Blood pressure control with a single-pill combination of indapamide sustained-release and amlodipine in patients with hypertension: the EFFICIENT study

Contribution of single-pill combinations in the management of hypertension: perspectives from China, Europe and the USA

Uncontrolled hypertension is associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical vascular outcomes and death. Hypertension management guidelines from China and the USA recommend initiation of antihypertensive pharmacotherapy with a single drug for patients without severe hypertension at presentation. Current European hypertension guidelines take a different approach and recommend the use of combination therapy from the time of diagnosis of hypertension for most patients. This article reviews the burden of hypertension in these countries and summarises the evidence base for the use of antihypertensive combination therapy contained within a single tablet (single-pill combinations, SPC). Typically, half or less of populations from China, Europe and the USA who were found to have hypertension were aware of their condition, less than half of those receiving treatment, and fewer still achieved adequate blood pressure (BP) control. The reasons for the unaddressed burden of hypertension are complex and multifactorial, with contributions from factors related to patients, healthcare providers and healthcare systems. The use of SPCs of antihypertensive therapies helps to optimise adherence with therapy and is likely to result in superior BP control. There is a strong evidence base to support current European guideline recommendations on the initiation of antihypertensive therapy with SPCs for the majority of people with hypertension.

Effectiveness of indapamide/amlodipine single-pill combination in patients with isolated systolic hypertension: post-hoc analysis of the ARBALET study

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the effectiveness of treatment with an indapamide/amlodipine single-pill combination (SPC) in outpatients with uncontrolled isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) aged over 55 years in real-life clinical practice.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis of the subgroup of patients with ISH from ARBALET, a 3-month, multicenter, observational, open-label study conducted in Russia among patients with grade I or II hypertension who were either uncontrolled on previous antihypertensive treatment or treatment-naïve. The effectiveness of indapamide/amlodipine SPC was assessed by the change in office systolic blood pressure (SBP) and the rate of target SBP (< 140 mmHg) achievement at 2 weeks, 1 month and 3 months, in four age groups: 55-59 years, 60-69 years, 70-79 years, and 80 years or older.

RESULTS

The ARBALET study recruited 2217 patients, of whom 626 had ISH and were included in this post-hoc analysis (mean age 66.1 ± 7.8 years; 165 men [26.4%] and 461 women [73.6%]). Target SBP < 140 mmHg was achieved in 43%, 75% and 93% of patients at 2 weeks, 1 and 3 months, respectively. SBP decreased from baseline by 18.8 ± 10.5 mmHg, 27.2 ± 10.6 mmHg and 31.8 ± 9.9 mmHg at 2 weeks, 1 month and 3 months, respectively. In the groups of patients aged 55-59, 60-69, 70-79, and ≥ 80 years, SBP reductions at 3 months compared with baseline were - 30.3 ± 9.4, - 32.4 ± 9.7, - 32.5 ± 10.7, and - 28.9 ± 9.6 mmHg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This post-hoc analysis of the observational ARBALET study showed that indapamide/amlodipine SPC was associated with significant reductions in BP and high rates of target BP achievement in a broad age range of patients with ISH treated in routine clinical practice.

STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN40812831.

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.

Efficacy of a new single-pill combination of a thiazide-like diuretic and a calcium channel blocker (indapamide sustained release/amlodipine) in essential hypertension

OBJECTIVES

The current international, 12-week, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial assessed the efficacy and safety of indapamide sustained release/amlodipine single-pill combination (SPC) in mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients.

METHODS

Following a 4-week run-in period on amlodipine 5 mg, patients (SBP 150-180 mmHg and/or DBP < 110 mmHg) were randomized to indapamide 1.5 mg sustained release/amlodipine 5 mg SPC or amlodipine 5 mg/valsartan 80 mg SPC with conditional uptitration at week 6. Office blood pressure (BP) was assessed at baseline, weeks 6 and 12; ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring (ABPM/HBPM) at baseline and week 12.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups (57 years, 51% men, BP 160/92 mmHg). 233 patients were randomized to IndSR/Aml and 232 to amlodipine/valsartan, of whom 48 and 57% were uptitrated, respectively. After 12 weeks, office SBP/DBP decreased similarly with both treatments (-21/-8 vs. -20/-8 mmHg) leading to BP control in 50% and BP response in 70% of patients. Uptitration was effective (P < 0.001) with both regimens, in favour of IndSR/Aml (SBP/DBP -12/-6 vs. -7/-3 mmHg, respectively). ABPM (n = 273) and HBPM (n = 194) confirmed 24-h efficacy of both regimens. In the subgroup of patients with sustained uncontrolled hypertension assessed by ABPM (n = 216), office SBP/DBP decreased by -23/-13 vs. -18/-10 mmHg, respectively (P = 0.016/P = 0.135, post-hoc analysis). Both treatments were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Both regimens produced effective BP reductions confirmed by ABPM/HBPM. Both treatments were well tolerated, in accordance with the individual agents' safety profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EUDRA CT no. 2012-001690-84.

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.

