Rationale for fixed-dose combinations in the treatment of hypertension: the cycle repeats

Evaluating Experimental, Knowledge-based and Computational Cocrystal Screening methods to advance Drug-Drug Cocrystal Fixed-dose Combination development

Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) offer significant advantages to patients and the pharmaceutical industry alike through improved dissolution profiles, synergistic effects and extended patent lifetimes. Identifying whether two active pharmaceutical ingredients have the potential to form a drug-drug cocrystal (DDC) or interact is an essential step in determining the most suitable type of FDC to formulate. The lack of coherent strategies to determine if two active pharmaceutical ingredients that can be co-administered can form a cocrystal, has significantly impacted DDC commercialisation. This review aims to accelerate the development of FDCs and DDCs by evaluating existing experimental, knowledge-based and computational cocrystal screening methods; the background of their development, their application in screening for cocrystals and DDCs, and their limitations are discussed. The evaluation provided in this review will act as a guide for selecting suitable screening methods to accelerate FDC development.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between the Fixed-Dose Combination of Ezetimibe/Rosuvastatin 10/20 Mg and the Fixed-Dose Combination of Telmisartan/Amlodipine 80/5 Mg in Healthy Subjects

Background

Management of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, which are common comorbid risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, require multiple medications. The development of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) containing ezetimibe, rosuvastatin, telmisartan, and amlodipine aims to enhance patient adherence and persistence, but the potential interactions among the four medications have not been studied. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between the FDC of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg (ER) and the FDC of telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg (TA).

Methods

An open-label, single-sequence, three-period, three-treatment crossover study was conducted in healthy male subjects. All subjects received ER for 7 days, TA for 9 days and ER combined with TA for 7 days during each treatment period. For PK analysis of total/free ezetimibe, rosuvastatin, telmisartan, and amlodipine, serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours at steady state. Safety profiles were assessed throughout the study.

Results

Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled, and 34 subjects completed the study. The systemic exposure to each active ingredient after coadministration of the two FDCs was similar to that after each FDC alone. The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals for the maximum plasma concentration (µg/L) and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (h·µg/L) of the combination therapy to monotherapy, assessed at steady state, were as follows: total ezetimibe, 1.0264 (0.8765-1.2017) and 0.9359 (0.7847-1.1163); free ezetimibe, 1.5713 (1.2821-1.9257) and 0.9941 (0.8384-1.1788); rosuvastatin, 2.1673 (1.7807-2.6379) and 1.1714 (0.9992-1.3733); telmisartan, 1.0745 (0.8139-1.4186) and 1.1057 (0.8379-1.4591); and amlodipine, 0.9421 (0.8764-1.0126) and 0.9603 (0.8862-1.0405). Both combination therapy and monotherapy were well tolerated by the subjects.

Conclusion

The coadministration of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg and ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg was well tolerated in healthy subjects, and the PK interaction between those two FDCs was not clinically significant.

Enhancing simultaneous determination of some angiotensin II receptor antagonists and amlodipine in plasma using HPTLC with fluorescence densitometry: Independent fluorescence detection of the co-administrative drugs in the mixture across various pH conditions

A novel and highly sensitive high-performance thin-layer chromatographic (HPTLC) method was developed and validated to quantify a combination of five pharmaceutical mixtures spiked to human plasma. The compounds comprised Amlodipine (AML) along with five angiotensin II receptor antagonist drugs (AIIRAs), namely Olmesartan (OLM), Telmisartan (TLM), Candesartan (CAN), Losartan (LOS), and Irbesartan (IRB). HPTLC was performed on silica gel 60 F254 plates using a mobile phase of Toluene: ethyl acetate: methanol: acetone: acetic acid (6:1.5:1:0.5:1, v/v/v/v/v). In a pioneering move, a reflectance/fluorescence detection mode was employed to identify two concurrently administered drugs at different pH levels for the first time. This method utilized the same chromatographic system, incorporating a specific measurement for AML at a neutral medium to achieve its maximum fluorescence at a 360 nm excitation wavelength, and measuring emission using a 540 nm optical filter. The process involved obtaining a very low fluorescence response from AIIRA. Subsequently, to enhance AIIRA's fluorescence, the plate was sprayed with perchloric acid to transition to a strong acidic medium, ultimately attaining the maximum fluorescence of AIIRA using various excitation wavelengths and a 400 nm emission filter. Through this strategic process, we could optimize the fluorescence signals of both drugs, thereby elevating the sensitivity of detection for this drug combination. AML demonstrated a linear range of 18-300 ng/band, while AIIRAs drugs exhibited a linear range of 6-150 ng/band. The method satisfied the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) criteria for recovery, precision, repeatability, and robustness, showcasing exceptional sensitivity. The approach was successfully applied to quantify AML and AIIRAs drugs in both bulk drug and plasma samples, achieving high recovery percentages and minimal standard deviations.

