The efficacy and tolerability of 'polypills': meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Medication Adherence With Polypill in Cardiovascular Disease and High-Risk Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Involving 7364 Participants

Considering the worldwide mortality and morbidity of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), the necessity of using multiple pills due to the chronicity of this condition, and the importance of medication adherence in these patients, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the polypill effect on adherence in patients with established CVD and at high risk. To accomplish this review, we searched various databases to access grey literature and several electronic databases to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing polypills compared to individual pills from January 2000 to October 2022. The outcomes were primarily medication adherence, secondarily systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) serum level, and serious adverse events (SAEs). Ultimately, 2820 studies were detected and narrowed to 8 RCTs based on the eligibility criteria. In this study, involving 7364 patients, there was a significant improvement in medication adherence in the polypill group compared to the individual pills group (Risk Ratio [RR] = 1.29; [95%CI: 1.10; 1.50]). Out of secondary outcomes, SBP was significantly decreased (Mean Difference [MD] = -1.72 mmHg; [95%CI: -2.40; 1.03]), but LDL-C serum level (MD = -0.65 mg/dl; [95%CI: -4.47; 3.16]) and SAE (RR = 1.08; [95%CI: f0.98; 1.20]) did not have a notable difference in polypill compared to individual pills.

The Impact of Polypill on Adherence and Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Comprehensive Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Polypills, containing various combinations of medications for primary and secondary CVD prevention, have been developed to enhance medication adherence and reduce the healthcare burden of CVD. However, their effectiveness compared to usual care remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of polypills on cardiovascular risk factors, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and medication adherence.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search for large-scale randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing the effects of polypills versus usual care on CVD risk factors and events. Outcomes included changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP), lipid profiles, occurrence of MACE, and medication adherence.

RESULTS

The use of polypills led to a statistically significant yet clinically modest reduction in SBP (mean difference -1.47 mmHg, 95% CI: -2.50 to -0.44, p<0.01) and DBP (mean difference- 1.10 mmHg, 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.51, p< 0.01) compared to usual care. Polypills also showed a significant reduction in the risk of MACE (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77 -0.95, p<0.01). There was a non-significant reduction in LDL and HDL levels. Adherence to medication improved by up to 17% in polypill users compared to those on usual care (p < 0.01). A multivariable metaregression analysis suggested that adherence may be the underlying factor responsible for the observed effect of the polypills on blood pressure.

CONCLUSION

Polypills were found to significantly reduce SBP, DBP and MACE. An improvement in medication adherence was also observed among polypill users, which might be responsible for the significant reduction in SBP observed users. Future research might benefit from exploring a more personalized approach to the composition of polypills, which could reveal a more clinically significant impact of increased adherence on CVD outcomes.

Premature Death, Underlying Reasons, and Preventive Experiences in Iran: A Narrative Review

Premature mortality (PM) has emerged as a global health challenge. This is of eminent importance in low- and middle-income countries, where nearly three fourths of the deaths occur. The concerning issue is the early occurrence of fatal events in productive age. Fatal events before the age of 70 are called PM, which mainly result from cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Iran as a middle- income country greatly suffers from the cardiovascular burden, which accounts for almost 50% of all PM. Despite substantial success in reducing mortality due to communicable diseases across different age ranges, urbanization and pervasiveness of cardiovascular risk factors have increased the death rate in adults in recent years. Undoubtedly, such lifestyles have imposed heavy costs on the healthcare system; it is possible that PM reduction, as one of the fundamental elements of sustainable development goals defined by the World Health Organization (WHO), would not be reached by the due date. Recently, researchers have introduced a cost-effective fixed-dose drug combination, the so-called polypill, in order to attenuate the detrimental effects of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, as two strong cardiovascular risk factors. PolyIran and PolyIran-Liver studies are two pivotal clinical trials that revealed the feasibility of primary and secondary prevention of premature cardiovascular mortality, both in an urban and a rural population. In the present narrative review, we tried to present a comprehensive appraisal on PM status, its underlying reasons, and the impact of polypill strategy on PM prevention in Iran.

Polypill Therapy in Cardiovascular Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of polypill therapy in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disorders is still unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of polypill therapy in reducing cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated polypill therapy for cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. We included 18 RCTs with a total of 20,463 participants in our analysis. Pooled effect estimates were reported as Odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Polypill therapy was associated with a statistically significant reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) [OR: -0.33, 95% CI (-0.64, -0.03); P-value= 0.03], diastolic blood pressure (DBP) [OR: -0.70, 95% CI (-1.20, -0.21); P-value= 0.005], and total cholesterol level [OR: -1.25, 95% CI (-1.82, -0.68); P-value < 0.0001]. Polypill therapy also showed improved adherence [OR 2.18, 95% CI (1.47, 3.24); P-value= 0.0001]. However, there was no statistically significant benefit in the reduction of all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and LDL-c levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of polypill therapy is associated with a statistically significant reduction in SBP, DBP, and total cholesterol levels, as well as improved adherence. Further research is needed to determine its impact on hard clinical outcomes such as mortality and major cardiovascular events.

Frontiers of cardiovascular polypills: From atherosclerosis and beyond

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies (also known as polypills) remain underutilized in clinical practice despite over two decades of evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrating increased adherence to multidrug therapy, improved cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor control, and lower incidence of cardiovascular events. Evidence demonstrates that FDC-based implementation strategies can substantially complement and augment current strategies for CVD risk prevention globally. The next decade is likely to extend the frontier of cardiovascular FDC therapies, particularly given expected advances in FDC manufacturing technology and accessibility. FDC-based anti-hypertensive therapies are emerging as integral components of a pragmatic blood pressure lowering strategy. Cardiovascular FDCs are rapidly approaching its coming of age, transforming from heavily hyped research tools to pragmatic clinical instruments. This review evaluates the current evidence for cardiovascular FDCs, barriers to current use, and potential next generation advances.

