The ADVANCE trial: clarifying the role of perindopril/indapamide fixed-dose combination in the reduction of cardiovascular and renal events in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus exhibit a marked increase in cardiovascular and renal risk. A number of interventional trials have shown that these patients benefit greatly from aggressive BP lowering, especially when the drug regimen comprises an inhibitor of the renin-angiotensin system. The results of the placebo-controlled ADVANCE (Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: PreterAx and DiamicroN MR Controlled Evaluation) trial, conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes, are exemplary in this respect. The systematic use of a fixed-dose combination containing the ACE inhibitor perindopril and the diuretic indapamide afforded substantial protection against cardiovascular mortality and myocardial infarction, while providing important renoprotection, reducing the development of micro- and macroalbuminuria, and allowing regression of nephropathy. The beneficial effects were obtained regardless of baseline BP and whether or not the patients were receiving antihypertensive therapy.

Amlodipine and valsartan as components of a rational and effective fixed-dose combination.

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension is effective in preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. Calcium antagonists and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system are widely used today to initiate antihypertensive therapy but, when given as monotherapy, do not suffice in most patients to normalize blood pressure. Combining the two types of agents considerably increases the antihypertensive efficacy, but not at the expense of a deterioration of tolerability. This is exemplified by the experience accumulated with the recently developed fixed dose combination containing the AT(1)-receptor blocker valsartan (160 mg) and the dihydropyridine amlodipine (5 or 10 mg). In a randomized trial, an 8-week treatment normalized blood pressure (<140/90 mmHg) within 8 weeks in a large fraction of hypertensive patients (78.4% and 85.2% using the 5/160 [n = 371] and 10/160 mg [n = 377] dosage, respectively). Like all AT(1)-receptor blockers valsartan has a placebo-like tolerability. Valsartan prevents to a large extent the occurrence amlodipine-induced peripheral edema. Both amlodipine and valsartan have beneficial effects on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, as well as protective effects on renal function. The co-administration of these two agents is therefore very attractive, as it enables a rapid and sustained blood pressure control in hypertensive patients. The availability of a fixed-dose combination based on amlodipine and valsartan is expected therefore to facilitate the management of hypertension, to improve long-term adherence with antihypertensive therapy and, ultimately, to have a positive impact on cardiovascular and renal outcomes.

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.

The need for combination antihypertensive therapy to reach target blood pressures: what has been learned from clinical practice and morbidity-mortality trials?

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension represents a cost-effective way for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. To benefit maximally from antihypertensive treatment blood pressure (BP) should be brought to below 140/90 mmHg in every hypertensive patient, and even lower (&lt; 130/80 mmHg) if diabetes or renal disease co-exists. Most of the time such targets cannot be reached using monotherapies. This is especially true in patients who exhibit a high cardiovascular risk. The co-administration of two agents acting by different mechanisms considerably increases BP control. Such preparations are not only efficacious, but also well tolerated, and some fixed low-dose combinations have a tolerability profile similar to placebo. This is for instance the case for the preparation containing the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril (2 mg) and the diuretic indapamide (0.625 mg), a fixed low-dose combination that has recently been shown in controlled interventional trials to be more effective than monotherapies in reducing albuminuria, regressing cardiac hypertrophy and improving macrovascular stiffness. Fixed-dose combinations are becoming more and more popular and are even proposed by current hypertension guidelines as a first-line option to treat hypertensive patients.

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.

Improved blood pressure control by monitoring compliance with antihypertensive therapy.

Compliance with antihypertensive therapy was monitored for three months using an electronic medication dispenser in 35 patients remaining hypertensive despite the once-daily administration of a blood pressure lowering drug (either as monotherapy or as fixed-dose combination therapy). During the monitoring of compliance, the treatment was unchanged but blood pressure decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from 167.9/100.4 +/- 16.3/7.2 mmHg (mean +/- SD) to 152.5/90.9 +/- 20.9/11.5 mmHg. The percentage of days with one opening per day was 80.8 +/- 20.5. Thus, discussing with the patient about compliance with the prescribed drug regimen and monitoring compliance for a few months allows better control of blood pressure. This most likely reflects increased compliance with antihypertensive drug therapy.

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.

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.

Managing hypertension in high-risk patients: lessons and promises from the STRATHE and ADVANCE trials.

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension represents a cost-effective way of preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. To benefit maximally from antihypertensive treatment, blood pressure should be brought to below 140/90 mmHg in every hypertensive patient, and even lower (< 130/80 mmHg) if diabetes or renal disease co-exists. Such targets cannot usually be reached using monotherapies. This is especially true in patients who present with a high cardiovascular risk. The co-administration of two agents acting by different mechanisms considerably increases the blood pressure control rate. Such combinations are not only efficacious, but are also well tolerated, and some fixed low-dose combinations even have a placebo-like tolerability. This is the case for the preparation containing the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril (2 mg) and the diuretic indapamide (0.625 mg), a fixed low-dose combination that has been shown in controlled trials to be more effective than monotherapies in reducing albuminuria, regressing cardiac hypertrophy and improving the stiffness of large arteries. Using this combination to initiate antihypertensive therapy has been shown in a double-blind trial (Strategies of Treatment in Hypertension: Evaluation; STRATHE) to normalize blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg) in significantly more patients (62%) than a sequential monotherapy approach based on atenolol, losartan and amlodipine (49%) and a stepped-care strategy based on valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide (47%), with no difference between the three arm groups in terms of tolerability. An ongoing randomized trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation; ADVANCE) is a study with a 2 x 2 factorial design assessing the effects of the fixed-dose perindopril-indapamide combination and of the intensive gliclazide modified release-based glucose control regimen in type 2 diabetic patients, with or without hypertension. A total of 11 140 patients were randomly selected. Within the first 6 weeks of treatment (run-in phase), the perindopril-indapamide combination lowered blood pressure from 145/81 +/- 22/11 mmHg (mean +/- SD) to 137/78 +/- 20/10 mmHg. Fixed-dose combinations are becoming more and more popular for the management of hypertension, and are even proposed by hypertension guidelines as a first-line option to treat hypertensive patients.