Formulations of Amlodipine: A Review

Amlodipine (AD) is a calcium channel blocker that is mainly used in the treatment of hypertension and angina. However, latest findings have revealed that its efficacy is not only limited to the treatment of cardiovascular diseases as it has shown to possess antioxidant activity and plays an important role in apoptosis. Therefore, it is also employed in the treatment of cerebrovascular stroke, neurodegenerative diseases, leukemia, breast cancer, and so forth either alone or in combination with other drugs. AD is a photosensitive drug and requires protection from light. A number of workers have tried to formulate various conventional and nonconventional dosage forms of AD. This review highlights all the formulations that have been developed to achieve maximum stability with the desired therapeutic action for the delivery of AD such as fast dissolving tablets, floating tablets, layered tablets, single-pill combinations, capsules, oral and transdermal films, suspensions, emulsions, mucoadhesive microspheres, gels, transdermal patches, and liposomal formulations.

Administration time-dependent effects of combination therapy on ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive subjects

The aim of this study was to explore the influence of combination therapy in different administration time on antihypertensive efficacy and blood pressure variability in patients with essential hypertension. A total of 86 patients with stage II to III essential hypertension were randomly divided into 4 groups: taking indapamide and losartan potassium together in the morning or in the evening 2 to 4 hours before sleep, indapamide in the morning and losartan potassium in the evening, losartan potassium in the morning and indapamide in the evening. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed before and 12 weeks after the medication. The result showed that statistically significant reductions from baseline of systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure occurred in all treatment groups. There was no significant difference of the reductions or SI among the four groups, neither the rate of decline of BP in the night or the circadian rhythm. In group B, the numbers of rapid rise in BP in the morning hours were significantly less after the medication, while not in the other groups. It is concluded that independent of the administration time, both once-daily treatment and component-based dual therapy had significant antihypertensive effect, but the night taken-together combination resulted in reductions of BP, SI and morning blood pressure peak that may have advantages over the other combinations, without the increased incidence of hypotension at night. Medicines should be taken 2 to 4 hours before sleep.

Treatment of Hypertensive Patients With Diabetes and Microalbuminuria With Combination Indapamide SR/Amlodipine: Retrospective Analysis of NESTOR

BACKGROUND

Combination treatments for hypertension most often include a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor. However, systolic blood pressure (SBP) remains difficult to control. Non-RAAS-inhibiting strategies such as calcium channel blocker/thiazide-like diuretic combinations may offer effective alternatives.

METHODS

Hypertensive diabetic patients with microalbuminuria were included in this retrospective, post-hoc analysis of the Natrilix SR Versus Enalapril Study in Hypertensive Type 2 Diabetics With MicrOalbuminuRia (NESTOR) trial if they were uncontrolled on monotherapy (indapamide slow release (SR) 1.5 mg or enalapril 10mg) and had been given add-on amlodipine 5 mg. Patients uncontrolled with monotherapy/amlodipine 5mg were uptitrated to 10 mg.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, supine SBP/diastolic BP (DBP) decreased from baseline by 26±13/14±9 mm Hg in the indapamide SR/amlodipine group (n = 135) and by 21±14/11±9 mm Hg in the enalapril/amlodipine group (n = 156) (P = 0.006 for ΔSBP). In the amlodipine 10mg subgroup, SBP/DBP decreased from baseline by 26±13/13±9 mm Hg in the indapamide SR/amlodipine group (n = 62) and by 20±13/12±8 mm Hg in the enalapril/amlodipine group (n = 77) (P = 0.02 for ΔSBP). Treatment with indapamide SR/amlodipine was well tolerated. Few patients experienced edema, with no between-group differences. As expected with diuretics, slight changes in kalemia and in uricemia were observed in the indapamide SR/amlodipine group. Changes in fasting glucose, lipids, natremia, and creatinine clearance were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Indapamide SR/amlodipine results in superior SBP reduction with a safety profile in line with that of its components and tolerability equivalent to that of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/amlodipine strategy.

Thiazide-like/calcium channel blocker agents: a major combination for hypertension management

In recent years, treatment strategies for hypertension have often focused on combination therapies that include diuretics and renin angiotensin aldosterone system blockers such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. However, in clinical practice, a significant number of patients do not respond completely to these combination treatments, and long-term reduction of cardiovascular risk remains insufficient. The particularly high residual cardiovascular risk of hypertensive patients, even when adequately treated with strategies based on renin angiotensin aldosterone system blockers, speaks in favor of new, innovative strategies. Thus, it has become relevant to consider whether it is always necessary to block plasma renin activation and whether other guideline-approved combinations should be considered routinely. Diuretic/calcium channel blocker combinations, which are supported by significant long-term evidence, are put forth as a preferred combination in the main guidelines, but are still underused by physicians who do not yet have easy access to such treatments. Fixed-dose indapamide sustained release/amlodipine is the first such single-pill combination to become available. Complementary mechanisms of action of these two molecules are expected to lead to greater and longer-term reductions in systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure and potentially to the reduction of cardiovascular risk.