BUPROPION/NALTREXONE FIXED-DOSE COMBINATION FOR THE TREATMENT OF OBESITY

The combination of bupropion and naltrexone is one of the most promising new possibilities for the treatment of obesity in an era of increasing prevalence of this disease and decreasing options for its pharmacological management. Although approved by FDA panel members, it was temporally rejected by the FDA afterwards, who demanded more cardiovascular safety data for its commercialization. This monograph will focus on the physiology involved in its mechanisms of action and results of clinical trials.

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.

Effect of artesunate-mefloquine fixed-dose combination in malaria transmission in amazon basin communities

Background: Studies in South-East Asia have suggested that early diagnosis and treatment with artesunate (AS) and mefloquine (MQ) combination therapy may reduce the transmission of Plasmodium falciparum malaria and the progression of MQ resistance. Methods: The effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination of AS and MQ (ASMQ) in reducing malaria transmission was tested in isolated communities of the Jurua valley in the Amazon region. Priority municipalities within the Brazilian Legal Amazon area were selected according to pre-specified criteria. Routine national malaria control programmatic procedures were followed. Existing health structures were reinforced and health care workers were trained to treat with ASMQ all confirmed falciparum malaria cases that match inclusion criteria. A local pharmacovigilance structure was implemented. Incidence of malaria and hospitalizations were recorded two years before, during, and after the fixed-dose ASMQ intervention. In total, between July 2006 and December 2008, 23,845 patients received ASMQ. Two statistical modelling approaches were applied to monthly time series of P. falciparum malaria incidence rates, P. falciparum/Plasmodium vivax infection ratio, and malaria hospital admissions rates. All the time series ranged from January 2004 to December 2008, whilst the intervention period span from July 2006 to December 2008. Results: The ASMQ intervention had a highly significant impact on the mean level of each time series, adjusted for trend and season, of 0.34 (95% CI 0.20 - 0.58) for the P. falciparum malaria incidence rates, 0.67 (95% CI 0.50 - 0.89) for the P. falciparum/P. vivax infection ratio, and 0.53 (95% CI 0.41 - 0.69) for the hospital admission rates. There was also a significant change in the seasonal (or monthly) pattern of the time series before and after intervention, with the elimination of the malaria seasonal peak in the rainy months of the years following the introduction of ASMQ. No serious adverse events relating to the use of fixed-dose ASMQ were reported. Conclusions: In the remote region of the Jurua valley, the early detection of malaria by health care workers and treatment with fixed-dose ASMQ was feasible and efficacious, and significantly reduced the incidence and morbidity of P. falciparum malaria.

Fixed-dose combination therapy for type 2 diabetes:sitagliptin plus pioglitazone

Type 2 diabetes is typically associated with insulin resistance and dysfunction of insulin-secreting pancreatic beta-cells. Addressing these defects often requires therapy with a combination of differently acting antidiabetic agents. A potential novel combination in development brings together the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor sitagliptin with the thiazolidinedione pioglitazone into a fixed-dose single-tablet combination. The former component acts mainly to increase prandial insulin secretion; the latter improves insulin sensitivity.

Position of fixed-dose combinations containing an AT(1)-receptor blocker and a thiazide diuretic.

Treatment of hypertension remains a difficult task despite the availability of different types of medications lowering blood pressure by different mechanisms. In order to reach the target blood pressures recommended today combination therapy is required in most patients. The co-administration of two drugs with different impacts on the cardiovascular system markedly increases the antihypertensive effectiveness without altering adversely tolerability. Fixed low-dose combinations are becoming a valuable option not only as second-line, but also as first-line therapy. In this respect the co-administration of thiazide diuretic with an AT(1)-receptor blocker is particularly appealing. The diuretic-induced decrease in total body sodium activates the renin-angiotensin system, thus rendering blood pressure maintenance angiotensin II-dependent. During blockade of the renin-angiotensin system low doses of thiazides generally suffice, allowing the prevention of undesirable metabolic effects. Also, blockade of the AT(1)-receptor, particularly when angiotensin II production is enhanced in response to diuretic therapy, is expected to be beneficial, since angiotensin II seems to contribute importantly to the pathogenesis of cardiovascular and renal complications of hypertension.