Adoption and scale-up of the cardiovascular Polypill: a realist institutional analysis

Efforts to promote the adoption and scale-up of health system innovations must contend with the existing institutional context. But there are no commonly used frameworks to ensure that the insights of actors involved in such institutional efforts connect to one another. To test and modify a potential framework-the 'four-by-four' framework-we interviewed researcher-entrepreneurs involved in the unfolding story of the cardiovascular Polypill. The framework has four types/levels of institutions that affect adoption and scale-up: (1) informal institutions (L1, e.g. social norms), (2) formal institutions (L2, e.g. government policies and regulation), (3) organizational structures (L3, e.g. organizational boards and mission) and (4) everyday exchange (L4, e.g. service delivery), vis-à-vis four potential entrepreneurial strategies in response: (1) abide by existing institutions, (2) evade them, (3) alter them and/or (4) exit entrepreneurial action. Using this framework, we conducted a realist-informed analysis to understand how context (i.e. institutions) and mechanism (i.e. entrepreneurial strategies) influence each other to shape outcomes (i.e. adoption and scale-up). We found that researcher-entrepreneurs began with efforts to abide with existing institutions but encountered institutional obstacles at each level. Efforts to abide were followed by seeking to evade and/or alter unfavourable institutions, with greater success evading and/or altering lower (L3 and L4) than upper (L1 and L2) institutions. Exit considerations followed the failure of the evade or alter strategy. Shifts between strategies were propelled by 'learning'. The 'four-by-four' framework can be used as a scaffold to generate narratives of adoption or scale-up efforts, a sensitizing tool to prospectively map out contingencies and a matrix to synthesize narratives and experiences across multiple innovations or settings. Used in these ways, the 'four-by-four' framework can help to optimize the transferability and cumulation of insights on how to promote the adoption and scale-up of health system innovations.

Cost-effectiveness of fixed-dose combination pill (Polypill) in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality could be prevented via the population-based and cost-effective interventions. A fixed-dose combination treatment is known as the polypill for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD has come up in recent years.

PURPOSE

In order to provide recommendations for future economic evaluations, this systematic review aimed to review and assess the quality of published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of polypill in primary and secondary prevention of CVD, to identify the key drivers that impact the cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature, following the PRISMA guidelines, was undertaken in the electronic databases. Two researchers identified the relevant studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to quality assessment of included studies. ICERs value adjusted to 2020 United States Dollar using consumer price index (CPI) and purchasing power parity (PPP). Finally, data were summarized via a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

In total, 24 articles were identified based on the determined inclusion criteria. All studies met more than 50% of the CHEERS criteria. Adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios varied from 24$ to 31000$(2020 US dollar) among the studies. The polypill resulted in the improved adherence and quality of life, at a price equal to or lower than multiple monotherapies. This price is typically below the commonly accepted thresholds or cost saving in both, primary and secondary prevention of CVD. The main identified cost-effectiveness drivers were the polypill price, adherence, age, CVD risk, and drug combination.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found that the polypill seemed to be a cost-effective intervention in primary and secondary prevention of CVD. However, it is necessary to conduct more economic evaluation studies based on the long-term clinical trials with large populations. Also, studies should consider how the polypill interacts with other primary and secondary preventive strategies as a complementary health strategy.

Association of polypill therapy with cardiovascular outcomes, mortality, and adherence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Prior studies have reported improvements in population-level risk factor burden and cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes using polypills for CVD risk reduction. However, a comprehensive assessment of the impact of polypills on CVD outcomes, mortality, adherence, and side effects across different settings has not previously been reported. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining the association between polypill therapy and CVD outcomes published before February 2021. The primary outcome of interest was the risk of major adverse CVD events (MACE). Risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes were converted to log RR and pooled using a generic inverse variance weighted random-effects model. Data for continuous outcomes were pooled using random-effects modeling and presented as mean differences with 95% CIs. Eight studies representing 25,584 patients were included for analysis. In the overall pooled analysis, the use of polypills was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk of MACE (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02) and significant reductions in the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.81-1.00). The reductions in the risk of MACE with polypill use varied by baseline risk and nature of the study population (primary prevention vs. secondary prevention), with the most significant risk reduction among lower-risk cohorts, including within primary prevention populations [RR 0.70 (0.62, 0.79)]. Among measures of CVD risk factors, modest but significant reductions were observed for systolic and diastolic blood pressure [systolic: mean difference 1.99 mmHg (95% CI: -3.07 to -0.91); diastolic: mean difference 1.30 mmHg (95% CI: -2.42 to -0.19), but not for levels of total or low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol. Use of the polypill strategy significantly improved drug adherence (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.11-1.55) with no association between polypill use and rates of adverse events or drug discontinuation. The use of polypill formulations is associated with significant reductions in CVD risk factors and the risk of all-cause mortality and MACE, particularly in the low-risk and primary prevention population.

Effectiveness of Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy (Polypill) Versus Exercise to Improve the Blood-Lipid Profile: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both exercise and polypills are recommended treatments to improve the blood-lipid profile.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare head-to-head the effectiveness of polypill and exercise strategies in improving the blood-lipid profile in high-risk cardiovascular patients.

METHODS

We performed an electronic search in Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and SPORTDiscus, from inception to August 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effectiveness of exercise interventions or treatment with fixed-dose combination therapy (polypill) in improving the blood-lipid profile in adults with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or presenting at least one well recognized cardiovascular risk factor were included.

RESULTS

A total of 131 RCTs were included: 15 and 116 studies analyzing the effects of polypills and exercise, respectively, on blood-lipid levels. Both exercise and polypill strategies were effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) and total cholesterol (TC), but only exercise interventions improved high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) and triglyceride levels compared with the control group. The results of the network meta-analyses showed that the polypill without antiplatelet therapy was the most effective pharmacological treatment for improving the lipid profile, while aerobic interval exercise was the most effective exercise intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering that both polypills and exercise are effective in reducing LDL-c and TC but only exercise improves HDL-c and triglycerides, and that exercise provides further health benefits (e.g., increases in physical fitness and decreases in adiposity), it seems reasonable to recommend exercise as the first treatment option in dyslipidemia when the patient's general condition and symptoms allow it.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019122794.

