these data, healthcare clinicians should consider FDC nonprescription analgesics as a potential first-line option for the management of acute pain.

Extemporaneous combination therapy with nebivolol/ramipril for the treatment of hypertension: a real-world evidence study in Europe

OBJECTIVES

To describe the clinical characteristics and treatment adherence in European adult hypertensive patients starting treatment with the extemporaneous combination of nebivolol and ramipril (NR-EXC).

METHODS

Retrospective database analysis of patients receiving NR-EXC treatment across five European countries (Italy, Germany, France, Poland, Hungary) over a period ranging from 3 to 9 years (until 30 June 2020) according to data availability for the different data sources. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and treatment adherence were evaluated.

RESULTS

We identified 592,472 patients starting NR-EXC. Most of them were over 60 years of age, with ramipril most commonly prescribed at 5 mg (from 30.0 to 57.2% of patients across the databases). Notable comorbidities included diabetes (19.2%) and dyslipidemia (18.2%). The study population was also highly subjected to polytherapy with antithrombotics, lipid-lowering agents, and other lowering blood pressure agents as the most co-prescribed medications, as resulted from Italian database. Up to 59% of the patients did not request a cardiologic visit during the study period. Adherence to therapy was low in 56.3% of the patients, and it was high only in 11.1% of them.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of nebivolol and ramipril is frequently prescribed in Europe, but adherence to treatment is suboptimal. The transition to a single pill combination could enhance treatment adherence and streamline regimens, potentially leading to significant benefits. Improved adherence not only correlates with better blood pressure control but also reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, underscoring the importance of this development.

The Rationale for Using Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in the Management of Hypertension in Colombia: A Narrative Review

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and the leading cause of death in Colombia. While the rate of hypertension awareness in Colombia is generally high, rates of treatment initiation, adherence, and blood pressure (BP) control are suboptimal. Major international hypertension guidelines recommend starting treatment with a combination of antihypertensive agents, and the use of a single-pill combination (SPC) to maximize adherence. In contrast, Colombian hypertension guidelines recommend starting treatment with diuretic monotherapy in most patients, and only initiating combination therapy in those with BP > 160/100 mmHg. Therefore, the aim of the current narrative review is to examine the rationale for using SPCs to treat hypertension in Colombia, in the context of the major issues for BP control there. There is evidence of widespread therapeutic inertia in hypertension management, particularly in primary care, in Colombia. Moreover, combination therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and long-acting calcium channel blockers, which are internationally recommended as first-line drug therapies, are underutilized there. Adherence to antihypertensive therapy is low in Colombia and may be enhanced by use of SPCs as well as better patient education and follow-up. While there are promising national initiatives to improve BP management, more needs to be done by individual physicians. Antihypertensive SPCs are available on the national essential medicines list and may help to overcome some of the problems with suboptimal adherence, therapeutic inertia, and low rates of BP control that contribute to the high cardiovascular death rate in Colombia.

Effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine fixed-dose combination in the treatment of hypertension: a systematic review

Background: Uncontrolled blood pressure is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy offers a promising approach to addressing this challenge by providing a convenient single-tablet solution that enhances the effectiveness of blood pressure control. In our systematic review, we assess the effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC in managing blood pressure. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search across four primary electronic databases, namely, PubMed, Virtual Health Library (VHL), Global Health Library (GHL), and Google Scholar, as of 8 February 2022. Additionally, we performed a manual search to find relevant articles. The quality of the selected articles was evaluated using the Study Quality Assessment Tools (SQAT) checklist from the National Institute of Health and the ROB2 tool from Cochrane. Results: Our systematic review included 17 eligible articles. The findings show that the use of perindopril/amlodipine FDC significantly lowers blood pressure and enhances the quality of blood pressure control. Compared to the comparison group, the perindopril/amlodipine combination tablet resulted in a higher rate of blood pressure response and normalization. Importantly, perindopril/amlodipine FDC contributes to improved patient adherence with minimal side effects. However, studies conducted to date have not provided assessments of the cost-effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC. Conclusion: In summary, our analysis confirms the effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC in lowering blood pressure, with combination therapy outperforming monotherapy and placebo. Although mild adverse reactions were observed in a small subset of participants, cost-effectiveness assessments for this treatment remain lacking in the literature.

