Felodipine-metoprolol combination tablet: a valuable option to initiate antihypertensive therapy?

The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of a calcium antagonist/beta-blocker fixed combination tablet used as first-line antihypertesnive therapy in comparison with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and placebo. Patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure between 95 and 110 mm Hg at the end of a 4-week run-in period) were randomly allocated to a double-blind, 12-week treatment with either a combination tablet of felodipine and metoprolol (Logimax), 5/50 mg daily (n = 321), enalapril, 10 mg daily (n = 321), or placebo (n = 304), with the possibility of doubling the dose after 4 or 8 weeks of treatment if needed (diastolic blood pressure remaining >90 mm Hg). The combined felodipine-metoprolol treatment controlled blood pressure (diastolic < or =90 mm Hg 24 h after dose) in 72% of patients after 12 weeks, as compared with 49% for enalapril and 30% for placebo. A dose adjustment was required in 38% of patients receiving the combination, in 63% of patients allocated to placebo, and 61% of enalapril-treated patients. The overall incidence of adverse events was 54.5% during felodipine-metoprolol treatment; the corresponding values for enalapril and placebo were 51.7% and 47.4%, respectively. Withdrawal of treatment due to adverse events occurred in 18 patients treated with the combination, in 10 patients on enalapril, and 12 patients on placebo. No significant change in patients' well-being was observed in either of the three study groups. These results show that a fixed combination tablet of felodipine and metoprolol allows to normalize blood pressure in a substantially larger fraction of patients than enalapril given alone. This improved efficacy is obtained without impairing the tolerability. The fixed-dose combination of felodipine and metoprolol, therefore, may become a valuable option to initiate antihypertensive treatment.

Treatment of essential hypertension with calcium channel blockers: what is the place of lercanidipine?

In all actual clinical guidelines, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) belong to the recommended first line antihypertensive drugs to treat essential hypertension. Several recent large clinical trials have confirmed their efficacy not only in lowering blood pressure but also in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients with a normal or high cardiovascular risk profile. In clinical trials such as ALLHAT, VALUE or ASCOT, an amlodipine-based therapy was at least as effective, when not slightly superior, in lowering blood pressure and sometimes more effective in preventing target organ damages than blood pressure lowering strategies based on the use of diuretics, beta-blockers and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. One of the main clinical side effects of the first and second generation CCBs including amlodipine is the development of peripheral edema. The incidence of leg edema can be markedly reduced by combining the CCB with a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system. This strategy has now led to the development of several fixed-dose combinations of amlodipine and angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Another alternative to lower the incidence of edema is to use CCBs of the third generation such as lercanidipine. Indeed, although no major clinical trials have been conducted with this compound, clinical studies have shown that lercanidipine and amlodipine have a comparable antihypertensive efficacy but with significantly less peripheral edema in patients receiving lercanidipine. In some countries, lercanidipine is now available in a single-pill association with an ACE inhibitor thereby further improving its efficacy and tolerability profile.

Patients with non-insulin depending diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome are suboptimal treated in swiss primary care.

The prevalence of complicated hypertension is increasing in America and Europe. This survey was undertaken to assess the status quo of primary care management of hypertension in patients with the high-risk comorbid diseases metabolic syndrome (MetS) and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (non-insulin depending diabetes mellitus (NIDDM)). Data of anti-hypertensive treatment of 4594 Swiss patients were collected over 1 week. We identified patients with exclusively NIDDM (N = 95), MetS (N = 168), and both (N = 768). Target blood pressure (TBP) attainment, frequency of prescribed substance-classes, and correlations to comorbidities/end-organ damages were assessed. In addition, we analyzed the prescription of unfavorable beta-blockers (BB) and high-dose diuretics (Ds). In NIDDM, Ds (61%), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (40%), and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (31%) were mostly prescribed, while in MetS, drugs prevalence was Ds (68%), ARBs (48%), and BB (41%). Polypharmacy in patients with MetS correlated with body mass index; older patients (>65 years) were more likely to receive dual-free combinations. TBP was attained in 25.2% of NIDDM and in 28.7% of MetS patients. In general, low-dose Ds use was more prevalent in NIDDM and MetS, however, overall, Ds were used excessively (NIDDM: 61%, MetS: 68%), especially in single-pill combination. Patients with MetS were more likely to receive ARBs, ACEIs, CCBs, and low-dose Ds than BBs and/or high-dose Ds. Physicians recognize DM and MetS as high-risk patients, but select inappropriate drugs. Because the majority of patients may have both, MetS and NIDDM, there is an unmet need to define TBP for this specific population considering the increased risk in comparison to patients with MetS or NIDDM alone.