The value of the polypill in cardiovascular disease: an Italian multidisciplinary Delphi panel consensus

The purpose of this work was to reach the consensus of a multidisciplinary and multistakeholder Italian panel on the value of polypill in cardiovascular disease, with respect to the clinical, technological, economic and organizational dimension. A three-step modified Delphi method was used to establish consensus. Eleven experts in the area of cardiology, pharmaceutical technology, general practice, hospital pharmacy, pharmacology, and health economics participated in the expert panel. To identify existing evidence concerning the value of polypill in the prevention of patients with cardiovascular disease, a systematic literature review was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines. In the first round, 22 statements were distributed to the panel. Panel members were asked to mark 'agree' or 'disagree' for each statement and provide any comments. The same voting method was again used for the second round. In the first round nine statements met consensus. In the second round, 10 statements reached consensus. Overall, consensus was reached for 19 statements representing five value polypill domains: clinical, technological, economic and organizational. During a final web meeting with all panel members consensus document open points were discussed. Panel members agreed to recognize polypill as effective in reducing cardiovascular events, blood pressure and lipids, cardiovascular risk and the weight of therapy, in therapeutic adherence improvement, in the absence of differences in bioavailability between drugs administered in fixed or free combinations and the better cost-effectiveness profile compared with standard care. This document represents a knowledge framework to inform decision makers of the value of polypill in cardiovascular prevention.

Frontiers of Upstream Stroke Prevention and Reduced Stroke Inequity Through Predicting, Preventing, and Managing Hypertension and Atrial Fibrillation: A Call to Action From the Value in Healthcare Initiative's Predict & Prevent Learning Collaborative

Stroke is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the United States. While age-adjusted stroke mortality was falling, it has leveled off in recent years due in part to advances in medical technology, health care options, and population health interventions. In addition to adverse trends in stroke-related morbidity and mortality across the broader population, there are sociodemographic inequities in stroke risk. These challenges can be addressed by focusing on predicting and preventing modifiable upstream risk factors associated with stroke, but there is a need to develop a practical framework that health care organizations can use to accomplish this task across diverse settings. Accordingly, this article describes the efforts and vision of the multi-stakeholder Predict & Prevent Learning Collaborative of the Value in Healthcare Initiative, a collaboration of the American Heart Association and the Robert J. Margolis, MD, Center for Health Policy at Duke University. This article presents a framework of a potential upstream stroke prevention program with evidence-based implementation strategies for predicting, preventing, and managing stroke risk factors. It is meant to complement existing primary stroke prevention guidelines by identifying frontier strategies that can address gaps in knowledge or implementation. After considering a variety of upstream medical or behavioral risk factors, the group identified 2 risk factors with substantial direct links to stroke for focusing the framework: hypertension and atrial fibrillation. This article also highlights barriers to implementing program components into clinical practice and presents implementation strategies to overcome those barriers. A particular focus was identifying those strategies that could be implemented across many settings, especially lower-resource practices and community-based enterprises representing broad social, economic, and geographic diversity. The practical framework is designed to provide clinicians and health systems with effective upstream stroke prevention strategies that encourage scalability while allowing customization for their local context.

Attributable Burden and Expenditure of Cardiovascular Diseases and Associated Risk Factors in Mexico and other Selected Mega-Countries

BACKGROUND

This paper describes the health and economic burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in Mexico and other mega-countries through a review of literature and datasets.

METHODS

Mega-countries with a low (Nigeria), middle (India), high (China/Brazil/Mexico), and very high (the U.S.A./Japan) human development index were included. The review was focused on prevalence of dyslipidemias and CVD economic impact and conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Public datasets of CVD indicators were explored.

RESULTS

Heterogeneity in economic data and limited information on dyslipidemias were found. Hypertriglyceridemia and hypercholesterolemia were higher in Mexico compared with other countries. Higher contribution of dietary risk factors for cardiovascular mortality and greater probability of dying prematurely from CVD were observed in developing countries. From 1990-2016, a greater decrease in cardiovascular mortality in developed countries was registered. In 2015, a CVD expense equivalent to 4% of total health expenditure was reported in Mexico. CVD ranked first in health expenditures in almost all these nations and the economic burden will remain significant for decades to come.

CONCLUSIONS

Resources should be assured to optimize CVD risk monitoring. Educational and medical models must be improved to enhance CVD diagnosis and the prescription and adherence to treatments. Long-term benefits could be attained by modifying the food system.

The role of single pill combination therapy in the prevention of ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of single pill combination therapy for stroke prevention remains to be established. We explored the perspectives of stroke survivors and healthcare professionals on single pill combination therapy for stroke prevention.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups involving stroke survivors and healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

We recruited six stroke survivors: four (67%) were female and mean age was 70 ± 12 years; and eight healthcare professionals (three Stroke Consultants, two Nurse Specialists, three General Practitioners). Improved adherence is the main perceived benefit of single pill combination therapy, although concerns exist surrounding less individualised care, unsuitability for use in the acute setting, reduced ability to titrate doses and difficulty identifying the cause of side effects. The clinical stability of patients, alongside single pill combination therapy efficacy, cost, side effect profile and evidence base for impact on risk factors and clinical outcomes are key factors influencing acceptability. Stroke survivors and healthcare professionals feel single pill combination therapy is most suitable for stable patients, although there is no evidence base for its use in this context.

CONCLUSION

Stroke healthcare professionals and stroke survivors are most amenable to using single pill combination therapy for stable patients, although its role in this context should be evaluated in studies with risk factor targets and clinical outcomes as endpoints.

Multi-level community interventions for primary stroke prevention: A conceptual approach by the World Stroke Organization

The increasing burden of stroke and dementia emphasizes the need for new, well-tolerated and cost-effective primary prevention strategies that can reduce the risks of stroke and dementia worldwide, and specifically in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

 This paper outlines conceptual frameworks of three primary stroke prevention strategies: (a) the “polypill” strategy; (b) a “population-wide” strategy; and (c) a “motivational population-wide” strategy.

 (a) A polypill containing generic low-dose ingredients of blood pressure and lipid-lowering medications (e.g. candesartan 16 mg, amlodipine 2.5 mg, and rosuvastatin 10 mg) seems a safe and cost-effective approach for primary prevention of stroke and dementia.

 (b) A population-wide strategy reducing cardiovascular risk factors in the whole population, regardless of the level of risk is the most effective primary prevention strategy. A motivational population-wide strategy for the modification of health behaviors (e.g. smoking, diet, physical activity) should be based on the principles of cognitive behavioral therapy. Mobile technologies, such as smartphones, offer an ideal interface for behavioral interventions (e.g. Stroke Riskometer app) even in LMICs.

