Long-term cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: full report of the Korean Hypertension Cohort

The Efficacy and Tolerability of Irbesartan/Amlodipine Combination Therapy in Patients With Essential Hypertension Whose Blood Pressure Were not Controlled by Irbesartan Monotherapy

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of irbesartan (IRB) and amlodipine (AML) combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) was not controlled by IRB monotherapy.

METHODS

Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III studies were conducted in Korea (the I-DUO 301 study and the I-DUO 302 study). After a 4-week run-in period with either 150 mg IRB (I-DUO 301 study) or 300 mg IRB (I-DUO 302 study), patients with uncontrolled BP (ie, mean sitting systolic BP [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg to <180 mmHg and mean sitting diastolic BP <110 mmHg) were randomized to the placebo, AML 5 mg, or AML 10 mg group. A total of 428 participants were enrolled in the 2 I-DUO studies. In the I-DUO 301 study, 271 participants were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, or IRB 150 mg/placebo. In the I-DUO 302 study, 157 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive IRB/AML 300/5 mg or IRB 300 mg/placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in MSSBP from baseline to week 8. Tolerability was assessed according to the development of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and clinically significant changes in physical examination, laboratory tests, pulse, and 12-lead electrocardiography.

FINDINGS

In I-DUO 301, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -14.78 (12.35) mmHg, -21.47 (12.78) mmHg, and -8.61 (12.19) mmHg in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In I-DUO 302, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -13.30 (12.47) mmHg and -7.19 (15.37) mmHg in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In both studies, all combination groups showed a significantly higher reduction in MSSBP than the IRB monotherapy groups (P < 0.001 for both). TEAEs occurred in 10.00%, 10.99%, and 12.22% of participants in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 301 and in 6.33% and 10.67% of participants in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 302, with no significant between-group differences. Overall, there was one serious adverse event throughout I-DUO study.

IMPLICATIONS

The combination of IRB and AML has superior antihypertensive effects compared with IRB alone over an 8-week treatment period, with placebo-like tolerability.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05476354 (I-DUO 301), NCT05475665 (I-DUO 302).

Association between office visit intervals and long-term cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients

Hypertension is a chronic disease that requires long-term follow-up in many patients, however, optimal visit intervals are not well-established. This study aimed to evaluate the incidences of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) according to visit intervals. We analyzed data from 9894 hypertensive patients in the Korean Hypertension Cohort, which enrolled and followed up 11,043 patients for over 10 years. Participants were classified into five groups based on their median visit intervals (MVIs) during the 4-year period and MACEs were compared among the groups. The patients were divided into clinically relevant MVIs of one (1013; 10%), two (1299; 13%), three (2732; 28%), four (2355; 24%), and six months (2515; 25%). The median follow-up period was 5 years (range: 1745 ± 293 days). The longer visit interval groups did not have an increased cumulative incidence of MACE (12.9%, 11.8%, 6.7%, 5.9%, and 4%, respectively). In the Cox proportional hazards model, those in the longer MVI group had a smaller hazard ratio (HR) for MACEs or all-cause death: 1.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-2.17), 1.7 (95% CI: 1.41-2.05), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74-1.09) and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.52-0.79), respectively (Reference MVI group of 75-104 days). In conclusion, a follow-up visits with a longer interval of 3-6 months was not associated with an increased risk of MACE or all-cause death in hypertensive patients. Therefore, once medication adjustment is stabilized, a longer interval of 3-6 months is reasonable, reducing medical expenses without increasing the risk of cardiovascular outcomes.

Feasibility, credence, and usefulness of out-of-office cuffless blood pressure monitoring using smartwatch: a population survey

BACKGROUND

Cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement, enabled by recent advances in wearable devices, allows for BP monitoring in daily life. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility, cresdence, and usefulness of cuffless BP monitoring through a population survey.

METHODS

During the "Daily BP Measurement with Your Galaxy Watch" campaign held by the Korean Society of Hypertension, participants were asked to share their experiences with cuffless BP measurement using a smartwatch application through an online survey. The questionnaire included questions about age, underlying medical conditions, smartwatch utilization, experience with BP calibration, the reliability of BP values measured by a smartwatch, and willingness to use the BP monitoring function in the future.

RESULTS

A total of 1071 participants responded to the survey. The largest age group (decile) was 50-59 years old (33.3%), followed by 40-49 years old (29.9%). Although nearly half of the participants (47.5%) had no chronic diseases, 40.1% reported having hypertension. BP monitoring was the most frequently utilized smartwatch function (95.8%), followed by heart rate measurement (87.1%). 31.8% of participants reported that BP values measured by the smartphone application were "very accurate and helpful," while 63.5% rated them as "slightly lower (44.4%)" or "higher (19.1%)" compared to the standard home BP monitoring device. 93% of the participants reported utilizing the BP monitoring function at least once a week. Regarding the BP calibration process, most participants (93.9%) calibrated the BP measurement application themselves, and 50.8% rated the difficulty level as "very easy."

CONCLUSION

Cuffless BP measurement using a smartwatch application was feasible in the general population, including the self-calibration process. However, the satisfaction level in terms of accuracy is still modest, indicating a need for further development.