Fixed-Dose Combination Formulations in Solid Oral Drug Therapy: Advantages, Limitations, and Design Features

Whilst monotherapy is traditionally the preferred treatment starting point for chronic conditions such as hypertension and diabetes, other diseases require the use of multiple drugs (polytherapy) from the onset of treatment (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, tuberculosis, and malaria). Successful treatment of these chronic conditions is sometimes hampered by patient non-adherence to polytherapy. The options available for polytherapy are either the sequential addition of individual drug products to deliver an effective multi-drug regimen or the use of a single fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy product. This article intends to critically review the use of FDC drug therapy and provide an insight into FDC products which are already commercially available. Shortcomings of FDC formulations are discussed from multiple perspectives and research gaps are identified. Moreover, an overview of fundamental formulation considerations is provided to aid formulation scientists in the design and development of new FDC products.

Orthogonal Gelations to Synthesize Core-Shell Hydrogels Loaded with Nanoemulsion-Templated Drug Nanoparticles for Versatile Oral Drug Delivery

Hydrophobic active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) are ubiquitous in the drug development pipeline, but their poor bioavailability often prevents their translation into drug products. Industrial processes to formulate hydrophobic APIs are expensive, difficult to optimize, and not flexible enough to incorporate customizable drug release profiles into drug products. Here, a novel, dual-responsive gelation process that exploits orthogonal thermo-responsive and ion-responsive gelations is introduced. This one-step "dual gelation" synthesizes core-shell (methylcellulose-alginate) hydrogel particles and encapsulates drug-laden nanoemulsions in the hydrogel matrices. In situ crystallization templates drug nanocrystals inside the polymeric core, while a kinetically stable amorphous solid dispersion is templated in the shell. Drug release is explored as a function of particle geometry, and programmable release is demonstrated for various therapeutic applications including delayed pulsatile release and sequential release of a model fixed-dose combination drug product of ibuprofen and fenofibrate. Independent control over drug loading between the shell and the core is demonstrated. This formulation approach is shown to be a flexible process to develop drug products with biocompatible materials, facile synthesis, and precise drug release performance. This work suggests and applies a novel method to leverage orthogonal gel chemistries to generate functional core-shell hydrogel particles.

Response surface analyses of antihypertensive effects of angiotensin receptor blockers and amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension

While previous studies have examined the dose-response characteristics of certain antihypertensive drugs alone or in combination, response surface analysis for combination therapies involving angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and either amlodipine (AML) or hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) has not been explored, particularly in the context of low-dose combinations. The objectives of present study were to generate useful dose-response information for the combination of ARB/AML or ARB/HCT and to predict the blood pressure lowering effects of combination therapies compared to monotherapies. We reviewed the New Drug Application data of combination drugs of ARB/AML and ARB/HCT. Data on systolic blood pressure (SBP), from studies conducted using a factorial dose-response design over a period of 8-12 weeks, were used. The placebo-subtracted SBP change was used for analysis. Response surface analyses of the collected data were conducted using a polynomial regression model. For ARB/AML combination, the quadratic polynomial regression model containing two linear terms, two quadratic terms, and one interaction term was best fitted to the naïve pooled data. Meanwhile, for ARB/HCT combination, the best-fitted model was a quadratic model that included two linear terms and two quadratic terms. The 1/2-dose combination of these medications, compared to each monotherapy, resulted in predicted SBP reductions that were 8-30% greater. The ratio of the estimated antihypertensive effects of the combination to the expected additive effects of each component ranged from 82% to 100% of the expected effect. These results can provide a rationale for developing lower-dose combinations of ARB/AML or ARB/HCT and assist in designing clinical trials.

Effectiveness of the Combination of Enalapril and Nifedipine for the Treatment of Hypertension versus Empirical Treatment in Primary Care Patients

Hypertension in Mexico has a prevalence of 32% and is the second most widespread cause of consultation in primary care. Only 40% of patients in treatment have a blood pressure (BP) below 140/90 mmHg. This clinical trial aimed to compare the effectiveness of the combination of enalapril and nifedipine versus the empirical treatment for hypertension in patients with uncontrolled BP in a primary care center in Mexico City. Participants were randomized to treatment with enalapril and nifedipine (combination group) or to continue with the empirical treatment. Outcome variables were BP control, therapeutic adherence, and adverse effects at 6 months of follow-up. At the end of the follow-up period, BP control (64% versus 77%) and therapeutic adherence (53% versus 93%) showed an improvement from the baseline values in the group that received the combination treatment. BP control (51% versus 47%) and therapeutic adherence (64% versus 59%) in the group who received the empirical treatment did not show improvement from the baseline to follow-up. Combined treatment was 31% more efficacious than conventional empirical treatment (odds ratio = 3.9), which yielded an incremental clinical utility of 18% with high tolerability extent among patients in primary care in Mexico City. These results contribute to the control of arterial hypertension.

Use of Perindopril Arginine/Indapamide/Amlodipine in the Management of Hypertension in Two Sub-Saharan African Island Countries of Madagascar and Mauritius

INTRODUCTION

Most patients with hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa require two or more drugs to control their blood pressure. Triple fixed-dose combination therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine is more effective in lowering blood pressure, offers better target organ protection and has increased adherence compared to monotherapy and free combination therapy, and is safe to use. This observational study evaluates the effectiveness of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine in controlling blood pressure at least 1 month after treatment initiation and assesses patient- and physician- reported drug tolerance over a 3-month period in Madagascar and Mauritius.