Safety and efficacy of fixed-combination travoprost/timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension not controlled with timolol monotherapy

To assess the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed-dose combination (TRAV/TIM-FC) in patients not achieving the target IOP of ≤18 mmHg while on timolol 0.5% (TIM) monotherapy. A multicenter, prospective, open-label study (NCT01336569) was conducted in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Eligible patients were receiving TIM monotherapy with a screening/baseline IOP of 19-35 mmHg in ≥1 eye. TIM was discontinued on the baseline visit day (no washout period) and TRAV/TIM-FC was initiated and administered once daily at 8 pm for 4-6 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was mean change in IOP from TIM-treated baseline to study end, measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. Results were analyzed by analysis of variance and paired samples t-test (5% significance). A total of 49 patients were enrolled (mean age, 63 [range, 42-82] years; 55.1% White; 73.5% women), and 45 were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Mean duration of treatment with TRAV/TIM-FC was 31 days. Mean ± standard deviation IOP reduction from baseline (TIM) to the follow-up visit (TRAV/TIM-FC) was -5.0±3.6 mmHg. IOP decreased significantly (P<0.0001) from baseline (22.1±2.6 mmHg) to study end (17.1±3.9 mmHg) in the ITT population, with a mean IOP reduction of 22.3%. Most patients (n=33/45; 73.3%) achieved IOP ≤18 mmHg. Two patients experienced a total of four adverse events (AEs), including a patient who reported one serious AE (enterorrhagia) that was considered unrelated to treatment, and a patient who reported one event each of drug-related redness, pruritus, and foreign body sensation. Most patients (n=47/49; 95.9%) reported no AEs. TRAV/TIM-FC lowered IOP in patients who were not at target IOP while receiving TIM monotherapy, with most patients achieving an IOP ≤18 mmHg with TRAV/TIM-FC. TRAV/TIM-FC was well tolerated in this population.

An 18-Week, Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study of Amlodipine/Ramipril Combination Versus Amlodipine Monotherapy in the Treatment of Hypertension: The Assessment of Combination Therapy of Amlodipine/Ramipril (ATAR) Study

Background: A combination of antihypertensive agents of different drug classes in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) may offer advantages in terms of efficacy, tolerability, and treatment compliance. Combination of a calcium channel blocker with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor may act synergistically to reduce blood pressure (BP). Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of an amlodipine/ramipril FDC with those of amlodipine monotherapy. Methods: This 18-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 8 centers across Brazil. Patients with stage 1 or 2 essential hypertension were enrolled. After a 2-week placebo run-in phase, patients received amlodipine/ramipril 2.5/2.5 mg or amlodipine 2.5 mg, after which the doses were titrated, based on BP, to 515 then 10/10 mg (amlodipme/ramipril) and 5 then 10 mg (amiodipine). The primary end point was BP measured in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Hematology and serum biochemistry were assessed at baseline and study end. Tolerability was assessed using patient interview, laboratory analysis, and physical examination, including measurement of ankle circumference to assess peripheral edema. Results: A total of 222 patients completed the study (age range, 40-79 years; FDC group, 117 patients [mean dose, 7.60/7.60 mg]; monotherapy, 105 patients [mean dose, 7.97 mg]). The mean (SD) changes in systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), as measured using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and in the physician`s office, were significantly greater with combination therapy than monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP (ABPM, -20.76 [1.25] vs -15.80 [1.18] mm Hg and -11.71 [0.78] vs -8.61 [0.74] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.004]; office, -27.51 [1.40] vs -22.84 [1.33] min Hg [P = 0.012] and -16.41 [0.79] vs -14.64 [0.75] mm Hg [P = NS], respectively). In the ITT analysis, the mean changes in ambulatory, but not office-based, BP were statistically significant (ABPM: SBP, -20.21 [1.14] vs -15.31 [1.12] mm Hg and DBP, -11.61 [0.72] vs -8.42 [0.70] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.002]; office: SBP, -26.60 [1.34] vs -22.97 [1.30] mm Hg and DBP, -16.48 [0.78] vs -14.48 [0.75] mm Hg [both, P = NS]). Twenty-nine patients (22.1%) treated with combination therapy and 41 patients (30.6%) treated with monotherapy experienced >= 1 adverse event considered possibly related to study drug. The combmation-therapy group had lower prevalence of edema (7.6% vs 18.7%; P = 0.011) and a similar prevalence of dry cough (3.8% vs 0.8%; P = NS). No clinically significant changes in laboratory values were found in either group. Conclusions: In this population of patients with essential hypertension, the amlodipine/ramipril FDC was associated with significantly reduced ambulatory and office-measured BP compared with amlodipine monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP. Both treatments were well tolerated. (Clin Ther. 2008;30: 1618-1628) (C) 2008 Excerpta Medica Inc.