Curcumin hybrid molecules for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: Structure and pharmacological activities

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease among the elderly. Contemporary treatments can only relieve symptoms but fail to delay disease progression. Curcumin is a naturally derived compound that has demonstrated significant therapeutic effects in AD treatment. Recently, molecular hybridization has been utilized to combine the pharmacophoric groups present in curcumin with those of other AD drugs, resulting in a series of novel compounds that enhance the therapeutic efficacy through multiple mechanisms. In this review, we firstly provide a concise summary of various pathogenetic hypotheses of AD and the mechanism of action of curcumin in AD, as well as the concept of molecular hybridization. Subsequently, we focus on the recent development of hybrid molecules derived from curcumin, summarizing their structures and pharmacological activities, including cholinesterase inhibitory activity, Aβ aggregation inhibitory activity, antioxidant activity, and other activities. The structure-activity relationships were further discussed.

Effectiveness of Single-Tablet Combination Therapy in Improving Adherence and Persistence and the Relation to Clinical and Economic Outcomes

Background: Single-tablet combination therapies (STCTs) combine multiple drugs into one formulation, making drug administration more convenient for patients. STCTs were developed to address concerns with treatment adherence and persistence, but the impact of STCT use is not fully understood across indications. Objectives: We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine STCT-associated outcomes across 4 evidence domains: clinical trials, real-world evidence (RWE), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) studies, and economic evaluations. Methods: Four SLRs were conducted across the aforementioned domains. Included studies compared STCTs as well as fixed-dose combinations ([FDCs] of non-tablet formulations) with the equivalent active compounds and doses in loose-dose combinations (LDCs). Original research articles were included; case reports, case series, and non-English-language sources were excluded. Databases searched included EconLit, Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE® ALL. Two independent reviewers assessed relevant studies and extracted data. Conflicts were resolved with a third reviewer or consensus-based discussion. Results: In all, 109 studies were identified; 27 studies were identified in more than one SLR. Treatment adherence was significantly higher in patients receiving FDCs vs LDCs in 12 of 13 RWE studies and 3 of 13 clinical trials. All 18 RWE studies reported higher persistence with FDCs. In RWE studies examining clinical outcomes (n = 17), 14 reported positive findings with FDCs, including a reduced need for add-on medication, blood pressure control, and improved hemoglobin A1C. HRQoL studies generally reported numerical improvements with STCTs or similarities between STCTs and LDCs. Economic outcomes favored STCT use. All 6 cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses found FDCs were less expensive and more efficacious than LDCs. Four budget impact models found that STCTs were associated with cost savings. Medical costs and healthcare resource use were generally lower with FDCs than with LDCs. Discussion: Evidence from RWE and economic studies strongly favored STCT use, while clinical trials and HRQoL studies primarily reported similarity between STCTs and LDCs. This may be due to clinical trial procedures aimed at maximizing adherence and HRQoL measures that are not designed to evaluate drug administration. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the value of STCTs for improving patient adherence, persistence, and clinical outcomes while also offering economic advantages.

Perspectives on improving blood pressure control to reduce the clinical and economic burden of hypertension

The clinical and economic burden of hypertension is high and continues to increase globally. Uncontrolled hypertension has severe but avoidable long-term consequences, including cardiovascular diseases, which are among the most burdensome and most preventable conditions in Europe. Yet, despite clear guidelines on screening, diagnosis and management of hypertension, a large proportion of patients remain undiagnosed or undertreated. Low adherence and persistence are common, exacerbating the issue of poor blood pressure (BP) control. Although current guidelines provide clear direction, implementation is hampered by barriers at the patient-, physician- and healthcare system levels. Underestimation of the impact of uncontrolled hypertension and limited health literacy lead to low adherence and persistence among patients, treatment inertia among physicians and a lack of decisive healthcare system action. Many options to improve BP control are available or under investigation. Patients would benefit from targeted health education, improved BP measurement, individualized treatment or simplified treatment regimens through single-pill combinations. For physicians, increasing awareness of the burden of hypertension, as well as offering training on monitoring and optimal management and provision of the necessary time to collaboratively engage with patients would be useful. Healthcare systems should establish nationwide strategies for hypertension screening and management. Furthermore, there is an unmet need to implement more comprehensive BP measurements to optimize management. In conclusion, an integrative, patient-focused, multimodal multidisciplinary approach to the management of hypertension by clinicians, payers and policymakers, involving patients, is required to achieve long-term improvements in population health and cost-efficiency for healthcare systems.