METHODS

A total of 198 patients with hypertension in ambulatory care who had been on fixed-dose combination of perindopril arginine, indapamide, and amlodipine for at least 4 weeks were included. The main outcome measures were changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, attainment of blood pressure control under 140/90 mmHg and 130/80 mmHg, self-reported drug tolerance by the patient, and perceived drug tolerance by the treating physician. Data was collected at 1 month and 3 months.

RESULTS

Mean systolic blood pressure was significantly lower at the 1-month (- 3.4 mmHg, p = 0.002) and 3-month (- 8.5 mmHg, p < 0.0001) visits. Diastolic blood pressure also decreased significantly (- 2.4 mmHg at 1-month, p = 0.017 and - 5.4 mmHg at the 3-month visits, p < 0.0001). At 3 months, 80.4% of the patients attained blood pressure targets less than 140/90 mmHg and 42.7% attained targets less than 130/80 mmHg on the basis of their baseline blood pressure. Excellent drug tolerance was reported by more than 90% of patients and physicians at the 1-month visit and by more than 95% at the 3-month visit.

CONCLUSION

Triple fixed-dose therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine continues to show additional blood pressure-lowering capacity even months after initiating the treatment in patients with hypertension in Madagascar and Mauritius. It is also well tolerated by patients with hypertension and assessed as safe to use by physicians.

Fixed-dose Combination of Metoprolol, Telmisartan, and Chlorthalidone for Essential Hypertension in Adults with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Phase III Study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of metoprolol, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone in patients with essential hypertension and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who showed inadequate response to dual therapy.

METHODS

In this phase III, open-label, multicenter study, 254 adults with stable CAD having uncontrolled hypertension despite being treated with FDC of metoprolol (25/50 mg) and telmisartan (40 mg) were included. Patients received either of the following FDC for 24 weeks: metoprolol (25 mg), telmisartan (40 mg), and chlorthalidone (12.5 mg) (FDC1; n = 139) or metoprolol (50 mg), telmisartan (40 mg), and chlorthalidone (12.5 mg) (FDC2; n = 115) tablets once daily. The FDCs were developed using the novel Wrap Matrix™ platform technology. Primary endpoint assessed the mean change in seated diastolic blood pressure (SeDBP) and seated systolic blood pressure (SeSBP) from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary efficacy endpoints included proportion of patients achieving < 90 mmHg SeDBP (SeDBP responder) and < 140 mmHg SeSBP (SeSBP responder) at weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24. Safety was assessed throughout the study.

RESULTS

A total of 243 (95.70%) patients completed study. The mean change in BP from baseline (FDC1, 155/96 mmHg; FDC2, 165/98 mmHg) to week 24 (FDC1, 128/82 mmHg; FDC2, 131/83 mmHg) was statistically significant (both groups p < 0.0001). Within FDC1 and FDC2, the mean change from baseline to week 24 in SeDBP (82.60 mmHg and 83.09 mmHg) and SeSBP (128.07 mmHg and 131.29 mmHg) was statistically significant (both groups p < 0.0001). At week 24, in FDC1, 80.15% and 84.73% were SeDBP and SeSBP responders, respectively; in FDC2, 79.46% and 74.11% were SeDBP and SeSBP responders, respectively. No serious adverse events or deaths were reported.

CONCLUSION

Triple FDCs of metoprolol, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone were considered effective and well tolerated in patients with hypertension who respond inadequately to dual therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

CTRI/2016/11/007491.

Solubility enhancement of carvedilol using drug–drug cocrystallization with hydrochlorothiazide

Background

Increasing hydrophilicity of poorly water-soluble drugs is a major challenge in drug discovery and development. Cocrystallization is one of the techniques to enhance the hydrophilicity of such drugs. Carvedilol (CAR), a nonselective beta/alpha1 blocker, used in the treatment of mild to moderate congestive heart failure and hypertension, is classified under BCS class II with poor aqueous solubility and high permeability. Present work is an attempt to improve the solubility of CAR by preparing cocrystals using hydrochlorothiazide (HCT), a diuretic drug, as coformer. CAR-HCT (2:0.5) cocrystals were prepared by slurry conversion method and were characterized by DSC, PXRD, FTIR, Raman, and SEM analysis. The solubility, stability, and dissolution (in vitro) studies were conducted for the cocrystals.

Results

The formation of CAR-HCT cocrystals was confirmed based on melting point, DSC thermograms, PXRD data, FTIR and Raman spectra, and finally by SEM micrographs. The solubility of the prepared cocrystals was significantly enhanced (7.3 times), and the dissolution (in vitro) was improved by 2.7 times as compared to pure drug CAR. Further, these cocrystals were also found to be stable for 3 months (90 days).

Conclusion

It may be inferred that the drug–drug (CAR-HCT) cocrystallization enhances the solubility and dissolution rate of carvedilol significantly. Further, by combining HCT as coformer could well be beneficial pharmacologically too.

Fixed dose drug combinations - are they pharmacoeconomically sound? Findings and implications especially for lower- and middle-income countries

Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and noninfectious diseases and issues of affordability.Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where there are concerns with their value.Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates, and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis, and hypertension are valued and listed in the country's essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which are being addressed.

