Long-term effect of the perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine single-pill combination on left ventricular hypertrophy in outpatient hypertensive subjects

A real-world analysis of outcomes and healthcare costs of patients on perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine single-pill vs. multiple-pill combination in Italy

OBJECTIVES

This analysis compared adherence, cardiovascular (CV) events and all-cause mortality incidence, and healthcare costs among hypertensive patients treated with perindopril (PER)/indapamide (IND)/amlodipine (AML) in single-pill combination (SPC) vs. multiple-pill combination, in a real-world setting in Italy.

METHODS

In this observational retrospective analysis of Italian administrative databases, adult patients treated with PER/IND/AML between 2010 and 2020 were divided into two cohorts: single-pill vs. multiple-pill. Patient data were available for at least one year before and after index date. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to reduce selection bias. Adherence was defined as proportion of days covered: non-adherence, <40%; partial adherence, 40-79%, and adherence ≥80%. Mortality incidence and CV events as single, or composite, endpoints were evaluated after first year of follow-up. Healthcare cost analyses were performed from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service.

RESULTS

Following PSM, the single-pill cohort included 12 150 patients, and the multiple-pill cohort, 6105. The SPC cohort had a significantly higher percentage of adherent patients vs. the multiple-pill cohort (59.9% vs. 26.9%, P  < 0.001). Following the first year of follow-up, incidence of all-cause mortality, and combined endpoint of all-cause mortality and CV events were lower in the SPC cohort compared with multiple-pill cohort. Average annual direct healthcare costs were lower in the single-pill cohort (€2970) vs. multiple-pill cohort (€3642); cost of all drugs and all-cause hospitalizations were major contributors.

CONCLUSION

The SPC of PER/IND/AML, compared with multiple-pill combination, is associated with higher adherence to medication, lower incidence of CV events and mortality, and reduced healthcare costs.

Hypertensive heart disease: risk factors, complications and mechanisms

Hypertensive heart disease constitutes functional and structural dysfunction and pathogenesis occurring primarily in the left ventricle, the left atrium and the coronary arteries due to chronic uncontrolled hypertension. Hypertensive heart disease is underreported and the mechanisms underlying its correlates and complications are not well elaborated. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of hypertensive heart disease, we discuss in detail the mechanisms associated with development and complications of hypertensive heart disease especially left ventricular hypertrophy, atrial fibrillation, heart failure and coronary artery disease. We also briefly highlight the role of dietary salt, immunity and genetic predisposition in hypertensive heart disease pathogenesis.

Combinatorial approaches for novel cardiovascular drug discovery: a review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

In this article, authors report an inclusive discussion about the combinatorial approach for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and for counteracting the cardiovascular risk factors. The mentioned strategy was demonstrated to be useful for improving the efficacy of pharmacological treatments and in CVDs showed superior efficacy with respect to the classical monotherapeutic approach.

AREAS COVERED

According to this topic, authors analyzed the combinatorial treatments that are available on the market, highlighting clinical studies that demonstrated the efficacy of combinatorial drug strategies to cure CVDs and related risk factors. Furthermore, the review gives an outlook on the future perspective of this therapeutic option, highlighting novel drug targets and disease models that could help the future cardiovascular drug discovery.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of specifically designed and increasingly rational and effective drug combination therapies can therefore be considered the evolution of polypharmacy in cardiometabolic and CVDs. This approach can allow to intervene on multiple etiopathogenetic mechanisms of the disease or to act simultaneously on different pathologies/risk factors, using the combinations most suitable from a pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and toxicological perspective, thus finding the most appropriate therapeutic option.

Perindopril/Indapamide/Amlodipine in Hypertension: A Profile of Its Use

The single-pill combination (SPC) of perindopril (PER)/indapamide (IND)/amlodipine (AML) is a valuable and convenient treatment option for patients with hypertension controlled with two-drug SPC of PER/IND + AML given as two separate pills at the same dose level. PER [an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor], IND (a thiazide-like diuretic) and AML (a calcium channel blocker) are well established antihypertensive agents, which have been available for a long time as monotherapies and dual SPCs and have complementary mechanisms of action. Once-daily PER/IND/AML provided effective BP control, with good tolerability, in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in clinical trials and in large observational prospective studies. The efficacy and tolerability of PER/IND/AML was similar to that of PER/IND + AML in a randomized clinical trial. The therapeutic effect of PER/IND/AML was associated with improved health-related quality of life. Thus, switching from the two-pill PER/IND + AML regimen to single-pill PER/IND/AML reduces pill burden and simplifies drug administration, which may improve adherence to treatment, leading to better BP control and clinical outcomes.