 (c) Community health workers can improve the maintenance of lifestyle changes as well as the adherence to medication, especially in resource poor areas. An adequate training of community health workers is a key point.

Conclusion

An effective primary stroke prevention strategy on a global scale should integrate pharmacological (polypill) and lifestyle modifications (motivational population-wide strategy) interventions. Side effects of such an integrative approach are expected to be minimal and the benefits among individuals at low-to-moderate risk of stroke could be significant. In the future, pragmatic field trials will provide more evidence.

Clinical Impact of the Polypill for Cardiovascular Prevention in Latin America: A Consensus Statement of the Inter-American Society of Cardiology

The burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) is increasing, particularly in low-middle-income countries such as most of Latin America. This region presents specific socioeconomic characteristics, generating a high incidence of CVD despite efforts to control the problem. A consensus statement has been developed by Inter-American Society of Cardiology with the aim of answering some important questions related to CVD in this region and the role of the polypill in cardiovascular (CV) prevention as an intervention to address these issues. A multidisciplinary team composed of Latin American experts in the prevention of CVD was convened by the Inter-American Society of Cardiology and participated in the process and the formulation of statements. To characterize the prevailing situation in Latin American countries, we describe the most significant CV risk factors in the region. The barriers that impair the use of CV essential medications are also reviewed. The role of therapeutic adherence in CV prevention and how the polypill emerges as an effective strategy for optimizing adherence, accessibility, and affordability in the treatment of CVDs are discussed in detail. Clinical scenarios in which the polypill could represent an effective intervention in primary and secondary CV prevention are described. This initiative is expected to help professionals involved in the management of CVD and public health policymakers develop optimal strategies for the management of CVDs.

A protocol for an economic evaluation of a polypill in patients with established or at high risk of cardiovascular disease in a UK NHS setting: RUPEE (NHS) study

INTRODUCTION

The 'Use of a Multi-drug Pill in Reducing cardiovascular Events' (UMPIRE) trial was a randomised controlled clinical trial evaluating the impact of a polypill strategy on adherence to indicated medication in a population with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) of or at high risk thereof. The aim of Researching the UMPIRE Processes for Economic Evaluation in the National Health Service (RUPEE NHS) is to estimate the potential health economic impact of a polypill strategy for CVD prevention within the NHS using UMPIRE trial and other relevant data. This paper describes the design of a modelled economic evaluation of the impact of increased adherence to the polypill versus usual care among the UK UMPIRE participants.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

As recommended by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and the Society for Medical Decision Making modelling guidelines, a review of published CVD models was undertaken to identify the most appropriate modelling approach and structure. The review was carried out in the electronic databases, MEDLINE and EMBASE. 40 CVD models were identified from 57 studies, the majority of economic models were health state transition cohort models and individual-level simulation models. The findings were discussed with clinical experts to confirm the approach and structure. An individual simulation approach was identified as the most suitable method to capture the heterogeneity in the population at CVD risk. RUPEE-NHS will use UMPIRE trial data on adherence to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of the polypill strategy.

DISSEMINATION

The evaluation findings will be presented in open-access scientific and healthcare policy journals and at national and international conferences. We will also present findings to NHS policy makers and pharmaceutical companies.

Stroke Minimization through Additive Anti-atherosclerotic Agents in Routine Treatment (SMAART): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

There is an unprecedented rise in the prevalence of stroke in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Secondary prevention guidelines recommend that antihypertensive, statin and antiplatelet therapy be initiated promptly after ischemic stroke and adhered to in a persistent fashion to achieve optimal vascular-risk reduction. However, these goals are seldom realized in routine clinical care settings in SSA due to logistical challenges.

We seek to assess whether a polypill containing fixed doses of three antihypertensive agents, a statin and antiplatelet therapy taken once daily per os for 12 months among recent stroke survivors would result in carotid intimal thickness regression compared with usual care (UC).

Methods

The Stroke Minimization through Additive Anti-atherosclerotic Agents in Routine Treatment (SMAART) trial is a phase 2, open-label, evaluator-blinded trial involving 120 Ghanaian recent-ischemic-stroke survivors. Using a computer-generated sequence, patients will be randomly allocated 1:1 into either the intervention arm or UC. Patients in the intervention arm will receive Polycap DS® (containing aspirin, 100 mg; atenolol, 50 mg; ramipril, 5 mg; thiazide, 12.5 mg; simvastatin, 20 mg) taken as two capsules once daily. Patients in the UC will receive separate, individual secondary preventive medications prescribed at the physician’s discretion. Both groups will be followed for 12 months to assess changes in carotid intimal thickness regression – a surrogate marker of atherosclerosis – as primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures include adherence to therapy, safety and tolerability, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, functional status, depression and cognitive dysfunction.

Discussion

An efficacy-suggesting SMAART trial could inform the future design of a multi-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy of the polypill strategy for vascular risk moderation among stroke survivors in SSA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03329599. Registered on 11 February 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2564-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Use of cardiovascular polypills for the secondary prevention of cerebrovascular disease

INTRODUCTION

There is little control of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors in secondary prevention after an ischaemic stroke, in part due to a lack of adherence to treatment. The CV polypill may contribute to proper treatment adherence, which is necessary for CV disease prevention. This study aimed to establish how and in what cases the CV polypill should be administered.

METHODS

A group of 8 neurologists drafted consensus recommendations using structured brainstorming and based on their experience and a literature review.

RESULTS

These recommendations are based on the opinion of the participating experts. The use of the CV polypill is beneficial for patients, healthcare professionals, and the health system. Its use is most appropriate for atherothrombotic stroke, lacunar stroke, stroke associated with cognitive impairment, cryptogenic stroke with CV risk factors, and silent cerebrovascular disease. It is the preferred treatment in cases of suspected poor adherence, polymedicated patients, elderly people, patients with polyvascular disease or severe atherothrombosis, young patients in active work, and patients who express a preference for the CV polypill. Administration options include switching from individual drugs to the CV polypill, starting treatment with the CV polypill in the acute phase in particular cases, use in patients receiving another statin or an angiotensin ii receptor antagonist, or de novo use if there is suspicion of poor adherence. Nevertheless, use of the CV polypill requires follow-up on the achievement of the therapeutic objectives to make dose adjustments.