Care of the Post-CABG Patient

An estimated 400,000 coronary artery bypass graft operations are performed annually in the United States. Saphenous vein grafts are the most commonly used conduits; however, graft failure is common. In contrast, left internal mammary artery grafts have more favorable long-term patency rates. Guidelines recommend aggressive secondary prevention. In the 2 decades following surgery, 16% of patients require repeat revascularization, and percutaneous coronary intervention accounts for 98% of procedures performed. Post-coronary artery bypass graft patients presenting with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome or progressive heart failure should undergo early coronary angiography given the high likelihood that such a presentation represents graft failure. Percutaneous coronary intervention in degenerated saphenous vein grafts is associated with embolization that may cause the "no-reflow phenomenon," which can be avoided with the use of embolic protection devices. Hybrid revascularization procedures are a promising emerging strategy to avoid the placement of vein grafts.

China STudy of valsartan/amlodipine fixed-dose combination-bAsed long-Term blood pressUre management in HypertenSive patients: a one-year registry (China STATUS III)

Objective: The present observational study evaluated long-term management of hypertension in patients who received treatment with valsartan and amlodipine in a single-pill combination (Val/Aml SPC) in a real-world setting in China (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry number ChiCTR1900021324). Methods: This was a prospective, observational, multicenter, real-world registry study wherein patients with hypertension who had already received Val/Aml SPC (80/5 mg) for at least 4 weeks before study enrollment were observed for 1 year. Investigators recorded patient data every 3 months and essentially five times during the 1 year follow-up period. Effectiveness was assessed by the blood pressure (BP) control rate and average duration of treatment at the end of the study. Safety was monitored by the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Results: Overall, 985 patients were enrolled (mean ± standard deviation [SD] age: 60.3 ± 11.5 years); of these, 894 were included in the full analysis set, 758 of whom completed the study. At baseline, BP was controlled (<140/90 mmHg) in 64.3% of patients on Val/Aml SPC for at least 4 weeks before enrollment. Office BP control rates significantly improved from baseline in 74.1% of patients at 1 year (p < .0001). Overall, 575 (87.0%) patients remained on Val/Aml SPC at 1 year (average exposure: 311.5 days). AEs were reported in 23.3% of patients. The majority of AEs were mild to moderate, and 0.6% of patients discontinued Val/Aml SPC because of SAEs. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that Val/Aml SPC effectively reduced BP over the long term among Chinese hypertensive patients, with a good adherence and tolerability profile, and that most hypertensive patients may benefit from this combination.

Ivabradine and metoprolol in fixed dose combination: When, why and how to use it

Heart rate is an important factor in coronary artery disease and its manifestations, and as such has been considered as a possible target for therapy. Although in epidemiological, and in less degree, in clinical studies derived indications of a possible pathogenetic role of heart rate in major cardiac diseases, clinical trials did not provided any strong evidence. However, even as a simple risk marker, remains important in the treatment of coronary artery disease and heart failure. Beta-blockers are the drugs most frequently used for heart rate control. However, recent studies constantly find insufficient effectiveness of beta-blockers in heart rate control and go further to question their efficacy on outcomes, making clear the need for an additional therapy. Ivabradine, a pure heart rate inhibitor, added to classic beta-blocker treatment represent the new therapeutic option in stable coronary disease and heart failure.

Fixed-dose combination of alogliptin/pioglitazone improves glycemic control in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus independent of body mass index

This study investigated the effects of switching from combination therapy with either alogliptin (Alo) or pioglitazone (Pio) to fixed-dose combination therapy (FDCT) with alogliptin and pioglitazone (Alo-Pio FDCT). The usefulness and efficacy of Alo-Pio FDCT were investigated. A total of 50 outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with Alo and 47 outpatients with T2DM treated with Pio were switched to Alo-Pio FDCT, and its efficacy and usefulness were evaluated. Significant improvements were observed in hemoglobinA1c (HbA_1c), alanine transaminase (ALT), and γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) levels after switching to Alo-Pio FDCT for 16 weeks in both groups. Only the group switching from Alo to Alo-Pio FDCT showed significant improvements in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) levels and triglyceride levels. In a multivariate logistic regression model of the variation in the change of HbA_1c at 16 weeks, ALT and GGT were independent predictors of the change of HbA_1c at 16 weeks. In addition, the switch to Alo-Pio FDCT improved glycemic control to a certain degree regardless of BMI. Switching from either Alo or Pio to Alo-PIO FDCT may, unlike monotherapy with a DPP-4 inhibitor, be effective for patients with T2DM regardless of whether they are obese or lean.

Valvejet Technology for the Production of a Personalised Fixed Dose Combination of Ramipril and Glimepiride: an Investigative Study on the Stability of Ramipril

PURPOSE

To use valvejet technology for printing a fixed dose combination of ramipril and glimepiride, and to investigate the stability profile of ramipril, which is susceptible to a range of processing and storage conditions.

METHODS

Inks of ramipril and glimepiride were formulated and printed on to HPMC film and the films were evaluated for the chemical and solid-state integrity of the APIs using HPLC and XRPD. The stability of the APIs in the inks and in the printed samples was investigated using Raman and NMR techniques.