Long-Term Impact of Different Triple Combination Antihypertensive Medications on Blood Pressure Control, Metabolic Pattern and Incident Events: Data from the Brisighella Heart Study

The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate clinical, laboratory and hemodynamic effects on the long term of different triple combination antihypertensive medications in a well-characterized Italian cohort. We considered the data of a subset of Brisighella Heart Study (BHS) participants who were consecutively evaluated in three epidemiological surveys between 2012 and 2020. For the current analysis, we excluded normotensive subjects, patients treated with <3 or ≥3 antihypertensive drugs without taking angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), calcium-channel blockers (CCB) and/or thiazide/thiazide-like diuretics. The remaining participants were divided into three groups depending on whether they were treated with Perindopril/Amlodipine/Indapamide, ACE-inhibitors (other than perindopril)/CCBs/Thiazide or ARBs/CCBs/Thiazide, either with separate drugs or fixed pill combinations. A further group of age- and sex-matched volunteers was selected as control and included patients receiving other antihypertensive treatments. The long-term (12 years) effects of the different antihypertensive treatments were compared among the pre-defined groups. During the observation period, there was a trend towards increase in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) in all the investigated subgroups (p for trend <0.05), but in the subgroup of patients treated with Perindopril/Amlodipine/Indapamide, such increase was significantly lower than in the other groups (p < 0.05). The combination treatment with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) modulators, CCBs and thiazide/thiazide-like diuretics was associated with significantly lower diastolic BP (p < 0.05) and more strictly controlled lipid pattern than other triple combination of anti-hypertensive medications. Patients treated with Perindopril/Amlodipine/Indapamide did not experience any age-related increase in serum levels of total cholesterol. Moreover, during the follow up none of them developed type 2 diabetes, nor had a need for a greater number of antihypertensive drugs to improve BP control, mainly because of a more stable BP control. Based on our observations, combination treatment with RAS modulators, amlodipine and thiazides/thiazide-like diuretics is more effective than other triple antihypertensive medications for lowering the diastolic BP and has a better impact on serum lipids. Perindopril/Amlodipine/Indapamide is associated with more protective metabolic profile than any other considered combination antihypertensive medications.

The Number of Pills, Rather Than the Type of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitor, Predicts Ambulatory Blood Pressure Control in Essential Hypertensives on Triple Therapy: A Real-Life Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

We evaluated the prevalence and predictors of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control in patients taking a triple antihypertensive therapy (renin–angiotensin system inhibitor + calcium channel blocker + thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, in either free or fixed-dose combinations) containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB).

Methods

We performed an observational cross-sectional study on 520 consecutive patients with essential hypertension taking a stable triple therapy in whom 24-h ambulatory BP was evaluated. Both number of pills and antihypertensive treatment intensity (ATI), as possible pharmacological predictors of ambulatory BP control, were taken into account.

Results

A total of 189 (36.3%) patients were taking triple therapy with ACEi and 331 (63.7%) patients were taking triple therapy with ARB. Mean age was 62.7 ± 12.2 years. Patients on triple therapy with ACEi had a significantly lower ATI and took fewer antihypertensive pills than patients on triple therapy with ARB (22.2% of patients took a single-pill triple fixed-dose combination). Patients taking triple therapy with ACEi had higher prevalence of both 24-h (54.8% vs 44.0%; p = 0.019) and daytime BP control (61.8% vs 49.2%; p = 0.006) than patients taking triple therapy with ARB, even after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, smoking habit, type 2 diabetes mellitus, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and ATI [OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1–2.2) and OR 1.6 (95% CI 1.1–2.4), respectively]. However, these independent associations with ambulatory BP control were lost when the number of antihypertensive pills was included in the model.