Medication adherence with fixed-dose versus free-equivalent combination therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: We conducted a large-scale meta-analysis and subgroup analysis to compare the effect of fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy with that of free-equivalent combination (FEC) therapy on medication adherence. Methods: Studies published in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Embase up to May 2022 were identified according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The primary assessed outcomes were the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC). We investigated the probability of being adherent to the prescribed treatment (MPR or PDC ≥80%) or the average estimate of these two parameters. Studies reporting such results were included in this meta-analysis. The summary measures were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the weighted mean difference (MD) with 95% of confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. The quality of the cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Of the 1,814 screened studies, 61 met the predefined inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the results showed that compared to FEC, FDC significantly improved the medication compliance of patients by 1.29 times (95% CI:1.23-1.35, p < 0.00001). I² of 99% represent high heterogeneity across studies. The mean difference in medication adherence between FDC and FEC was 0.10 (95% CI: 0.06-0.14, p < 0.00001) with an I² estimate of 100%. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies that reported adherence outcomes according to disease type, period of evaluation and compliance indicators. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to exclude the results of low-quality studies, as well as studies in which there was ambiguity in the method of calculating the estimator. Conclusion: Analysis of the assessed parameters for the intention-to-treat and subgroup populations suggests that FDC can improve adherence to treatment and its advantages over FEC may increase over time. Further research is needed to better understand how medical conditions affect the impact of reduced pill burden on adherence, particularly in diseases other than cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Combinatorial approaches for novel cardiovascular drug discovery: a review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

In this article, authors report an inclusive discussion about the combinatorial approach for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and for counteracting the cardiovascular risk factors. The mentioned strategy was demonstrated to be useful for improving the efficacy of pharmacological treatments and in CVDs showed superior efficacy with respect to the classical monotherapeutic approach.

AREAS COVERED

According to this topic, authors analyzed the combinatorial treatments that are available on the market, highlighting clinical studies that demonstrated the efficacy of combinatorial drug strategies to cure CVDs and related risk factors. Furthermore, the review gives an outlook on the future perspective of this therapeutic option, highlighting novel drug targets and disease models that could help the future cardiovascular drug discovery.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of specifically designed and increasingly rational and effective drug combination therapies can therefore be considered the evolution of polypharmacy in cardiometabolic and CVDs. This approach can allow to intervene on multiple etiopathogenetic mechanisms of the disease or to act simultaneously on different pathologies/risk factors, using the combinations most suitable from a pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and toxicological perspective, thus finding the most appropriate therapeutic option.

Therapeutic Options for the Single Pill Combination of Lisinopril, Amlodipine and Rosuvastatin: a Systematic Review

Aim. To evaluate the effect of taking a single pill combination of amlodipine, lisinopril and rosuvastatin on blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in hypertensive patients with or without severe hypercholesterolemia.

Material and methods. Articles published in Russian were selected for analysis. Six articles that met the criteria for inclusion in a systematic review were found by searching the eLibrary database for the keyword "equamer". The results of 5 observational clinical studies were presented in these articles. The effectiveness of the fixed combination of amlodipine, lisinopril and rosuvastatin was assessed mainly by changes in the level of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, the concentration of LDL cholesterol. In addition, the effects of fixed-dose amlodipine, lisinopril, and rosuvastatin on central aortic pressure and its increment index, as well as carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, were studied in part of the studies. The effect of the fixed combination of amlodipine, lisinopril and rosuvastatin on blood pressure and LDL-C concentration, as well as on these additional indicators, in patients who had a coronavirus infection with severe lung damage was studied in one study.

Results. Evidence from a systematic review demonstrates the efficacy of single pill combination amlodipine, lisinopril and rosuvastatin in reducing blood pressure and LDL-C in a wide range of patients with different baseline risk of developing cardiovascular complications and different baseline levels of blood pressure and LDL-C.

Conclusion. The data obtained confirm the feasibility of more frequent prescription of the single pill combination of amlodipine, lisinopril and rosuvastatin in clinical practice for the treatment of hypertensive patients with high or moderate risk of developing cardiovascular diseases, including patients with concomitant hypercholesterolemia.

Single-Pill Combination to Improve Hypertension Treatment: Pharmaceutical Industry Development

Multiple illness is an increasingly common phenomenon. Its consequence is the need for polytherapy, which is particularly common among people suffering from arterial hypertension. The development of combined preparations (containing at least two API-active pharmaceutical ingredients) dedicated to the treatment of hypertension is a response to increased compliance, especially in elderly patients. In our work, we describe in particular the possibilities of using β-adrenergic receptors blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in combinations. The combinations of APIs are used as single pills in patients with arterial hypertension with concomitant diseases such as hyperlipidemia; blood coagulation problems and diabetes mellitus were also discussed successively. Pharmacoeconomic analysis for the API combinations shown is also presented. As a final conclusion, numerous benefits of using the combined preparations should be indicated, especially by the elderly and/or in patients with coexistence of other diseases.