CONCLUSIONS

This document is the first to establish recommendations for the use of the CV polypill in cerebrovascular disease, beyond its advantages in terms of treatment adherence.

How to Improve Effectiveness and Adherence to Antihypertensive Drug Therapy: Central Role of Dihydropyridinic Calcium Channel Blockers in Hypertension

Essential hypertension is a complex clinical condition, characterized by multiple and concomitant abnormal activation of different regulatory and contra-regulatory pathophysiological mechanisms, leading to sustained increase of blood pressure (BP) levels. Asymptomatic rise of BP may, indeed, promote development and progression of hypertension-related organ damage, which in turn, increases the risk of major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. A progressive and independent relationship has been demonstrated between high BP levels and increased cardiovascular risk, even in the high-to-normal range. Conversely, evidence from randomized controlled clinical trials have independently shown that lowering BP to the recommended targets reduces individual cardiovascular risk, thus improving event-free survival and reducing the incidence of hypertension-related cardiovascular events. Despite these benefits, overall rates of BP control remain poor, worldwide. Currently available guidelines support a substantial equivalence amongst various antihypertensive drug classes. However, several studies have also reported clinically relevant differences among antihypertensive drugs, in terms of both BP lowering efficacy and tolerability/safety profile. These differences should be taken into account not only when adopting first-line antihypertensive therapy, but also when titrating or modulating combination therapies, with the aim of achieving effective and sustained BP control. This review will briefly describe evidence supporting the use of dihydropyridinic calcium channel blockers for the clinical management of hypertension, with a particular focus on barnidipine. Indeed, this drug has been demonstrated to be effective, safe and well tolerated in lowering BP levels and in reducing hypertension-related organ damage, thus showing a potential key role for improving the clinical management of hypertension.

Personalised Single-Pill Combination Therapy in Hypertensive Patients: An Update of a Practical Treatment Platform

Despite the improvements in the management of hypertension during the last three decades, it continues to be one of the leading causes of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide. Effective and sustained reductions in blood pressure (BP) reduce the incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure and cardiovascular death. However, the proportion of patients who achieve the recommended BP goal (< 140/90 mmHg) is persistently low, worldwide. Poor adherence to therapy, complex therapeutic regimens, clinical inertia, drug-related adverse events and multiple risk factors or comorbidities contribute to the disparity between the potential and actual BP control rate. Previously we published a practical therapeutic platform for the treatment of hypertension based on clinical evidence, guidelines, best practice and clinical experience. This platform provides a personalised treatment approach and can be used to improve BP control and simplify treatment. It uses long-acting, effective and well-tolerated angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) olmesartan, in combination with a calcium channel blocker amlodipine, and/or a thiazide diuretic hydrochlorothiazide. These drugs were selected based on the availability in most European Countries of single-pill, fixed formulations in a wide range of doses for both dual- and triple-drug combinations. The platform approach could be applied to other ARBs or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors available in single-pill, fixed-dose combinations. Here, we present an update, which takes into account the results of the recently published studies and extends the applicability of the platform to common conditions that are often neglected or poorly considered in clinical practice guidelines.

Closing the gap between evidence and practice in chronic kidney disease

There are major gaps between our growing knowledge of effective treatments for chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the delivery of evidence-based therapies to populations around the world. Although there remains a need for new, effective therapies, current evidence suggests that many patients with CKD are yet to fully realize the benefits of blood pressure-lowering drugs (with and without reducing proteinuria with renin-angiotensin system blockade), wider use of statins to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, and better glycemic control in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. There are many barriers to optimizing evidence-based nephrology care around the world, including access to health care, affordability of treatments, consumer attitudes and circumstances, the dissemination of appropriate knowledge, the availability of expertise and structural impediments in the delivery of health care. Further investment in implementation science that addresses the major barriers to effective care in a cost-effective manner could yield both local and global benefits.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of use of a polypill versus usual care or best practice for primary prevention in people at high risk of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials suggest that use of fixed-dose combination therapy ('polypills') can improve adherence to medication and control of risk factors of people at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to usual care, but cost-effectiveness is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a polypill is cost-effective compared to usual care and optimal guideline-recommended treatment for primary prevention in people already on statins and/or blood pressure lowering therapy.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to perform a cost-utility analysis with a one year time cycle and a 10 year time horizon to compare the polypill with usual care and optimal implementation of NICE Guidelines, using patient level data from a retrospective cross-sectional study. The model was run for ten age (40 years+) and gender-specific sub-groups on treatment for raised CVD risk with no history of CVD. Published sources were used to estimate impact of different treatment strategies on risk of CVD events.

RESULTS

A polypill strategy was potentially cost-effective compared to other strategies for most sub-groups ranging from dominance to up to £18,811 per QALY depending on patient sub-group. Optimal implementation of guidelines was most cost-effective for women aged 40-49 and men aged 75+. Results were sensitive to polypill cost, and if the annual cost was less than £150, this approach was cost-effective compared to the other strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

For most people already on treatment to modify CVD risk, a polypill strategy may be cost-effective compared with optimising treatment as per guidelines or their current care, as long as the polypill cost is sufficiently low.