Conclusion

The higher prevalence of ambulatory BP control found in patients taking a triple therapy with ACEi was affected by the lower number of antihypertensive pills taken, which was also the key predictor of ambulatory BP control in our study. This confirms the importance of fixed-dose combinations in the management of essential hypertension.

Bioequivalence study of two perindopril tert-butylamine tablet formulations in healthy Chinese subjects under fasting and fed conditions: A randomized, open-label, single-dose, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the bioequivalence between test and reference formulations of perindopril tert-butylamine under fasting and fed conditions and to assess their pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles.

METHOD

A randomized, open-label, single-dose, crossover trial was conducted in healthy Chinese subjects. Test or reference perindopril tert-butylamine tablets (4 mg) were randomly given to subjects under fasting (2-period crossover, with an administration sequence of test tablet (T), reference tablet (R) or RT) and fed (4-period crossover, with an administration sequence of TRTR or RTRT) conditions, while each single administration was followed by a 14-day washout period. The plasma concentrations and corresponding non-compartmental PK parameters of perindopril and perindoprilat were determined. The two formulations were considered to be bioequivalent if the 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean (GM) ratio (test/reference) for C_max, AUC_0-t, and AUC_0-∞ (perindopril) was both within the range of 80-125 %. Safety assessments including vital signs, physical examination, laboratory examination, 12-lead ECG and reports of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were carefully documented.

RESULTS

A total of 64 subjects (32 in each trial) were randomized and all completed the trials. Regardless of fasting or fed trials, the PK characteristics of perindopril and perindoprilat for the test formulation were similar to those of the reference formulation (all P > 0.05). The 90 % CIs of the geometric mean (GM) ratio for C_max, AUC_0-t, and AUC_0-∞, respectively, were 92.86-106.81 %, 98.44-102.88 % and 98.48-103.02 % under the fasting condition and 90.64-110.04 %, 96.95-101.90 % and 96.83-101.78 % under the fed condition, which were both within the pre-specified range of 80-125 %. A total of 10 (31.3 %) fasted subjects and 11 (34.4 %) fed subjects experienced 11 and 24 TEAEs, respectively, all of which were within the severity of grade 1. The incidence of TEAEs and drug-related TEAEs were similar between test and reference formulations (all P > 0.05) and no serious TEAEs or deaths occurred during the trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The test and reference formulations of perindopril tert-butylamine tablets (4 mg) were bioequivalent and well tolerated in healthy Chinese subjects under fasting and fed conditions.

Triple fixed-dose combination empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin for patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVES

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy can improve outcomes in type 2 diabetes (T2D). We evaluated the bioequivalence of 2 doses of an FDC of extended-release metformin (metformin XR), empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, versus corresponding free tablet combinations.

METHODS

Two randomized, open-label, two-way crossover studies in healthy adults compared: 2 FDC tablets of empagliflozin 5 mg/linagliptin 2.5 mg/metformin XR 1000 mg (Study 1; N = 30), 1 FDC tablet of empagliflozin 25 mg/linagliptin 5 mg/metformin XR 1000 mg (Study 2; N = 30) versus corresponding dose of free combinations. Subjects received study medication under fed conditions; washout was ≥35 days between treatments. Primary endpoints: area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to last quantifiable data point for empagliflozin and metformin; AUC from time 0 to 72 hours for linagliptin, and peak plasma concentration (C_max) for empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin. Bioequivalence was defined as adjusted geometric mean ratios (FDC: free combination) and two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of AUC and C_max for each component within 80.00-125.00%.

RESULTS

Study 1: 27/29 and 28/30 treated participants were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis for the FDC and free combination periods, respectively. Study 2: 29/29 treated participants were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis for both periods. The adjusted geometric mean ratios of FDCs to their respective free tablet combinations and two-sided 90% CIs were all within the predefined range. The shapes of the mean plasma concentration-time profile of empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin XR were similar for subjects in the FDC and free combination groups in both studies. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

The evaluated doses of empagliflozin/linagliptin/metformin XR FDC tablets were bioequivalent to the corresponding free combinations. Based on these two bioequivalence studies and existing phase 3 data, the FDA has recently approved this triple FDC to improve glycemic control in adults with T2D.