Cost-effectiveness analysis: controlled-release nifedipine and valsartan combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension: the adalat CR and valsartan cost-effectiveness combination (ADVANCE-Combi) study

Drug in Adhesive Transdermal Formulation of Valsartan and Nifedipine: Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics in Rats

Background:

The increasing complications associated with hypertension often require a combination of two or more drugs acting through different routes to counter the elevated blood pressure.

Objective:

The present investigation envisaged at preparing and evaluating a transdermal formulation containing gelled microemulsion drug in adhesive (DIA) patch for simultaneous systemic delivery of valsartan and nifedipine aimed at effective management of hypertension.

Methods:

An optimized microemulsion was prepared by using Captex® 500 (7.34% w/w), Capmul® MCM (4.24% w/w), Acrysol EL 135 (24.43% w/w), Transcutol P® (5% w/w) and water (58.9% w/w). Gelling was contributed by polyvinylpyrrolidone K 90F and polyethyleneimine where the latter also conferred skin adhesion properties to the patch. DIA patches were evaluated for in vitro drug release as well as in vivo pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in rats.

Results:

In vitro permeation of nifedipine or valsartan from the selected DIA patch was 10.67-fold and 1.25-fold higher as compared to their aqueous dispersions. The relative bioavailability of nifedipine was 1.34 and that of valsartan was 2.18 from this DIA patch with respect to the oral administration of their aqueous suspension.

Conclusion:

Transdermal delivery of either drug alone was not effective in reducing methyl prednisolone acetate-induced hypertension, whereas, simultaneous transdermal delivery of both drugs from DIA patch effectively maintained systolic blood pressure at a normal level in these rats for 20 h.

Early intervention of long-acting nifedipine GITS reduces brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity and improves arterial stiffness in Chinese patients with mild hypertension: a 24-week, single-arm, open-label, prospective study

Background

Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) is used to treat angina and hypertension. The authors aimed to study the early intervention impact on arterial stiffness and pulse wave velocity (PWV) independent of its blood-pressure-(BP) lowering effect in mild hypertensive patients.

Methods

This single-center, single-arm, open-label, prospective, Phase IV study recruited patients with mild hypertension and increased PWV from December 2013 to December 2014 (N=138; age, 18–75 years; systolic blood pressure, 140–160 mmHg; diastolic BP, 90–100 mmHg; increased brachial–ankle pulse wave velocity [baPWV, ≥12 m/s]). Nifedipine GITS (30 mg/d) was administered for 24 weeks to achieve target BP of <140/90 mmHg. The dose was uptitrated at 60 mg/d in case of unsatisfactory BP reduction after 4 weeks. Primary study end point was the change in baPWV after nifedipine GITS treatment. Hemodynamic parameters (office BP, 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring, and heart rate and adverse events) were evaluated at baseline and followed-up at 2, 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 weeks.

Results

Majority of patients (n=117; 84.8%) completed the study. baPWV decreased significantly at 4 weeks compared with baseline (1,598.87±239.82 vs 1,500.89±241.15 cm/s, P<0.001), was stable at 12 weeks (1,482.24±215.14 cm/s, P<0.001), and remained steady through 24 weeks (1,472.58±205.01 cm/s, P<0.001). Office BP reduced from baseline to week 4 (154/95 vs 136/85 mmHg) and remained steady until 24 weeks. Nifedipine GITS significantly decreased 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (P<0.001) after 24 weeks from baseline. Mean arterial pressure and pulse pressure were lowered significantly after 4, 12, and 24 weeks of treatment (P<0.001). These changes in baPWV were significantly correlated with changes in systolic blood pressure, diastolic BP, and mean arterial pressure (P<0.05), but not with changes in pulse pressure (P>0.05). There were no other drug-related serious adverse events.

Conclusion

Nifedipine GITS was considerably effective in reducing baPWV and BP, indicating improvement in arterial stiffness as early as 4 weeks.

