Azilsartan compared to ACE inhibitors in anti-hypertensive therapy: one-year outcomes of the observational EARLY registry

BACKGROUND

Azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M), has been demonstrated to be more effective than the other sartans currently in use; however, there is insufficient information available comparing it with ACE-inhibitors. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of AZL-M with that of ACE-inhibitors in a real life clinical setting.

METHODS

The EARLY registry is a prospective, observational, national, multicentre registry with a follow-up period of 12 months. There were two principal objectives: 1) documentation of the achievement of target BP values set according to recent national and international guidelines, and 2) description of the safety profile of AZL-M.

RESULTS

A total of 3 849 patients with essential arterial hypertension were recruited from primary care offices in Germany. Patients who initiated monotherapy at baseline comprising either AZL-M or an ACE-inhibitor were included at a ratio of seven to three. Results demonstrated that a blood pressure target of <140/90 mmHg was achieved by a significantly greater proportion of patients in the AZL-M group (61.1 %) compared with the ACE-inhibitor group (56.4 %; p < 0.05; OR, 1.21; 95 % CI, 1.03-1.42), with this finding maintained after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics. AZL-M appeared to have an equivalent safety profile to the ACE-inhibitors, with a similar incidence of adverse events in the two patient groups (p = 0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

These data add to the results of previous randomized controlled clinical trials suggesting that, compared with other agents that target the renin-angiotensin system, AZL-M provides statistically significant albeit small improvements in blood pressure control.

Patients With Newly Diagnosed Hypertension Treated With the Renin Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Azilsartan Medoxomil vs Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors: The Prospective EARLY Registry

For patients with newly diagnosed hypertension, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are usually the first-line therapies. There is, however, no real-life data regarding the relative clinical effectiveness and tolerability of either drug class. The prospective registry, Treatment With Azilsartan Compared to ACE Inhibitors in Antihypertensive Therapy (EARLY), was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the ARB azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) vs ACE inhibitors in real-world patients. Of the 1153 patients with newly diagnosed hypertension who were included in the registry, 789 were prescribed AZL-M and 364 were prescribed an ACE inhibitor. After multivariate adjustment, AZL-M was found to provide superior blood pressure reduction and better target blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg) achievement. The proportion of patients with adverse events was not statistically different between groups. The authors conclude that in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients, AZL-M provides superior blood pressure control with a similar safety profile compared with ACE inhibitors.

Candesartan cilexetil 32 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg in unselected patients with high or very high cardiovascular risk: efficacy, safety, and metabolic impact

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Safety and efficacy of the fixed-dose combination candesartan cilexetil 32 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg has been demonstrated in a number of randomized clinical trials. Because stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria prohibit many high-risk patients from being investigated in clinical trials we aimed to assess the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety in a large unselected cohort of high-risk patients in primary care. The primary objective was the efficacy of candesartan cilexetil 32 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg in lowering the office-based blood pressure (BP). Secondary objectives were changes of metabolic parameters and safety.

METHODS

A multicenter, non-interventional study of patients with a BP ≥ 140 mmHg systolic and/or 90 mmHg diastolic and additional cardiovascular risk factors. Patients received the fixed-dose combination of candesartan cilexetil 32 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 3,390 patients with a mean age of 61.7 ± 10.6 years, 57.8 % being male, and a mean body mass index of 29.7 kg/m(2) were documented. Of these, 70.9 % had at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor such as coronary artery disease (45.5 %) or diabetes mellitus (44.5 %). Baseline BP was 159.6 ± 15.3 over 93.5 ± 9.5 mmHg. BP at 24 weeks was reduced by 32.3 ± 15.8 systolic and 16.1 ± 10.2 mmHg diastolic compared with baseline (p < 0.001 each). Systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) was normalized (<140/<90 mmHg) in 57.4 % of non-diabetic patients. An SBP <140 mmHg or SBP reduction of ≥ 20 mmHg was achieved by 77.9 % non-diabetic patients. Fasting plasma glucose (-5.9 mg/dL), glycosylated hemoglobin (-0.18 %), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-8.5 mg/dL) and triglycerides (-20.3 mg/dL) were reduced significantly, high-density lipoprotein was increased by 0.18 %, while potassium and creatinine levels remained stable. The proportion of patients with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was 1.3 % (n = 61 events in 45 patients). There were ten serious ADRs in eight patients; four patients died without causal relationship to study drug.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm previous randomized clinical trial data supporting the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of this fixed-dose combination in an unselected patient population with high cardiovascular risk.

