Valsartan 160 mg/Amlodipine 5 mg Combination Therapy versus Amlodipine 10 mg in Hypertensive Patients with Inadequate Response to Amlodipine 5 mg Monotherapy

Efficacy of single-pill combination in uncontrolled essential hypertension: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.

Effectiveness of Amlodipine in the Control of 24-Hour Blood Pressure in Mild-to-Moderate Essential Hypertension: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Real-World Study from India

Background Calcium-channel blockers (CCB) are a mainstay in the management of hypertension (HTN), and amlodipine is the preferred CCB due to its longer half-life and better safety. Patients and methods This practice-based, observational, real-world evidence study assessed the 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) control in mild-to-moderate essential hypertensive patients (treatment naïve receiving amlodipine monotherapy, or as add-on therapy) in inadequately controlled blood pressure (BP goal not met after one month of existing therapy). One hundred four (62M/42F) patients between 18 and 65 years of age who received amlodipine 5/10 mg/day for >8 weeks were included after obtaining informed written consent. The primary outcome was a change from baseline in the mean 24-h SBP and DBP on ABP monitoring at eight (±1) weeks. Secondary outcomes were different from baseline in the mean morning, day-time, night-time, and last six-hour dosing interval period. Other outcomes assessed BP variability (dippers and non-dippers), and responder rates based on ABP monitoring and in-clinic trough cuff measurements. Safety outcomes included adverse effects reported, electrocardiogram, and laboratory abnormalities (hepatic and renal function). Changes in BP parameters in different sub-groups (age, gender, BMI, physical activity, occupation, duration of hypertension, the total daily dose of amlodipine, type of amlodipine therapy, and hypertension severity at baseline) were estimated. Results Of the 104 patients, 49 patients (completed eight weeks) were included in the per-protocol (PP) data for efficacy analysis. Safety analysis was done on the intent-to-treat (ITT) dataset. Significant reductions (p<0.0001) from baseline in all BP measurements on ABPM were observed at the end of eight weeks. Similar improvements were observed in office BP recordings. There was a marginal but non-significant (p>0.05) increase in the proportion of dippers and extreme dippers with amlodipine at the end of the eight-week treatment period. Conclusions Amlodipine 5/10 mg/day therapy used as monotherapy or adjuvant therapy provided significant reductions in both office BP and ambulatory BP over eight weeks.

Valsartan Dosage on Ventriculo-Vascular Coupling Index Dose-Dependency in Heart Failure Patients

PURPOSE

Heart failure (HF) poses significant morbidity and mortality. Recently, the ventriculo-vascular coupling index (VVI) was introduced as an independent prognostic factor reflective of the overall cardiovascular performance index in HF. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of force-titration of valsartan on VVI values in HF patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicenter and prospective observational trial, the effect of valsartan was stratified according to dosages [non-ceiling dose (NCD) vs. ceiling dose (CD)] in HF patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <55%. Biochemical studies, including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), echocardiography with VVI, the treadmill test, and the activity scale index were assessed at baseline and after 24 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

One-hundred thirty-eight patients were force-titrated to either a CD group (n=81) or a NCD group (n=57). The mean age of the study participants was 59 years and 66% were male. After 6 months of follow up, left ventricular mass index (LVMI) values had significantly improved in the CD group but not in the NCD group. Intriguingly, in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (n=52, LVEF <40%), a significant improvement in VVI was only observed in the CD group (from 2.4±0.6 to 1.8±0.5, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

CDs of valsartan for 6 months showed better improvement in VVI, as well as LVMI, in patients with HFrEF, compared with NCDs.

The Impact of Valsartan/Amlodipine Single-Pill Combination on Blood Pressure and Vascular Stiffness in Patients with Grade 1-2 Essential Arterial Hypertension