Blood pressure control and satisfaction of hypertensive patients following a switch to combined drugs of an angiotensin receptor blocker and a calcium channel blocker in clinical practice of nephrology

Background

Combination drugs containing an angiotensin receptor blocker and a calcium channel blocker have been widely commercialized in recent years, and their advantages, such as improvements in adherence, and reductions in medication costs, have been greatly emphasized. However, the actual situations and the impact of switching to combination drugs in clinical practice of nephrology are not fully understood.

Methods

This study was conducted in outpatients of nephrology who received antihypertensive medicines, and who switched to combination drugs. Changes in the potency of the antihypertensive drugs, and blood pressure were examined retrospectively before and after changing treatments. In addition, the study also involved patients’ questionnaire, which examined changes in blood pressure at home, the presence or absence of missed doses, the impact on medication-related expenses, and the level of patients’ satisfaction with regard to combination drugs.

Results

Survey results from 90 participants revealed that changing to combination drugs resulted in a reduction of missed doses, a decrease in blood pressure measured in an outpatient setting, and a reduction in medication-related expenses in total patients, non-chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, and CKD patients.

Conclusion

Our study shows that switching to combination antihypertensive drugs resulted in an improvement in adherence and a reduction in medication-related expenses, and revealed that patient satisfaction was high. Combination drugs for hypertensive patients may be beneficial in both medical and economical viewpoints.

Efficacies of Controlling Morning Blood Pressure and Protecting the Kidneys by Treatment With Valsartan and Nifedipine CR or Valsartan and Amlodipine (MONICA Study)

Background

It is controversial whether a single-pill fixed-dose combination of angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker and calcium channel blocker (CCB) is effective for all types of hypertension.

Methods

Thirty-five patients with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) under treatment with valsartan 80 mg/day or amlodipine 5 mg/day were enrolled. They were randomly divided into two treatment groups: a single-pill fixed-dose combination of valsartan 80 mg/day and amlodipine 5 mg/day in the morning (VA group), or valsartan 80 mg/day in the morning and nifedipine CR 20 mg/day at night (VN group), and treated for 16 weeks. If the patient did not reach the target office BP at 8 weeks, they received double doses of CCBs.

Results

In the VN group, morning diastolic BP was significantly lower than the respective values in the VA group at 8 weeks. The percentage of patients who required a double dose of CCB in the VN group was significantly lower than that in the VA group. At 16 weeks, the BP levels in both groups were significantly reduced. Urinary albumin/creatinine at 16 weeks was significantly less than that at 0 weeks in the VN group.

Conclusion

Combination therapy with valsartan and nifedipine CR may help to control morning BP and protect the kidneys.

Evolutionary cost analysis of valsartan initiation among patients with hypertension: a time series approach

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the evolutionary impact of valsartan initiation on medical costs.

METHODS

A retrospective time series study design was used with a large, US national commercial claims database for the period of 2004-2008. Hypertensive patients who initiated valsartan between the ages of 18 and 63, and had continuous enrollment for 24-month pre-initiation period and 24-month post-initiation period were selected. Patients' monthly medical costs were calculated based on individual claims. A novel time series model was devised with monthly medical costs as its dependent variables, autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) as its stochastic components, and four indicative variables as its decomposed interventional components. The number of post-initiation months before a cost-offset point was also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 18,269) had mean age of 53 at the initiation date, and 53% of them were female. The most common co-morbid conditions were dyslipidemia (52%), diabetes (24%), and hypertensive complications (17%). The time series model suggests that medical costs were increasing by approximately $10 per month (p < 0.01) before the initiation, and decreasing by approximately $6 per month (p < 0.01) after the initiation. After the 4th post-initiation month, medical costs for patients with the initiation were statistically significantly lower (p < 0.01) than forecasted medical costs for the same patients without the initiation.

LIMITATIONS

The study has its limitations in data representativeness, ability to collect unrecorded clinical conditions, treatments, and costs, as well as its generalizability to patients with different characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercially insured hypertensive patients experienced monthly medical cost increase before valsartan initiation. Based on our model, the evolutionary impact of the initiation on medical costs included a temporary cost surge, a gradual, consistent, and statistically significant cost decrease, and a cost-offset point around the 4th post-initiation month.