RESULTS

The printed samples demonstrated excellent precision and accuracy in the doses of APIs deposited. Both drugs were chemically intact in the freshly printed samples and ramipril was found to be in its amorphous form. Ramipril in the printed samples has transformed into ramipril diketopiperazine when stored at 40°C with 75% RH, but remained stable when stored in a desiccator. Results from the stability study of ramipril ink show that the API has undergone degradation when stored both at room temperature and at 40°C but remained stable when stored in a refrigerator.

CONCLUSION

An FDC of ramipril and glimepiride was successfully printed using valvejet technology. The significance of inkjet printing in producing amorphous dosage forms from solution based inks and personalised dosage forms of drugs susceptible to processing conditions was demonstrated using ramipril. This study illustrates the significance of examining the stability of the APIs in the inks and the importance of appropriate storing of both the inks and printed samples.

Secondary prevention after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a primer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the benefits of surgical coronary revascularization, patients continue to be at risk for ischemic events in the years that follow coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), mandating the role for postoperative secondary preventive therapy. The purpose of this review was to present a summary on the subject of secondary prevention after CABG, including an overview of a recently published scientific statement, and highlight the newest studies in the field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Aspirin and statin therapy continue to be the mainstay of secondary prevention after CABG, although newer antiplatelet and lipid-lowering medicines are being actively studied for their potential benefits. Other important elements to secondary prevention after CABG include the aggressive management of hypertension, smoking cessation, and the initiation of cardiac rehabilitation.

SUMMARY

Secondary prevention is an essential component of postoperative care after CABG. Instituting preventive therapies after surgery optimizes graft patency and helps patients achieve the highest level of physical health and quality of life following CABG.

Nonclinical Development of Combination Drugs

We define "combination drugs" as "fixed-dose combinations" (FDCs), that is, two or more drugs (marketed or not) combined in a single pill or two or more separate drugs packaged together. FDCs have been available commercially for many years but only relatively recently have nonclinical development guidelines been released by a number of regulatory authorities and the World Health Organization; as yet there are no ICH guidelines specific to combination drugs. In general however, the ICH guidelines for monotherapy development provide a framework for FDC development. Depending on the type of drug combination (marketed drug/marketed drug; marketed drug/NME and NME/NME) the scope and complexity of toxicity studies will vary greatly. In all cases however, a key issue is the potential for pharmacokinetic and/or toxicologic interaction between the components. For a marketed drug/marketed drug combination a detailed review of the nonclinical data available may suffice, particularly when the components have a history of coadministration at about the same dose and ratio as that of the proposed combination. For a marketed drug/NME combination, in addition to a review of the data for the marketed drug, a full ICH program of studies will be required for the NME, and a study of up to 90-day duration (in one species) for the combination. With an NME/NME combination each component will require a full ICH battery of studies and a combination study in one species. In all cases additional studies may be needed to address data gaps. Given the many novel and complex issues which arise when developing FDCs we recommend that, whenever possible, the nonclinical study strategy is discussed with the regulatory authorities.

Patient-centered drug delivery and its potential applications for unmet medical needs

Pharmaceutical dosage forms address diverse key components but satisfying unmet patient needs to enhance patient adherence is a major challenge. The desired design of patient-centered drug products should be based on characteristics of various components, such as patients, disease, routes of administration, drug delivery technologies and active pharmaceutical ingredients. Understanding of targeting patients and their physiological and biological environments is pivotal for developing suitable patient-centered drug products. In this review, key components of an ideal drug delivery system were considered. Then, stepwise approaches for designing patient-centered drug products were suggested. Finally, various case studies are also presented and considered to develop models of patient-centered drug products.

Challenges for the pharmaceutical technical development of protein coformulations

Objectives

This review discusses challenges to stability, analytics and manufacturing of protein coformulations. Furthermore, general considerations to be taken into account for the pharmaceutical development of coformulated protein drug products are highlighted.

Key findings

Coformulation of two or more active substances in one single dosage form has recently seen increasing use offering several advantages, such as increased efficacy and/or the overall reduction of adverse event incidents in patients. Most marketed coformulated drug products are composed of small molecules. As proteins are not only comparatively large but also complex molecules, the maintenance of their physicochemical integrity within a formulation throughout pharmaceutical processing, storage, transport, handling and patient administration to ensure proper pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in vivo already represents various challenges for single-entity products. Thus, nowadays, only sparse biologics-based coformulations can be found, as additional complexity during development is given for these products.

Summary

The complexity of the dosage form and the protein molecules results into additional challenges to formulation, manufacture, storage, transport, handling and patient administration, stability and analytics during the pharmaceutical development of protein coformulations. Various points have to be considered during different stages of development in order to obtain a safe and efficacious product.

Biological evaluation of dinuclear copper complex/dichloroacetic acid cocrystal against human breast cancer: design, synthesis, characterization, DFT studies and cytotoxicity assays

Binuclear copper(ii) cocrystal “[Cu₂(valdien)₂⋯2Cl₂CHCOOH],” 1 was synthesized from H₂valdien scaffold and anticancer drug pharmacophore “dichloroacetic acid” embedded with two Cu(ii) connected via a hydrogen bonded network.

Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists for Treatment of Hypertension and Heart Failure

Spironolactone and eplerenone are both mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. These compounds block both the epithelial and nonepithelial actions of aldosterone, with the latter assuming increasing clinical relevance. Spironolactone and eplerenone both affect reductions in blood pressure either as mono- or add-on therapy; moreover, they each afford survival benefits in diverse circumstances of heart failure and the probability of renal protection in proteinuric chronic kidney disease. However, as use of mineralocorticoid-blocking agents has expanded, the hazards inherent in taking such drugs have become more apparent. Whereas the endocrine side effects of spironolactone are in most cases little more than a cosmetic annoyance, the potassium-sparing effects of both spironolactone and eplerenone can prove disastrous, even fatal, if sufficient degrees of hyperkalemia emerge. For most patients, however, the risk of developing hyperkalemia in and of itself should not discourage the sensible clinician from bringing these compounds into play. Hyperkalemia should always be considered a possibility in patients receiving either of these medications; therefore, anticipatory steps should be taken to minimize the likelihood of its occurrence if long-term therapy of these agents is being considered.

Leg edema with (S)-amlodipine vs conventional amlodipine given in triple therapy for hypertension: a randomized double blind controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Leg edema is a common adverse effect of dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers (CCB) that may need dose reduction or drug withdrawal, adversely affecting the antihypertensive efficacy. Leg edema is reported to occur less often with (S)-amlodipine compared to conventional racemic amlodipine. We aimed to find the incidence of leg edema as a primary outcome and antihypertensive efficacy with (S)-amlodipine compared to conventional amlodipine.

METHODS

This prospective, double-blind, controlled clinical trial randomized 172 hypertensive patients, not controlled on beta-blockers (BB) and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB), to either conventional amlodipine (5-10 mg; n = 86) or (S)-amlodipine (2.5-5 mg; n = 86), while continuing their previous anti-hypertensive medications. Sample was sufficient to find a difference in edema between the interventions with 80 % power at 5 % significance level. Intension to treat analysis (ITT) for safety data and per protocol analysis for efficacy data was performed. Fischer's exact test was applied to observe difference between responder rates and proportions of subjects having peripheral edema in the two groups. Pitting edema test scores were compared using Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

Altogether 146 patients (amlodipine, n = 76 and (S)-amlodipine, n = 70) completed 120 days treatment. Demographic variables and treatment adherence were comparable in the two groups. Incidence of new edema after randomization was 31.40 % in test group and 46.51 % in control group [p = 0.03; absolute risk reduction (ARR) = 15.1 %; Number Needed to Treat (NNT) = 7, ITT analysis]. Pitting edema score and patient rated edema score increased significantly in the control compared to test group (p = 0.038 and 0.036 respectively) after treatment period. Edema scores increased significantly in the control group from baseline (p < 0.0001). Responders in blood pressure were 98.57 % in test and 98.68 % in control group. Most common adverse events (AE) were pitting edema and increased urinary frequency. Incidence of all AEs other than edema was similar in both groups. Two serious AEs occurred unrelated to therapy. Biochemical and ECG parameters in the two groups were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In hypertensive patients not controlled on prior BB and ACEI/ARB therapy, addition of (S)-amlodipine besylate at half the dose of conventional amlodipine provides better tolerability with reduced incidence of peripheral edema, and equal antihypertensive efficacy compared to amlodipine given at usual doses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Sri Lanka Clinical Trials registry: www.slctr.lk, SLCTR/2013/006.

Drug–drug co-crystallization presents a new opportunity for the development of stable vitamins

Two packing polymorphs of drug–drug co-crystals between VD₂ and VD₃ exhibit dramatically different properties. Form A presents superior physicochemical properties compared with VD₂ or VD₃ themselves.

Blood Pressure Response to Zofenopril or Irbesartan Each Combined with Hydrochlorothiazide in High-Risk Hypertensives Uncontrolled by Monotherapy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled, Parallel Group, Noninferiority Trial

In this randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel group study (ZENITH), 434 essential hypertensives with additional cardiovascular risk factors, uncontrolled by a previous monotherapy, were treated for 18 weeks with zofenopril 30 or 60 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg or irbesartan 150 or 300 mg plus HCTZ. Rate of office blood pressure (BP) response (zofenopril: 68% versus irbesartan: 70%; p = 0.778) and 24-hour BP response (zofenopril: 85% versus irbesartan: 84%; p = 0.781) was similar between the two treatment groups. Cardiac and renal damage was equally reduced by both treatments, whereas the rate of carotid plaque regression was significantly larger with zofenopril. In conclusion, uncontrolled monotherapy treated hypertensives effectively respond to a combination of zofenopril or irbesartan plus a thiazide diuretic, in terms of either BP response or target organ damage progression.

National trends in the ambulatory treatment of hypertension in the United States, 1997-2012

Importance

Hypertension is common and costly. Over the past decade, new antihypertensive therapies have been developed, several have lost patent protection and additional evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of these agents has accrued.

Objective

To examine trends in the use of antihypertensive therapies in the United States between 1997 and 2012.

Design, Setting and Participants

We used nationally representative audit data from the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index to examine the ambulatory pharmacologic treatment of hypertension.

Outcome Measures

Our primary unit of analysis was a visit where hypertension was a reported diagnosis and treated with a pharmacotherapy (treatment visit). We restricted analyses to the use of six therapeutic classes of antihypertensive medications among individuals 18 years or older.