The Number of Pills, Rather Than the Type of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitor, Predicts Ambulatory Blood Pressure Control in Essential Hypertensives on Triple Therapy: A Real-Life Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

We evaluated the prevalence and predictors of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control in patients taking a triple antihypertensive therapy (renin–angiotensin system inhibitor + calcium channel blocker + thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, in either free or fixed-dose combinations) containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB).

Methods

We performed an observational cross-sectional study on 520 consecutive patients with essential hypertension taking a stable triple therapy in whom 24-h ambulatory BP was evaluated. Both number of pills and antihypertensive treatment intensity (ATI), as possible pharmacological predictors of ambulatory BP control, were taken into account.

Results

A total of 189 (36.3%) patients were taking triple therapy with ACEi and 331 (63.7%) patients were taking triple therapy with ARB. Mean age was 62.7 ± 12.2 years. Patients on triple therapy with ACEi had a significantly lower ATI and took fewer antihypertensive pills than patients on triple therapy with ARB (22.2% of patients took a single-pill triple fixed-dose combination). Patients taking triple therapy with ACEi had higher prevalence of both 24-h (54.8% vs 44.0%; p = 0.019) and daytime BP control (61.8% vs 49.2%; p = 0.006) than patients taking triple therapy with ARB, even after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, smoking habit, type 2 diabetes mellitus, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and ATI [OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1–2.2) and OR 1.6 (95% CI 1.1–2.4), respectively]. However, these independent associations with ambulatory BP control were lost when the number of antihypertensive pills was included in the model.

Conclusion

The higher prevalence of ambulatory BP control found in patients taking a triple therapy with ACEi was affected by the lower number of antihypertensive pills taken, which was also the key predictor of ambulatory BP control in our study. This confirms the importance of fixed-dose combinations in the management of essential hypertension.

Impact of single-pill combination therapy on adherence, blood pressure control, and clinical outcomes: a rapid evidence assessment of recent literature

The 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension raised the need for evidence to support the use of single-pill combination (SPC) therapy in preference to free-dosed therapy for hypertension. This systematic rapid evidence assessment sought to determine if initiating SPC therapy improves adherence, blood pressure (BP) control and/or cardiovascular outcomes vs. initiation of free-dose combination therapy.

Effect of patient and treatment factors on persistence with antihypertensive treatment: A population-based study

Purpose

To analyze patterns of antihypertensive drug use among new users in a Southern European population, and identify patient- and treatment-related factors that influence persistence.

Methods

This is a retrospective observational study of new antihypertensive drug users aged ≥40 years in Aragón, Spain. Information on antihypertensive drugs (2014–2016) prescribed and dispensed at pharmacies via the public health system were collected from a regional electronic population-based pharmacy database. Persistence was assessed using the gap method. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were conducted to analyze patterns of use and factors that influence persistence.

Results

The 25,582 new antihypertensive drug users in Aragón during the study period were prescribed antihypertensive drugs in monotherapy (73.3%), fixed combination (13.9%), free combination (9.1%), or other (3.7%). One in five received antihypertensive drugs within 15 days of the prescription date, but not after. During the first year of follow-up, 38.6% of the study population remained persistent. The likelihood of treatment discontinuation was higher for participants who were male, aged ≥80 years, and received an antihypertensive drug in monotherapy compared with fixed combination.

Conclusion

Overall persistence with antihypertensive therapy was poor, and was influenced by the sex, age and type of therapy. Fixed combinations appear to be a good choice for initial therapy, especially in patients with a higher risk of discontinuation. Nonetheless, adverse drug effects and the patient’s preferences and clinical profile should be taken into account.

Does the Polypill Improve Patient Adherence Compared to Its Individual Formulations? A Systematic Review

Many patients, especially those with a high pill burden and multiple chronic illnesses, are less adherent to medication. In medication treatments utilizing polypills, this problem might be diminished since multiple drugs are fused into one formulation and, therefore, the therapy regimen is simplified. This systematic review summarized evidence to assess the effect of polypills on medication adherence. The following databases were searched for articles published between 1 January 2000, and 14 May 2019: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Medication adherence was the only outcome assessed, regardless of the method of measuring it. Sixty-seven original peer-reviewed articles were selected. Adherence to polypill regimens was significantly higher in 56 articles (84%) compared to multiple pill regimens. This finding was also supported by the results of 13 out of 17 selected previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses dealing with this topic. Adherence can be improved through the formulation of polypills, which is probably why the interest in researching them is growing. There are many polypills on the market, but the adherence studies so far focused mainly on a small range of medical conditions.