Enhancing clinically-relevant shoulder function assessment using only essential movements.

Kinematic functional evaluation with body-worn sensors provides discriminative and responsive scores after shoulder surgery, but the optimal movements' combination has not yet been scientifically investigated. The aim of this study was the development of a simplified shoulder function kinematic score including only essential movements. The P Score, a seven-movement kinematic score developed on 31 healthy participants and 35 patients before surgery and at 3, 6 and 12 months after shoulder surgery, served as a reference.Principal component analysis and multiple regression were used to create simplified scoring models. The candidate models were compared to the reference score. ROC curve for shoulder pathology detection and correlations with clinical questionnaires were calculated.The B-B Score (hand to the Back and hand upwards as to change a Bulb) showed no difference to the P Score in time*score interaction (P > .05) and its relation with the reference score was highly linear (R(2) > .97). Absolute value of correlations with clinical questionnaires ranged from 0.51 to 0.77. Sensitivity was 97% and specificity 94%.The B-B and reference scores are equivalent for the measurement of group responses. The validated simplified scoring model presents practical advantages that facilitate the objective evaluation of shoulder function in clinical practice.

Potential impact of single-risk-factor versus total risk management for the prevention of cardiovascular events in Seychelles.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors in Seychelles, a middle-income African country, and compare the cost-effectiveness of single-risk-factor management (treating individuals with arterial blood pressure >/= 140/90 mmHg and/or total serum cholesterol >/= 6.2 mmol/l) with that of management based on total CV risk (treating individuals with a total CV risk >/= 10% or >/= 20%).METHODS: CV risk factor prevalence and a CV risk prediction chart for Africa were used to estimate the 10-year risk of suffering a fatal or non-fatal CV event among individuals aged 40-64 years. These figures were used to compare single-risk-factor management with total risk management in terms of the number of people requiring treatment to avert one CV event and the number of events potentially averted over 10 years. Treatment for patients with high total CV risk (>/= 20%) was assumed to consist of a fixed-dose combination of several drugs (polypill). Cost analyses were limited to medication.FINDINGS: A total CV risk of >/= 10% and >/= 20% was found among 10.8% and 5.1% of individuals, respectively. With single-risk-factor management, 60% of adults would need to be treated and 157 cardiovascular events per 100 000 population would be averted per year, as opposed to 5% of adults and 92 events with total CV risk management. Management based on high total CV risk optimizes the balance between the number requiring treatment and the number of CV events averted.CONCLUSION: Total CV risk management is much more cost-effective than single-risk-factor management. These findings are relevant for all countries, but especially for those economically and demographically similar to Seychelles.

Application in the STRATHE trial of a score system to compare the efficacy and the tolerability of different therapeutic strategies in the management of hypertension

A score system integrating the evolution of efficacy and tolerability over time was applied to a subpopulation of the STRATHE trial, a trial performed according to a parallel group design, with a double-blind, random allocation to either a fixed-dose combination strategy (perindopril/indapamide 2 mg/0.625 mg, with the possibility to increase the dose to 3 mg/0.935 mg, and 4 mg/1.250 mg if needed, n = 118), a sequential monotherapy approach (atenolol 50 mg, followed by losartan 50 mg and amlodipine 5 mg if needed, n = 108), or a stepped-care strategy (valsartan 40 mg, followed by valsartan 80 mg and valsartan 80 mg+ hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg if needed, n = 103). The aim was to lower blood pressure below 140/90 mmHg within a 9-month period. The treatment could be adjusted after 3 and 6 months. Only patients in whom the study protocol was strictly applied were included in this analysis. At completion of the trial the total score averaged 13.1 +/- 70.5 (mean +/- SD) using the fixed-dose combination strategy, compared with -7.2 +/- 81.0 using the sequential monotherapy approach and -17.5 +/- 76.4 using the stepped-care strategy. In conclusion, the use of a score system allows the comparison of antihypertensive therapeutic strategies, taking into account at the same time efficacy and tolerability. In the STRATHE trial the best results were observed with the fixed-dose combination containing low doses of an angiotensin enzyme converting inhibitor (perindopril) and a diuretic (indapamide).

Comparaison de stratégies thérapeutiques dans la prise en charge de l'hypertension artérielle [Comparison of therapeutic strategies in the management of hypertension]

Guidelines for the treatment of hypertension recommend reducing blood pressure to below 140/90 mmHg. However, there is little to guide the clinician on which pharmacological strategy to pursue: monotherapy with stepped-care, sequential monotherapy, or the initial use of combination therapy. The STRATHE study was designed to clarify this issue by comparing the three strategies. A low-dose combination of perindopril/indapamide was significantly superior to either stepped-care or sequential monotherapy in terms of reducing systolic blood pressure and in the percentage of patients achieving normalisation without adverse effects. Pulse pressure showed a trend to greater reductions with the low-dose combination. Although there must be caution about extrapolating these results to other combinations, which may not have the same pharmacological properties, the STRATHE study has shown that initiating antihypertensive therapy with a low-dose combination has advantages over the two other classical therapeutic strategies.