Aim. To investigate the impact of valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination (V/A SPC) on arterial stiffness parameters and 24-hours blood pressure (BP) level in the middle-aged patients with stage II grade 1-2 essential arterial hypertension (HT). Material and methods. A group of patients with stage II grade 1-2 HT who had not previously received regular antihypertensive therapy (n=38, age 49.7±7.0 years) was retrospectively formed. All the patients were treated with V/A SPC and all of them achieved target office BP (<140/90 mm Hg). 12 weeks after reaching the target BP the assessment of V/A SPC therapy effectiveness and vascular stiffness (general clinical data, ambulatory BP monitoring, volume sphygmography, echocardiography) were performed in all included HT patients. Sex- and age-matched healthy people with normal BP (n=86, age 48.8±5.8years) and in whom similar clinical and vascular stiffness data were available represented a control group. Results. According to the ambulatory BP monitoring data systolic, diastolic and pulse BP significantly (p<0.001) decreased after the treatment with V/A SPC. Volume sphygmography has showed significant decrease in right-CAVI value from 8.9±1.3 to 7.3±1.4 (p=0.021) as well as a reduction the number of patients with a right- and/or left-CAVI>9.0 from 31.6 to 10.5% (p=0,049). According to an assessment of arterial stiffness the augmentation index decreased significantly by 23.6±8.6% from -23.0±17.1 to -28.9±18.7 (p=0.034. Transthoracic echocardiography data has demonstrated decrease in effective arterial elastance from 1.73±0.35 to 1.60±0.32 mm Hg (p=0.016) and increase in the arterial compliance – from 1.30±0.38 to 1.43±0.34 mm Hg/ml (p=0.049). Conclusions. In naive patients 40-65 years old with stage II grade 1-2 HT antihypertensive therapy with V/A SPC provides effective 24 hours BP control and improves arterial stiffness parameters.

A randomized multicenter study on ambulatory blood pressure and arterial stiffness in patients treated with valsartan/amlodipine or nifedipine GITS

In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of a 12-week randomized multicenter study, we investigated effects of valsartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg single-pill combination (n = 75) and nifedipine GITS 30 mg (n = 75) on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness assessed by brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. At week 12, the between-treatment mean differences in systolic/diastolic BP were smaller for 24-hour and daytime (-2.1/-1.7 and -2.0/-1.5 mm Hg, respectively, P ≥ 0.22) but greater (P < 0.01) for nighttime (-4.0/-2.8 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.09), especially in sustained uncontrolled hypertension (-5.0/-4.1 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.04) and non-dippers (-6.5/-3.7 mm Hg, P ≤ 0.07), in favor of valsartan/amlodipine. At week 12, PWV was significantly reduced from baseline by valsartan/amlodipine (n = 59, P < 0.0001) but not nifedipine (n = 59, P = 0.06). The changes in PWV were significantly associated with that in ambulatory systolic BP and pulse pressure in the nifedipine (P ≤ 0.0008) but not valsartan/amlodipine group (P ≥ 0.57), with a significant interaction (P ≤ 0.045). The valsartan/amlodipine combination was more efficacious than nifedipine GITS in lowering nighttime BP in sustained uncontrolled hypertension and non-dippers, and in lowering arterial stiffness independent of BP lowering.

Pharmacokinetic and bioequivalence study of a telmisartan/S-amlodipine fixed-dose combination (CKD-828) formulation and coadministered telmisartan and S-amlodipine in healthy subjects

Purpose

A new fixed-dose combination (FDC) formulation of telmisartan 80 mg and S-amlodipine 5 mg (CKD-828) has been developed to increase convenience (as only one tablet is required per day) and improve treatment compliance.

Methods

The pharmacokinetic characteristics and tolerability of an FDC of telmisartan and S-amlodipine were compared to those after coadministration of the individual agents in this randomized, open-label, single-dose, two-way, four-period, crossover study. To analyze the telmisartan and S-amlodipine plasma concentrations using a validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method, serial blood samples were collected up to 48 hours post-dose for telmisartan and 144 hours post-dose for S-amlodipine, in each period.

Results

Forty-eight healthy subjects were enrolled, and 43 completed the study. The mean peak plasma concentration (C_max) and the area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to the last measurement (AUC_0–t) values of telmisartan were 522.29 ng/mL and 2,475.16 ng·h/mL for the FDC, and 540.45 ng/mL and 2,559.57 ng·h/mL for the individual agents concomitantly administered, respectively. The mean C_max and AUC_0–t values of S-amlodipine were 2.71 ng/mL and 130.69 ng·h/mL for the FDC, and 2.74 ng/mL and 129.81 ng·h/mL for the individual agents concomitantly administered, respectively. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 90% confidence interval (CI) for the telmisartan C_max and AUC_0–t (FDC of telmisartan and S-amlodipine/concomitant administration) were 0.8509 (0.7353–0.9846) and 0.9431 (0.8698–1.0226), respectively. The GMR and 90% CI for the S-amlodipine C_max and AUC_0–t (FDC/concomitant administration) were 0.9829 (0.9143–1.0567) and 0.9632 (0.8798–1.0546), respectively. As the intrasubject variability of the C_max for telmisartan administered individually was 42.94%, all 90% CIs of the GMRs fell within the predetermined acceptance range. Both treatments were well tolerated in this study.

Conclusion

CKD-828 FDC tablets were shown to be bioequivalent to coadministration of the individual agents with the respective strength, in healthy subjects under fasting conditions. There was no significant difference in safety profile between the two treatments.