Results

Annual hypertension treatment visits increased from 56.9 million treatment visits (95% confidence intervals [CI], 53.9–59.8) in 1997 to 83.3 million visits (CI 79.2–87.3) in 2008, then declined steadily to 70.9 million visits (CI 66.7–75.0) by 2012. Angiotensin receptor blocker utilization increased substantially from 3% of treatment visits in 1997 to 18% by 2012, whereas calcium channel blocker use decreased from 27% to 18% of visits. Rates of diuretic and beta-blocker use remained stable and represented 24%–30% and 14–16% of visits, respectively. Use of direct renin inhibitor accounted for fewer than 2% of annual visits. The proportion of visits treated using fixed-dose combination therapies increased from 28% to 37% of visits.

Conclusions

Several important changes have occurred in the landscape of antihypertensive treatment in the United States during the past decade. Despite their novel mechanism of action, the adoption rate of direct renin inhibitors remains low.

Inhibitory effect of atenolol on urinary excretion of metformin via down-regulating multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1) expression in the kidney of rats

Renal tubular secretion is an important pathway for the elimination of many clinically used drugs. Metformin, a commonly prescribed first-line antidiabetic drug, is secreted primarily by the renal tubule. Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving metformin may together be given selective β1 blockers (e.g., atenolol). Therefore, it is of great use to evaluate the effect of atenolol on metformin urinary excretion for exploring drug interactions and predicting the adverse effect of drugs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of atenolol on the pharmacokinetic of metformin and plasma lactate (LCA) level in rats, for high LCA is a serious adverse reaction of metformin after long-term metformin treatment. In this study, rats were treated with metformin alone or in combination with atenolol. Plasma, urine and tissue concentration of metformin was determined by HPLC method, while Western blotting and immunohistochemical analysis were used to evaluate the renal expression of rat organic cation transporter 2 (rOct2) and multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1). The results showed that, after 7 days drug treatment, the AUC0 → t of metformin in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 19.5% compared to that in metformin group, while the 24h cumulative urinary excretion of metformin was significantly decreased by 57.3%. In addition, atenolol treatment significantly decreased the renal expression of rMate1, but had no effect on rOct2 expression, renal blood perfusion and glomerular filtration. Moreover, plasma LCA level in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 83.3% compared to that in metformin group after 60 days drug treatment. These results indicated that atenolol can inhibit urinary excretion of metformin via decreasing renal rMate1 expression, and long-term atenolol and metformin co-administration may induce potential lactic acidosis. Our results, for the first time, provided an important experimental evidence that rMate1 is the target of transporter-mediated drug interactions concerning metformin and atenolol.

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition: overview of the therapeutic use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and direct renin inhibitors

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) therapy in hypertensive diabetic patients with macroalbuminuria, microalbuminuria, or normoalbuminuria has been repeatedly shown to improve cardiovascular mortality and reduce the decline in glomerular filtration rate. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade in normotensive diabetic patients with normoalbuminuria or microalbuminuria cannot be advocated at present. Dual RAAS inhibition with ACE inhibitors plus ARBs or ACE inhibitors plus direct renin inhibitors has failed to improve cardiovascular or renal outcomes but has predisposed patients to serious adverse events.

Efficacy and safety of valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination in 11,422 Chinese patients with hypertension: an observational study

Introduction

Single-pill combination (SPC) therapy of two drugs is recommended by international guidelines, including the Chinese guidelines (2010), for the treatment of hypertension in high-risk patients who require marked blood pressure (BP) reductions. Real-world data on the efficacy and safety of valsartan/amlodipine (Val/Aml) SPC are scarce. The present study is the first observational study in China to evaluate the efficacy (primary endpoint) and safety of Val/Aml (80/5 mg) SPC in Chinese patients with hypertension whose BP was not adequately controlled by monotherapy in a real-world setting.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter, open-label, post-marketing observational study included 11,422 Chinese adults (≥18 years) with essential hypertension from 238 sites of 29 provinces who were prescribed once-daily Val/Aml (80/5 mg) SPC. Patients were treated for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy variable of the study included changes in mean sitting systolic BP (MSSBP) and mean diastolic BP (MSDBP) from baseline to week 8 (end point). The secondary efficacy variable of the study included BP control rate and response rate at week 4 and 8. Safety assessments included recording and measurement of all adverse events (AEs) and vital signs in the safety population.

Results

A significant reduction of 27.1 mmHg in MSSBP (159.6 vs. 132.5 mmHg; P < 0.0001) and 15.2 mmHg in MSDBP (95.6 vs. 80.4 mmHg; P < 0.0001) from baseline was observed at week 8. The BP-lowering efficacy of Val/Aml SPC was independent of age and comorbidities. BP control of <140/90 mmHg was achieved in 76.8% (n = 8,692) of the patients. The most frequently reported AEs were dizziness (0.2%), headache (0.2%), upper respiratory tract infection (0.2%), and edema (0.2%). Only three serious AEs were reported and they were not drug-related.