Fixed-dose combination therapy for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death and disability worldwide, yet ASCVD risk factor control and secondary prevention rates remain low. A fixed-dose combination of blood pressure- and cholesterol-lowering and antiplatelet treatments into a single pill, or polypill, has been proposed as one strategy to reduce the global burden of ASCVD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of fixed-dose combination therapy on all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal ASCVD events, and adverse events. We also sought to determine the effect of fixed-dose combination therapy on blood pressure, lipids, adherence, discontinuation rates, health-related quality of life, and costs.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our previous searches in September 2016 of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Science, and DARE, HTA, and HEED. We also searched two clinical trials registers in September 2016. We used no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a fixed-dose combination therapy including at least one blood pressure-lowering and one lipid-lowering component versus usual care, placebo, or an active drug comparator for any treatment duration in adults 18 years old or older, with no restrictions on presence or absence of pre-existing ASCVD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted the data for this update. We evaluated risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed-effect models when heterogeneity was low (I2 < 50%) and random-effects models when heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥ 50%). We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In the initial review, we identified nine randomised controlled trials with a total of 7047 participants and four additional trials (n = 2012 participants; mean age range 62 to 63 years; 30% to 37% women) were included in this update. Eight of the 13 trials evaluated the effects of fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy in populations without prevalent ASCVD, and the median follow-up ranged from six weeks to 23 months. More recent trials were generally larger with longer follow-up and lower risk of bias. The main risk of bias was related to lack of blinding of participants and personnel, which was inherent to the intervention. Compared with the comparator groups (placebo, usual care, or active drug comparator), the effects of the fixed-dose combination treatment on mortality (FDC = 1.0% versus control = 1.0%, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.89,  I2 = 0%, 5 studies, N = 5300) and fatal and non-fatal ASCVD events (FDC = 4.7% versus control = 3.7%, RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.66, I2 = 0%, 6 studies, N = 4517) were uncertain (low-quality evidence). The low event rates for these outcomes and indirectness of evidence for comparing fixed-dose combination to usual care versus individual drugs suggest that these results should be viewed with caution. Adverse events were common in both the intervention (32%) and comparator (27%) groups, with participants randomised to fixed-dose combination therapy being 16% (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.25, 11 studies, 6906 participants, moderate-quality evidence) more likely to report an adverse event . The mean differences in systolic blood pressure between the intervention and control arms was -6.34 mmHg (95% CI -9.03 to -3.64, 13 trials, 7638 participants, moderate-quality evidence). The mean differences (95% CI) in total and LDL cholesterol between the intervention and control arms were -0.61 mmol/L (95% CI -0.88 to -0.35, 11 trials, 6565 participants, low-quality evidence) and -0.70 mmol/L (95% CI -0.98 to -0.41, 12 trials, 7153 participants, moderate-quality evidence), respectively. There was a high degree of statistical heterogeneity in comparisons of blood pressure and lipids (I2 ≥ 80% for all) that could not be explained, so these results should be viewed with caution. Fixed-dose combination therapy improved adherence to a multidrug strategy by 44% (26% to 65%) compared with usual care (4 trials, 3835 participants, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of fixed-dose combination therapy on all-cause mortality or ASCVD events are uncertain. A limited number of trials reported these outcomes, and the included trials were primarily designed to observe changes in ASCVD risk factor levels rather than clinical events, which may partially explain the observed differences in risk factors that were not translated into differences in clinical outcomes among the included trials. Fixed-dose combination therapy is associated with modest increases in adverse events compared with placebo, active comparator, or usual care but may be associated with improved adherence to a multidrug regimen. Ongoing, longer-term trials of fixed-dose combination therapy will help demonstrate whether short-term changes in risk factors might be maintained and lead to expected differences in clinical events based on these changes.

Cost-effectiveness of the polypill versus risk assessment for prevention of cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVE

There is an international trend towards recommending medication to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals at increasingly lower cardiovascular risk. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a population approach with a polypill including a statin (simvastatin 20 mg) and three antihypertensive agents (amlodipine 2.5 mg, losartan 25 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg) and periodic risk assessment with different risk thresholds.

METHODS

We developed a microsimulation model for lifetime predictions of CVD events, diabetes, and death in 259 146 asymptomatic UK Biobank participants aged 40-69 years. We assessed incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for polypill scenarios with the same combination of agents and doses but differing for starting age, and periodic risk assessment with 10-year CVD risk thresholds of 10% and 20%.

RESULTS

Restrictive risk assessment, in which statins and antihypertensives were prescribed when risk exceeded 20%, was the optimal strategy gaining 123 QALYs (95% credible interval (CI) -173 to 387) per 10 000 individuals at an extra cost of £1.45 million (95% CI 0.89 to 1.94) as compared with current practice. Although less restrictive risk assessment and polypill scenarios prevented more CVD events and attained larger survival gains, these benefits were offset by the additional costs and disutility of daily medication use. Lowering the risk threshold for prescription of statins to 10% was economically unattractive, costing £40 000 per QALY gained. Starting the polypill from age 60 onwards became the most cost-effective scenario when annual drug prices were reduced below £240. All polypill scenarios would save costs at prices below £50.

CONCLUSIONS

Periodic risk assessment using lower risk thresholds is unlikely to be cost-effective. The polypill would become cost-effective if drug prices were reduced.

Practical Applications for Single Pill Combinations in the Cardiovascular Continuum

Despite the availability of new drugs and devices, the treatment of cardiovascular disease remains suboptimal. Single-pill combination therapy offers a number of potential advantages. It can combine different classes of drugs to increase efficacy while mitigating the risks of treatment-related adverse events, reduce pill burden, lower medical cost, and improve patient adherence. Furthermore, in hypertension, single pill combinations include standard to lower doses of each drug than would be necessary to achieve goals with monotherapy, which may explain their better tolerability compared with higher dose monotherapy. Combination therapy is now established in the treatment of hypertension. In ischaemic heart disease, the concept of a preventative polypill has been studied, but its benefits have not been established conclusively. However, the combination of ivabradine and beta-blockers has proven efficacy in patients with stable angina pectoris. This combination has also demonstrated benefits in patients with chronic heart failure.

Polypills for the prevention of Cardiovascular diseases

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remain the leading cause of death worldwide with an estimated 17.5 million deaths per year. Since its initial conception over a decade ago, the use of cardiovascular polypills has gained increasing momentum as a strategy to lower risk factor levels and prevent CVD. Several new data have emerged including the recent publication of the first outcomes trial using polypills. Areas covered: In this review, the authors summarize the current literature on the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of polypills for primary and secondary prevention of CVD, describe the current controversies in this field, and identify important areas for future research. The authors searched PubMed, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception till 25 June 2016 using the search term 'polypill.' Expert opinion: Cardiovascular polypills containing aspirin, statin, and one or more anti-hypertensive medications, along with lifestyle interventions, represent an attractive, safe, and cost-effective strategy for primary and secondary prevention of CVD. Future research efforts should focus on identifying patients who will benefit the most from the use of polypills, marketing several polypills with different components and doses, and developing novel regulatory strategies for making polypills more readily available in all countries worldwide.

Could patents interfere with the development of a cardiovascular polypill?