Hypertension: which aspects of hypertension should we impact on and how?

Cardiovascular complications may, to a large extent, be prevented by lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients. International recommendations currently stress the importance of reaching values of below 140/90 mmHg in each patient or even lower in the case of concomitant diabetes or renal impairment. It is currently considered crucial to control the systolic pressure as well as the diastolic pressure, in particular because the relationship between cardiovascular risk and blood pressure is closer for the systolic than the diastolic value. An increase in systolic pressure is in itself a sign of the stiffening of the arterial tree. In most patients, the target pressure may only be reached by combining several different antihypertensive agents. In the STRATHE Study, a greater antihypertensive efficacy, in particular on systolic pressure, was obtained by instituting treatment with a fixed low-dose combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (perindopril) and a diuretic (indapamide), in comparison with other therapeutic strategies based on single-agent therapy. Fixed-dose antihypertensive combinations have now become a validated option for initiating antihypertensive treatment.

Quality of care after acute coronary syndromes in a prospective cohort with reasons for non-prescription of recommended medications.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guidelines is associated with improved outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Clinical registries developed to assess quality of care at discharge often do not collect the reasons for non-prescription for proven efficacious preventive medication in Continental Europe. In a prospective cohort of patients hospitalized for an ACS, we aimed at measuring the rate of recommended treatment at discharge, using pre-specified quality indicators recommended in cardiologic guidelines and including systematic collection of reasons for non-prescription for preventive medications. METHODS: In a prospective cohort with 1260 patients hospitalized for ACS, we measured the rate of recommended treatment at discharge in 4 academic centers in Switzerland. Performance measures for medication at discharge were pre-specified according to guidelines, systematically collected for all patients and included in a centralized database. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty eight patients(54.6%) were discharged with a main diagnosis of STEMI, 491(39%) of NSTEMI and 81(6.4%) of unstable angina. Mean age was 64 years and 21.3% were women. 94.6% were prescribed angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers at discharge when only considering raw prescription rates, but increased to 99.5% when including reasons non-prescription. For statins, rates increased from 98% to 98.6% when including reasons for non-prescription and for beta-blockers, from 82% to 93%. For aspirin, rates further increased from 99.4% to 100% and from to 99.8% to 100% for P2Y12 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: We found a very high adherence to ACS guidelines for drug prescriptions at discharge when including reasons for non-prescription to drug therapy. For beta-blockers, prescription rates were suboptimal, even after taking into account reason for non-prescription. In an era of improving quality of care to achieve 100% prescription rates at discharge unless contra-indicated, pre-specification of reasons for non-prescription for cardiovascular preventive medication permits to identify remaining gaps in quality of care at discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01000701.

Prevention du diabète de type 2: état des connaissances [Prevention of type 2 diabetes: where do we stand?]

It is anticipated that one out of 3 children born in the year 2000 in the United States may develop diabetes. In Switzerland, a population based study in the city of Lausanne (CoLaus) has shown that about 30% of the participants have abnormal glucose homeostasis, and that the prevalence of obesity in the younger age groups has doubled since 1992. In this review, we describe clinical and biological factors associated with an increased risk to develop diabetes and summarize the most important intervention studies that have shown a beneficial effect in the prevention of diabetes. While life style modifications should be recommended for everybody, the place of pharmacological interventions (oral hypoglycemic agents, blood pressure and cholesterol lowering agents) is more controversial.

Hypertension. L'etude ACCOMPLISH: des résultats vraiment inattendus [The ACCOMPLISH trial: are results really unexpected?]