Conclusion

This is the first evidence-based real-world data in Chinese hypertensive patients which demonstrate the efficacy and safety of Val/Aml (80/5 mg) SPC.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0132-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Efficacy of olmesartan/amlodipine combination therapy in reducing ambulatory blood pressure in moderate-to-severe hypertensive patients not controlled by amlodipine alone

This previously unpublished, preplanned analysis investigated the efficacy of the olmesartan/amlodipine combination at different doses on 24-h blood pressure (BP) control, as well as assessed trough estimation of trough-to-peak ratio (TPR) and smoothness index (SI). Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension whose BP was inadequately controlled after 8 weeks' treatment with amlodipine 5 mg. Patients were randomized to continue with amlodipine 5 mg or to receive olmesartan/amlodipine 10/5, 20/5 or 40/5 mg for 8 weeks (Period II). Patients not achieving BP control were uptitrated to a more powerful regimen for another 8 weeks (Period III). During Period II, each olmesartan/amlodipine combination reduced 24-h systolic and diastolic BP (SBP/DBP), as well as morning and early morning SBP/DBP, significantly more than amlodipine 5 mg (P<0.001 for all). TPRs were higher in each olmesartan/amlodipine group than with amlodipine 5 mg, and SI values showed dose-related increases; olmesartan/amlodipine 40/5 mg produced a significantly higher SI for SBP and DBP (1.55 and 1.33, respectively) than amlodipine 5 mg (0.96 and 0.77, respectively, P<0.0001 for each). During Period III, uptitrated patients showed further BP reductions, which were largest in those on olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg. SI values increased in uptitrated patients and were highest with olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg (SBP 1.62/DBP 1.41). The olmesartan/amlodipine combination effectively reduces BP over 24 h, including the morning hours, in a dose-related manner. Compared with amlodipine alone, the olmesartan/amlodipine combination has a better 24-h coverage (TPR) and a dose-related improvement in BP lowering homogeneity (SI).

Effectiveness of hydrochlorothiazide in combination with telmisartan and olmesartan in adults with moderate hypertension not controlled with monotherapy: a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point (PROBE), parallel-arm study

BACKGROUND

The potential combinations of antihypertensive agents are many, and making rational choices depends on the characteristics of each drug and on their complementary mechanisms of action.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adding hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg to olmesartan 20 mg or telmisartan 80 mg on blood pressure (BP) in patients with moderate hypertension.

METHODS

Consecutive outpatients at the Centro per l'Ipertensione e la Fisiopatologia Cardiovascolare, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy, of both sexes aged 39 to 75 years were considered eligible for enrollment if they had a sitting diastolic BP (DBP) ->99 mm Hg and <110 mm Hg at the end of an initial 2-week washout period. Patients were random- ized to olmesartan 20 mg QD or telmisartan 80 mg QD according to a prospective, open-label, blinded end point, parallel-arm design. After 8 weeks of monotherapy, patients whose BP was not controlled (DBP ->90 mm Hg) received HCTZ 12.5 mg QD for 8 additional weeks. Clinical and ambulatory BPs were measured at the end of the washout period and at the end of both treatment periods. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded from spontaneous reports and direct inquiry from investigators.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five patients, all of whom were white, were recruited for the study. After the initial washout period, 13 patients did not meet the inclusion criteria and 6 refused to continue. A total of 126 white patients (69 men, 57 women; mean [SD] age, 60.2 [11.6] years) were randomized to receive monotherapy. Of these, 35 patients (56%) in the olmesartan group and 33 (52%) in the telmisartan group had previously received antihypertensive therapy. At the end of monotherapy, the 52 patients in the olmesartan group and the 49 patients in the telmisartan treatment group who were still in the study and had their BP inadequately controlled by treatment had HCTZ 12.5 mg QD added to their treatment regimen. Both combinations induced a greater ambulatory mean (SD) systolic BP (SBP) and DBP reduction than monothera- py (SBP: 145.3 [6.1] in the olmesartan group and 140.1 [6.4] in the telmisartan group, P < 0.05; DBP: 88.1 [5.1] in the olmesartan group and 84.9 [4.9] in the telmisartan group, P < 0.05). The mean (SD) reduction from baseline in the telmisartan/HCTZ-treated patients (21.5 [10.1]/14.6 [5.2] mm Hg for 24 hours, 21.8 [10.2]/14.9 [5.2] mm Hg for daytime, and 20.4 [10.3]/13.7 [5.9] mm Hg for nighttime; all, P < 0.001 vs baseline) was significantly greater than that observed in the olmesartan/HCTZ-treated patients (18.8 [9.8]/12.3 [4.9] mm Hg for 24 hours, 19.3 [9.8]/12.8 [4.9] mm Hg for daytime, and 17.4 [10.2]/10.6 [5.5] mm Hg for nighttime; all, P < 0.001 vs baseline), with a significant difference between the 2 treatment groups (P < 0.01). Compared with mono- therapy, the add-on effect of HCTZ 12.5 mg QD administration was significantly greater in the telmisartan group than in the olmesartan group (P < 0.05); the differ- ence being more evident for nighttime BP values (SBP, P 0.031; DBP, P 0.025). Reported AEs were similar in the olmesartan/HCTZ and the telmisartan/HCTZ groups (4 patients [7%] vs 3 patients [6%]).

CONCLUSION

The addition of HCTZ 12.5 mg to telmisartan 80 mg monothera- py was associated with greater BP reduction than the addition of the same dose of HCTZ to olmesartan 20 nag monotherapy in these patients previously uncontrolled on monotherapy.