Antihypertensive Prescribing Pattern in Older Adults: Implications of Age and the Use of Dual Single-Pill Combinations

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension, if not appropriately treated, is associated with life-threatening complications.

AIMS

This study evaluated antihypertensive prescribing patterns in older adults (≥ 65 years) versus young adults based on the current guidelines with an emphasis on the use of dual single-pill combinations (SPCs).

METHODS

A nationwide audit of 8746 primary care prescriptions of hypertensive patients with comorbidities in Bahrain was performed.

RESULTS

Antihypertensive combination therapy was prescribed more often to older (77.1%) than young adults (68.6%; P < 0.0001) whereas SPCs were under-used (57.6% vs. 69.4%; P < 0.0001). Recommended dual SPCs, without/with a combination of a free-dose complementary antihypertensive agent, were significantly less often prescribed for the older adult as compared to young adult adults (45.1% vs. 62.99% and 35.97% vs. 46.72%; P < 0.0001), respectively. Unacceptable two- and three-drug combinations (including those with limited clinical evidence and unacceptable ones) were prescribed more often to older adults rather than to young ones (20.06% vs. 12.6%; and 56.5% vs. 46.8%; P < 0.0001), respectively. In both age groups, the top-three antihypertensive classes prescribed as monotherapy were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and β blockers.

CONCLUSION

The updated guidelines for hypertension treatment in older adults have had a limited impact on primary care practice in Bahrain. In both age groups, there was a high positive correlation between the number of antihypertensive drugs prescribed and prescribing unacceptable combinations. Unacceptable combinations comprising SPC-related antihypertensive therapy duplication were more common than those reported elsewhere. Introducing approved triple SPCs may discourage prescribing unacceptable antihypertensive drugs and their combinations that lack robust evidence.

Pharmacokinetic Interaction Among Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Hydrochlorothiazide After a Single Oral Administration in Healthy Male Subjects

PURPOSE

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, necessitating hypertension control. Antihypertensive drugs are more potent when administered in combinations of 2 or 3 different classes of drugs. One such therapy includes a combination of an angiotensin receptor blocker, a calcium channel blocker, and a diuretic. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction among telmisartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide.

METHODS

A randomized, open-label, 3-period, 6-sequence, 3-treatment, single-dose crossover study was conducted in healthy male subjects. Subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 sequences and one of the following treatments was administered in each period: treatment A, co-administration of one tablet of telmisartan 80 mg and one tablet of amlodipine 10 mg; treatment B, one tablet of hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg alone; and treatment C, co-administration of all 3 investigational products. Serial blood samples were collected up to 144 hours postdose. Plasma drug concentrations were measured by using LC/MS-MS. Pharmacokinetic parameters, including C_max and AUC_0-last, were determined by using noncompartmental analysis. The geometric least squares mean ratios and associated 90% CIs of log-transformed C_max and AUC_0-last for separate administration or co-administration were calculated to evaluate pharmacokinetic interactions.

FINDINGS

Twenty-seven subjects completed the study. The geometric least squares mean ratios and 90% CIs of C_max and AUC_0-last were 1.02 (0.85-1.21) and 1.04 (0.97-1.13) for telmisartan; 1.00 (0.95-1.04) and 0.95 (0.91-0.99) for amlodipine; and 0.88 (0.82-0.96) and 0.86 (0.82-0.90) for hydrochlorothiazide, respectively. No serious adverse events were recorded, and all reported adverse events were of mild intensity.

IMPLICATIONS

The pharmacokinetic parameters of telmisartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide when administered separately or co-administered were compared, and all the parameters met the criteria for pharmacokinetic equivalence. Combination therapy of these 3 drugs had no significant impact on the pharmacokinetic parameters of each drug. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03889145).

Fixed Versus Free Combinations Of Antihypertensive Drugs: Analyses Of Real-World Data Of Persistence With Therapy In Italy

PURPOSE

To analyse the pattern of use and cost of antihypertensive drugs in new users in an Italian population, and explore the patient/treatment factors associated with the risk of therapy discontinuation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, information was collected from a population-based electronic primary-care database. Persistence with medication use 1 year from therapy initiation was evaluated for each user using the gap method. Each new user was classified according to his/her pattern of use as: "continuer", "discontinuer" "switching" or "add-on". A Cox regression model was used to analyse the factors influencing therapy discontinuation. Primary-care costs comprised specialists' visits, diagnostic procedures and pharmacologic therapies.