Background

The Wellcome Trust, the World Health Organization, and cardiologists have advocated for the idea of a “polypill” containing multiple cardiovascular drugs to be co-formulated into a single pill for over a decade. Some cardiologists have asserted that the drugs commonly considered for inclusion into such a polypill are older and therefore free of patent protection. We tested this assertion. This project was requested by the World Heart Federation (WHF).

Methods, data and materials

Two cardiologists from the WHF provided a list of 48 cardiovascular drugs for evaluation. We designated the United States and Canada as the base jurisdictions for this patent study. We linked patent data from these countries’ national medicine patent registers to patent information in over 96 other countries using Derwent and INPADOC via Thomson Innovation. We expanded our study beyond the aforementioned data linkage through a systematic search of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s PatentScope, which was based primarily upon the drugs’ active ingredient names.

Results

In the United States and Canada, eight of the drugs were only available in the patent-protected, brand name formulation in one or both countries. Another 21 drugs had relevant patents, but generic equivalents were nevertheless available. Only 19 drugs (40 %) appeared entirely post-patent. Broadening the co-formulation searches globally, the overwhelming majority of drugs (40/48) were mentioned in patent applications for cardiovascular drug combinations.

Conclusion

The assertion that most of these cardiovascular drugs are post-patent is accurate, but only in the sense that many of the original patents on these active ingredients have expired and that generic alternatives are usually available. The landscape of patents covering novel (co-) formulations is far more complex, however. Most research and development for cardiovascular combination medicines are likely to be undertaken by companies whose original patents on the active ingredient will soon expire or have recently expired. Cardiologists looking to accelerate polypill development may consider approaching such companies to partner.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-016-0997-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Triple Combination Therapy for Global Cardiovascular Risk: Atorvastatin, Perindopril, and Amlodipine

Statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) have markedly changed the clinical progression of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The goal of this paper is to review the rationale and evidence for combining these three drug classes in hypertensive patients with hypercholesterolemia or CAD. Data sources include a literature search for publications on the use of a statin combined with various antihypertensive drugs in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia or stable CAD. Hypercholesterolemia and hypertension constitute major physiological risk factors of ischemic heart disease. Current guidelines recommend a global approach to risk management, using agents that address as many risk factors as possible. Dual combination therapies are an important component of guideline-recommended therapy in hypertension. Our review of the literature indicates that triple therapy with a statin, ACE inhibitor, and CCB is associated with a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events. For example, a post hoc analysis in 1056 patients with stable CAD participating in the EUROPA trial indicated that the addition of perindopril to a CCB and a lipid-lowering agent was associated with a 46 % reduction in the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and resuscitated cardiac arrest (p = 0.023). In addition, single pill formulations are known to result in better adherence to the treatment. Single-pill formulations that combine a statin, an ACE inhibitor, and a CCB appear to offer an effective approach to the management of global cardiovascular risk.

Improving cardiovascular protection: focus on a cardiovascular polypill

Lack of adherence may explain, at least in part, the poor cardiovascular risk factors control observed in patients with ischemic heart disease, increasing the risk of developing new events. Polypill improves medication adherence, which may actually reduce blood pressure and LDL cholesterol compared with the drugs given separately. The fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg + ramipril 2.5, 5, or 10 mg + either simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg is the unique cardiovascular polypill that has been registered in 22 countries worldwide. The polypill-containing simvastatin has been specifically tested in a clinical trial including only patients with ischemic heart disease. The FOCUS study showed that patients treated with the polypill showed a higher adherence compared with those receiving separate medications.

The Stroke Prevention Programme: a programme of research to inform optimal stroke prevention in primary care

Background

The management of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors in community populations is suboptimal. The aim of this programme was to explore the role of three approaches [use of a ‘polypill’; self-management of hypertension; and more intensive targets for blood pressure (BP) lowering after stroke] to improve prevention of CV disease (CVD) in the community.

Research questions

(1) Is it more cost-effective to titrate treatments to target levels of cholesterol and BP or to use fixed doses of statins and BP-lowering agents (polypill strategy)? (2) Will telemonitoring and self-management improve BP control in people on treatment for hypertension or with a history of stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) in primary care and are they cost-effective? (3) In people with a history of stroke/TIA, can intensive BP-lowering targets be achieved in a primary care setting and what impact will this have on health outcomes and cost-effectiveness?

Design

Mixed methods, comprising three randomised controlled trials (RCTs); five cost-effectiveness analyses; qualitative studies; analysis of electronic general practice data; a screening study; a systematic review; and a questionnaire study.

Setting

UK general practices, predominantly from the West Midlands and the east of England.

Participants

Adults registered with participating general practices. Inclusion criteria varied from study to study.

Interventions

A polypill – a fixed-dose combination pill containing three antihypertensive medicines and simvastatin – compared with current practice and with optimal implementation of national guidelines; self-monitoring of BP with self-titration of medication, compared with usual care; and an intensive target for systolic BP of < 130 mmHg or a 10 mmHg reduction if baseline BP is < 140 mmHg, compared with a target of < 140 mmHg.

Results

For patients known to be at high risk of CVD, treatment as per guidelines was the most cost-effective strategy. For people with unknown CV risk aged ≥ 50 years, offering a polypill is cost-effective [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £8115 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)] compared with a strategy of screening and treating according to national guidelines. Both results were sensitive to the cost of the polypill. Self-management in people with uncontrolled hypertension led to a 5.4 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4 to 8.5 mmHg] reduction in systolic BP at 1 year, compared with usual care. It was cost-effective for men (ICER of £1624 per QALY) and women (ICER of £4923 per QALY). In people with stroke and other high-risk groups, self-management led to a 9.2 mmHg (95% CI 5.7 to 12.7 mmHg) reduction in systolic BP at 1 year compared with usual care and dominated (lower cost and better outcome) usual care. Aiming for the more intensive BP target after stroke led to a 2.9 mmHg (95% CI 0.2 to 5.7 mmHg) greater reduction in BP and dominated the 140 mmHg target.

Conclusions

Potential for a polypill needs to be further explored in RCTs. Self-management should be offered to people with poorly controlled BP. Management of BP in the post-stroke population should focus on achieving a < 140 mmHg target.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17585681, ISRCTN87171227 and ISRCTN29062286.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme. Additional funding was provided by the NIHR National School for Primary Care Research, the NIHR Career Development Fellowship and the Department of Health Policy Research Programme.