The ACCOMPLISH trial consists of a randomized morbidity-mortality study involving 11506 hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk, randomly allocated to a fixed dose combination containing an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (B, benazepril) and either a calcium antagonist (A, amlodipine) or a diuretic (HCTZ, hydrochlorothiazide). The target blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg) was achieved after a 6 month titration period in 75.4% of patients receiving B+A, versus 72.4% in those on B + HCTZ. Over a mean follow-up of 3 years, the B + A drug regimen was found to reduce significantly more effectively the relative risk cardiovascular mortality (-20%), fatal and non fatal myocardial infarction (-22%) and coronary revascularization (-14%), appearing therefore particularly effective to prevent complications due to myocardial ischemia.

Improvement of chronic congestive heart-failure by oral captopril

Catopril, an inhibitor of angiotensin converting enzyme, was given orally during cardiac catheterisation to 6 normotensive patients with refractory congestive heart-failure. 60--180 minutes after administration of 25 mg captopril, arterial pressure fell by 25%, cardiac index rose by 38%, and left-ventricular pressure and right-atrial pressure fell by 25% and 40% respectively. Plasma-renin activity rose while plasma noradrenaline and aldosterone fell. These data suggest that, in the short term, captopril can reduce both preload and afterload, and improve cardiac function, in refractory congestive heart-failure.

CYP3A5 and ABCB1 genes influence blood pressure and response to treatment, and their effect is modified by salt.

The permeability-glycoprotein efflux-transporter encoded by the multidrug resistance 1 (ABCB1) gene and the cytochromes P450 3A4/5 encoded by the CYP3A4/5 genes are known to interact in the transport and metabolism of many drugs. Recent data have shown that the CYP3A5 genotypes influence blood pressure and that permeability-glycoprotein activity might influence the activity of the renin-angiotensin system. Hence, these 2 genes may contribute to blood pressure regulation in humans. We analyzed the association of variants of the ABCB1 and CYP3A5 genes with ambulatory blood pressure, plasma renin activity, plasma aldosterone, endogenous lithium clearance, and blood pressure response to treatment in 72 families (373 individuals; 55% women; mean age: 46 years) of East African descent. The ABCB1 and CYP3A5 genes interact with urinary sodium excretion in their effect on ambulatory blood pressure (daytime systolic: P=0.05; nighttime systolic and diastolic: P<0.01), suggesting a gene-gene-environment interaction. The combined action of these genes is also associated with postproximal tubular sodium reabsorption, plasma renin activity, plasma aldosterone, and with an altered blood pressure response to the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril (P<0.05). This is the first reported association of the ABCB1 gene with blood pressure in humans and demonstration that genes encoding for proteins metabolizing and transporting drugs and endogenous substrates contribute to blood pressure regulation.

Recent clinical trials with omapatrilat: new developments.

Omapatrilat belongs to the vasopeptidase inhibitors, ie, drugs that possess the ability to inhibit simultaneously the membrane-bound zinc metalloproteases, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), and the neutral endopeptidase EC 3.4.24.11 (NEP). Omapatrilat was targeted to treat patients with hypertension and congestive heart failure. The preclinical and early clinical studies conducted with omapatrilat were very promising. Indeed, omapatrilat appeared to be a very potent antihypertensive agent with very favorable effects on cardiac function in heart failure patients. In contrast to these early studies, the large clinical trials were more disappointing. The results of the OCTAVE trial confirmed the antihypertensive efficacy of omapatrilat, but at the price of an angioedema rate more than threefold higher than that of an ACE inhibitor in the overall population (2.17% vs 0.68%), and close to fourfold higher in the black population. In OVERTURE, a large randomized control trial in heart failure, angioedema was also more common with omapatrilat, but the incidence was much lower (0.8% with omapatrilat vs 0.5% with enalapril). However, omapatrilat was not convincingly superior to the ACE inhibitor. Because angioedema is probably a class side effect of vasopeptidase inhibitors, the higher incidence of this potentially life-threatening complication with omapatrilat has likely stopped the development of this new class of agents. The future of vasopeptidase inhibitors will depend on the ability to improve the risk/benefit ratio either by developing agents that produce less angioedema, or by defining more precisely a high-risk population that could take advantage of dual ACE/NEP inhibition.