RESULTS

Among 14,999 subjects included in persistence analyses, 55.1% of cases initially started on monotherapy were classified as discontinuers vs 36.5% of cases taking combination therapy (42.3% vs 32.7%, respectively, for free and fixed combinations, P < 0.01). Old age, high cardiovascular risk and being in receipt of fixed-combination therapy were associated with greater persistence. Overall, the primary-care cost/person/year of hypertension management was ~€95.3 (IQR, 144.9). The monotherapy cost was €88 per patient (IQR, 132.9), and that for combination therapy was €151±148.3. The median cost/patient with a fixed combination was lower than that for a free combination (€98.4 (IQR, 155.3) and €154.9 (IQR, 182.6), respectively).

CONCLUSION

The initial type of therapy prescribed influences persistence. Prescribing fixed combinations might be a good choice as initial therapy.

Prevalence and real-world assessment of central aortic blood pressure in adult patients with essential hypertension uncontrolled on single anti-hypertensive agents

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of high central aortic pressure (CAP) in Indian patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension while on anti-hypertensive monotherapy. Also, to determine correlation between brachial blood pressure (BBP) and CAP, and ascertain if it is impacted by anti-hypertensive drug class and patients' age.

METHODS

In this real-world, observational, prospective study, patients (30-70 years) with uncontrolled BBP (systolic BP [SBP] ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90 mmHg) were enrolled. Treatment was adjusted at Visit 1 (baseline), based on BBP and at treating physicians' discretion. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with uncontrolled central aortic SBP (>125 mmHg) at baseline. Secondary endpoints were comparison of BBP and CAP across drugs classes and age groups at baseline and Visit 2 (End-of-study, ∼8 weeks post-baseline), and proportion of patients with uncontrolled central SBP at end-of-study.

RESULTS

Of 2030 patients screened, 1949 patients reported at baseline and 1740 patients completed end-of-study visit. Central SBP was >125 mmHg for 84.3% patients at baseline, and 48% patients at end-of-study. Interestingly, at end-of-study, 6.6% patients still had uncontrolled brachial SBP and controlled central SBP, while 13.6% patients had uncontrolled central SBP and controlled brachial SBP. At both visits, brachial SBP and central SBP showed positive correlation across most drug classes and age groups. At baseline, ACE inhibitors showed better efficacy than other drug classes. At end-of-study, BP control was better with fixed-dose combinations, though free-drug combinations were more frequently prescribed.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of CAP along with BBP can be vital in management of hypertension.

CTRI REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTRI/2015/10/006302.

Cross-sectional survey evaluating blood pressure control ACHIEVEment in hypertensive patients treated with multiple anti-hypertensive agents in Belgium and Luxembourg

Objective

This study evaluates the actual blood pressure control rate and its estimation by general practitioners, the use of single-pill or free combinations, and the attitude towards single-pill combinations in primary care.

Methods

Cross-sectional observational survey in primary care between January 2015 and September 2016 in Belgium and Luxembourg. The participating general practitioners enrolled hypertensive patients taking at least 2 antihypertensive molecules (as fixed or free associations).

Results

742 general practitioners included a total of 8,006 patients, with a mean age of 66 ± 12 years. Systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure were respectively 141 ± 17 mmHg and 82 ± 10 mmHg (means ± SD). These patients had a blood pressure control rate of 45%, whereas it was estimated by general practitioners to be 60%. General practitioners with 11–25 years’ experience performed better than general practitioners with 36–51 years’ experience in the evaluation of blood pressure control. Combinations used were free in 39%, single-pill in 34% and mixed in 27% of the patients. Patients receiving single-pill combinations were younger than those treated with free combinations (63 ± 12 vs. 68 ± 12 years, p < 0.001), with fewer comorbidities (39 vs. 55%, p < 0.001). In patients treated solely with free pill associations, 66% of patient cases, general practitioners were willing to switch to a single-pill combination. The main reasons were improved adherence (76%) and better blood pressure control (64%).

Conclusion

In patients requiring at least two antihypertensive drugs, blood pressure control rate remains low and is overestimated by general practitioners. Free combinations remain largely used although many general practitioners seem willing to shift to single-pill combinations. Treatment simplification could improve adherence and blood pressure control rate, which has been shown to lead to reduced morbidity and mortality.