Estimated cardiovascular relative risk reduction from fixed-dose combination pill (polypill) treatment in a wide range of patients with a moderate risk of cardiovascular disease

AIMS

Recent data indicate that fixed-dose combination (FDC) pills, polypills, can produce sizeable risk factor reductions. There are very few published data on the consistency of the effects of a polypill in different patient populations. It is unclear for example whether the effects of the polypill are mainly driven by the individuals with high individual risk factor levels. The aim of the present study is to examine whether baseline risk factor levels modify the effect of polypill treatment on low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, blood pressure (BP), calculated cardiovascular relative risk reduction and adverse events.

METHODS

This paper describes a post-hoc analysis of a randomised, placebo-controlled trial of a polypill (containing aspirin 75 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, lisinopril 10 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg) in 378 individuals without an indication for any component of the polypill, but who had an estimated five-year risk for cardiovascular disease ≥7.5%. The outcomes considered were effect modification by baseline risk factor levels on change in LDL-cholesterol, systolic BP, calculated cardiovascular relative risk reduction and adverse events.

RESULTS

The mean LDL-cholesterol in the polypill group was 0.9 mmol/l (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-1.0) lower compared with the placebo group during follow-up. Those with a baseline LDL-cholesterol >3.6 mmol/l achieved a greater absolute LDL-cholesterol reduction with the polypill compared with placebo, than patients with an LDL-cholesterol ≤3.6 mmol/l (-1.1 versus -0.6 mmol/l, respectively). The mean systolic BP was 10 mm Hg (95% CI: 8-12) lower in the polypill group. In participants with a baseline systolic BP >135 mm Hg the polypill resulted in a greater absolute systolic BP reduction with the polypill compared with placebo, than participants with a systolic BP ≤ 135 mm Hg (-12 versus -7 mm Hg, respectively). Calculated from individual risk factor reductions, the mean cardiovascular relative risk reduction was 48% (95% CI: 43-52) in the polypill group. Both baseline LDL-cholesterol and estimated cardiovascular risk were significant modifiers of the estimated cardiovascular relative risk reduction caused by the polypill. Adverse events did not appear to be related to baseline risk factor levels or the estimated cardiovascular risk.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the effect of a cardiovascular polypill on risk factor levels is modified by the level of these risk factors. Groups defined by baseline LDL-cholesterol or systolic BP had large differences in risk factor reductions but only moderate differences in estimated cardiovascular relative risk reduction, suggesting also that patients with mildly increased risk factor levels but an overall raised cardiovascular risk benefit from being treated with a polypill.

Effectiveness of fixed dose combination medication ('polypills') compared with usual care in patients with cardiovascular disease or at high risk: A prospective, individual patient data meta-analysis of 3140 patients in six countries

AIMS

To conduct a prospective, individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing a polypill-based approach with usual care in high risk individuals.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Three trials comparing polypill-based care with usual care in individuals with CVD or high calculated cardiovascular risk contributed IPD. Primary outcomes were self-reported adherence to combination therapy (anti-platelet, statin and ≥ two blood pressure (BP) lowering agents), and difference in mean systolic BP (SBP) and LDL-cholesterol at 12 months. Analyses used random effects models. Among 3140 patients from Australia, England, India, Ireland, New Zealand and The Netherlands (75% male, mean age 62 years), median follow-up was 15 months. At baseline, 84%, 87% and 61% respectively were taking a statin, anti-platelet agent and at least two BP lowering agents. At 12 months, compared to usual care, participants in the polypill arm had higher adherence to combination therapy (80% vs. 50%, RR 1.58; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.90; p < 0.001), lower SBP (-2.5 mmHg; 95% CI, -4.5 to -0.4; p = 0.02) and lower LDL-cholesterol (-0.1 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.0; p = 0.04). Baseline treatment levels were a major effect modifier for adherence and SBP (p-homog < 0.0001 and 0.02 respectively) with greatest improvements seen among those under-treated at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypill therapy significantly improved adherence, SBP and LDL-cholesterol in high risk patients compared with usual care, especially among those who were under-treated at baseline.

Integrated preclinical cardiovascular prevention: a new paradigm to face growing challenges of cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) still represents the leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Despite considerable improvements in the prognosis of CVD and the significant reduction of CVD mortality obtained during the past half century, patients developing CVD, even though satisfactorily treated, still carry coronary artery disease and remain at risk for advanced CVD. Thus, the healthcare and socioeconomic burden linked to CVD remains high. As a result, more effective CVD prevention strategies remain crucial. 'Population strategies' and 'high-risk' approaches both have limitations and have often been viewed as alternative solutions. This persistent dualism could be overcome with the promotion of integrated prevention strategies based on a systematic evaluation of the total risk of disease, at both a population and an individual level. New approaches are also needed to reach people earlier in the course of the vascular disease and, possibly, to prevent risk factors and reduce CVD clinical manifestation.

Calcium channel blockers and hypertension

Effective treatment of high blood pressure (BP) represents a key strategy for reducing the burden of hypertension-related cardiovascular and renal diseases. In spite of these well-established concepts, hypertension remains poorly controlled worldwide. In order to improve BP control in patients with hypertension, several interventions have been proposed, among which (1) preferred use of more effective, sustained, and well-tolerated antihypertensive drug aimed to ensure adherence to prescribed medications and (2) extensive use of rational, integrated, and synergistic combination therapies, even as first-line strategy, aimed to achieve the recommended BP targets. Within the possible antihypertensive drug classes currently available for the clinical management of hypertension, both in monotherapy and in combination therapy, drugs inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) have demonstrated to be effective and safe in lowering BP levels and achieving the recommended BP targets with a good tolerability profile. In particular, CCBs have been one of the most widely used classes of antihypertensive agents in the last 20 years, based on their effectiveness in reducing BP levels, good tolerability, and abundant evidence on reducing cardiovascular and renal consequences of hypertension. This article provides an updated overview of the evidence supporting the use of CCBs-based antihypertensive regimen, both in monotherapy and in combination therapies with different classes of antihypertensive drugs.