EARLY Treatment with azilsartan compared to ACE-inhibitors in anti-hypertensive therapy--rationale and design of the EARLY hypertension registry

Background

Arterial hypertension is highly prevalent but poorly controlled. Blood pressure (BP) reduction substantially reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Recent randomized, double-blind clinical trials demonstrated that azilsartan medoxomil (AZM) is more effective in reducing BP than the ubiquitary ACE inhibitor ramipril. Therefore, we aimed to test whether these can be verified under clinical practice conditions.

Methods/Design

The “Treatment with Azilsartan Compared to ACE-Inhibitors in Anti-Hypertensive Therapy” (EARLY) registry is a prospective, observational, national, multicenter registry with a follow-up of up to 12 months. It will include up to 5000 patients on AZM or ACE-inhibitor monotherapy in a ratio of 7 to 3. A subgroup of patients will undergo 24-hour BP monitoring. EARLY has two co-primary objectives: 1) Description of the safety profile of azilsartan and 2) achievement of BP targets based on recent national and international guidelines for patients treated with azilsartan in comparison to those treated with ACE-inhibitors. The most important secondary endpoints are the determination of persistence with treatment and the documentation of cardiovascular and renal events. Recruitment commenced in January 2012 and will be completed by February 2013.

Conclusions

The data obtained will supplement previous results from randomized controlled trials to document the potential value of utilizing azilsartan medoxomil in comparison to ACE-inhibitor treatment for target BP achievement in clinical practice.

Effect of Traumeel S on pain and discomfort in radiation-induced oral mucositis: a preliminary observational study

CONTEXT

Painful oral mucositis is an almost inevitable side effect of radiotherapy of head and neck tumors that simultaneous chemotherapy intensifies and that is notoriously difficult to treat. In a previous study, chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in children undergoing bone marrow transplantation responded well to the homeopathic complex remedy Traumeel S.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of Traumeel S in the management of radiation-induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck tumors.

DESIGN

The research team designed a nonrandomized, prospective, observational study with matched pairs.

SETTING

The research team performed the study in a tertiary cancer-care center at the Institute of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medical School Hanover, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were 20 patients who were receiving radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy for head and neck tumors.

INTERVENTION

Five times per day during the observational period, participants self-administered daily mouth rinses with either sage tea (Salvia officinalis, control group) or Traumeel S solution (intervention group).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Two independent physicians determined the grade of oral mucositis at least once per week, and the research team derived the degree of oral pain from diaries that participants kept.

RESULTS

Both groups were comparable in terms of tumor and treatment characteristics. The research team could not confirm any appreciable specific effect of Traumeel S on the primary endpoints; the limited reduction in pain for the intervention group compared to the control group was not significant, and the more frequent analgesia in the Traumeel S group most likely explained that reduction. Among the secondary endpoints, loss of taste and swallowing difficulty responded to Traumeel S to some extent.

CONCLUSIONS

Traumeel S may have some potential in the treatment of radiation-induced oral mucositis, but its possible effects need confirmation by further studies. This article discusses some methodological requirements.

Auricular acupuncture for dental anxiety: a randomized controlled trial

Auricular acupuncture can be an effective treatment for acute anxiety, but there is a lack of direct comparisons of acupuncture to proven standard drug treatments. In this study we compared the efficacy of auricular acupuncture with intranasal midazolam, placebo acupuncture, and no treatment for reducing dental anxiety. Patients having dental extractions (n = 67) were randomized to (i) auricular acupuncture, (ii) placebo acupuncture, and (iii) intranasal midazolam and compared with a no treatment group. Anxiety was assessed before the interventions, at 30 min, and after the dental extraction. Physiological variables were assessed continuously. With the no treatment group as control, the auricular acupuncture group, and the midazolam group were significantly less anxious at 30 min as compared with patients in the placebo acupuncture group (Spielberger Stait-Trait Anxiety Inventory X1, P = 0.012 and <0.001, respectively). In addition, patient compliance assessed by the dentist was significantly improved if auricular acupuncture or application of intranasal midazolam had been performed (P = 0.032 and 0.049, respectively). In conclusion, both, auricular acupuncture and intranasal midazolam were similarly effective for the treatment of dental anxiety.