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.

Public health value of fixed-dose combinations in hypertension.

It is well documented that reducing blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive individuals reduces the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events. Despite this, many patients with hypertension remain untreated or inadequately treated, and fail to reach the recommended BP goals. Suboptimal BP control, whilst arising from multiple causes, is often due to poor patient compliance and/or persistence, and results in a significant health and economic burden on society. The use of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for the treatment of hypertension has the potential to increase patient compliance and persistence. When compared with antihypertensive monotherapies, FDCs may also offer equivalent or better efficacy, and the same or improved tolerability. As a result, FDCs have the potential to reduce both the CV event rates and the non-drug healthcare costs associated with hypertension. When FDCs are adopted for the treatment of hypertension, issues relating to copayment, formulary restrictions and therapeutic reference pricing must be addressed.

Fixed-dose combinations as initial therapy for hypertension : a review of approved agents and a guide to patient selection.

Recent guidelines recommend initiation of antihypertensive therapy with fixed-dose combinations in high-risk patients because such patients usually need two or more blood pressure (BP)-lowering agents in order to normalize their BP. Agents that block the renin-angiotensin system (ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor antagonists [angiotensin receptor blockers; ARBs]) are preferred for the management of hypertension in most patients exhibiting subclinical target organ damage, or established cardiovascular or renal diseases. Unless contraindicated they should be one of the components of fixed-dose combinations, whereas the other component may be either a calcium channel antagonist or a thiazide diuretic. Fixed-dose combinations containing an ACE inhibitor or ARB plus a calcium channel antagonist appear particularly effective in preventing complications of coronary heart disease.

Desenvolvimento e validação de método analítico para determinação simultânea de lamivudina, zidovudina e nevirapina em comprimidos dose-fixa combinada por cromatografia líquida de alta eficiência

An analytical method has been developed and validated for the quantitation of lamivudine, zidovudine and nevirapine in the fixed-dose combination film-coated tablet by high performance liquid chromatography, in accordance with RE No. 899/2003, National Sanitary Surveillance Agency. It was based on an isocratic elution system with a potassium phosphate buffer pH 3.0: acetonitrile (60:40 v/v) mobile phase, C18, 250 x 46 mm column, 10µm particle size, λ 270 nm. The statistically evaluated results have shown that the method is specific, precise, accurate, and robust, ensuring the analytical safety of 3TC, AZT and NVP determination, which emerges as a new therapeutic alternative for antiretroviral treatment.

Simultaneous spectrophotometric determination of lamivudine and zidovudine in fixed dose combinations using multivariate calibration

The simultaneous determination of two or more active components in pharmaceutical preparations, without previous chemical separation, is a common analytical problem. Published works describe the determination of AZT and 3TC separately, as raw material or in different pharmaceutical preparations. In this work, a method using UV spectroscopy and multivariate calibration is described for the simultaneous measurement of 3TC and AZT in fixed dose combinations. The methodology was validated and applied to determine the AZT+3TC contents in tablets from five different manufacturers, as well as their dissolution profile. The results obtained employing the proposed methodology was similar to methods using first derivative technique and HPLC.

Statistical evaluation of an acute dermal toxicity test using the dermal fixed dose procedure

The conventional method for the assessment of acute dermal toxicity (OECD Test Guideline 402, 1987) uses death of animals as an endpoint to identify the median lethal dose (LD50). A new OECD Testing Guideline called the dermal fixed dose procedure (dermal FDP) is being prepared to provide an alternative to Test Guideline 402. In contrast to Test Guideline 402, the dermal FDP does not provide a point estimate of the LD50, but aims to identify that dose of the substance under investigation that causes clear signs of nonlethal toxicity. This is then used to assign classification according to the new Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling scheme (GHS). The dermal FDP has been validated using statistical modelling rather than by in vivo testing. The statistical modelling approach enables calculation of the probability of each GHS classification and the expected numbers of deaths and animals used in the test for imaginary substances with a range of LD50 values and dose-response curve slopes. This paper describes the dermal FDP and reports the results from the statistical evaluation. It is shown that the procedure will be completed with considerably less death and suffering than guideline 402, and will classify substances either in the same or a more stringent GHS class than that assigned on the basis of the LD50 value.