Changes in antihypertensive drug treatment in the general population: the Colaus Study

Background and aims: there is little information regar ding changes in antihypertensive drug treatment in Switzerland. We aimed at assessing those changes in a population-based, prospective study. Methods: 768 hypertensive subjects (372 women, 397 men) followed for 5 years. Subjects were defined as continuers (no change), switchers (one antihypertensive class replace by another), combiners (one antihypertensive class added) and discontinuers (stopped treatment). Results: Analysis of all patients (mono or combination therapy) showed that 54.6% were continuers, 27.2% combiners, 12.9% switchers and 5.3 % discontinuers. Similar findings were obtained for participants on monotherapy only: 42.2% continuers, 36.7% combiners, 13.4% switchers and 7.7% discontinuers. Combiners had higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure values at baseline than the other groups (p<0.001), while no difference were found for personal and family history and other clinical and biological variables. Compared to continuers, combiners and switchers improved their blood pressure status at follow-up: 26.7% of combiners and 26.3% of switchers improved, versus 17.7% of continuers and 7.3% of discontinuers (p<0.001). Among participants on monotherapy at baseline, continuation was greatest for angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocking agents (ARBs, 53.1%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (44.4%) and β-blockers (41.8%). Only one quarter of participants treated with diuretic or calcium channel blockers at baseline remained so at follow-up. Conclusion: Antihypertensivedrug treatment is very stable in Switzerland. There are no big differences in persistence between antihypertensive classes, even if ARBs had the most favorable utilization pattern. Changes are only due to blood pressure level and improve blood pressure status.

Prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of high blood pressure in a Swiss city general population: the CoLaus study.

BACKGROUND: This study is aimed to assess the prevalence of awareness, treatment and control of high blood pressure (HBP) and associated factors in a Swiss city. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study of 6182 participants (52.5% women) aged 35-75 years living in Lausanne, Switzerland. METHODS: HBP was defined as blood pressure >/=140/90 mmHg or current antihypertensive medication. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of HBP was 36% (95% confidence interval: 35-38%). Among participants with HBP, 63% were aware of it. Among participants aware of HBP, 78% were treated, and among those treated, 48% were controlled (BP <140/90 mmHg). In multivariate analysis, HBP prevalence was associated with older age, male sex, low educational level, high alcohol intake, awareness of diabetes or dyslipidaemia, obesity and parental history of myocardial infarction. HBP awareness was associated with older age, female sex, awareness of diabetes or dyslipidaemia, obesity and parental history of myocardial infarction. HBP control was associated with younger age, higher educational level and no alcohol intake. Alone or in combination, sartans were the most often prescribed antihypertensive medication category (41%), followed by diuretics, beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers. Only 31% of participants treated for HBP were taking >/=2 antihypertensive medications. CONCLUSION: Although more than half of all participants with HBP were aware and more than three-quarters of them received a pharmacological treatment, less than half of those treated were adequately controlled.

Hypertension et diabète ADVANCE : une étude de morbidité-mortalité : nouveautés en médecine 2007 [ADVANCE: a morbidity mortality study of diabetes and hypertension]

The ADVANCE study is a morbidity-mortality double-blind trial carried out in normotensive or hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes. The patients were randomly assigned to receive containing a fixed-combination tablet of an ACE inhibitor (perindopril) with a diuretic (indapamide) (4 mg/l,250 mg, n=5569), or placebo (n=5571), administered if needed on top of other blood pressure lowering agents. Significant reductions in the relative risk of death from cardiovascular disease (18%), total coronary events (14%), and total renal events (21%) were observed. Thus, in patients with type 2 diabetes, a drug regimen based on a fixed-dose combination of perindopril/ indapamide affords major protection against both the macro and microvascular complications. L'étude ADVANCE est un essai clinique de morbidité-mortalité réalisé en double insu chez des malades avec diabète de type 2 normo ou hypertendus. Les malades ont été alloués au hasard pour un suivi moyen de 4,3 ans à un traitement comportant soit une association fixe de l'inhibiteur de l'ECA périndopril et du diurétique indapamide (4 mg/1,250 mg, n = 5569), soit un placebo (n = 5571), ceci en plus si nécessaire d'autres médicaments antihypertenseurs. Des réductions significatives du risque relatif ont été observées sous périndopril/indapamide, en particulier de la mortalité cardiovasculaire (18%), de l'ensemble des événements coronaires (14%) et rénaux (21%). Ainsi chez le malade avec diabète de type 2, un traitement basé sur une association de périndopril et d'indapamide à doses fixes a un effet protecteur majeur contre les complications macro et microvasculaires.