How early should blood pressure control be achieved for optimal cardiovascular outcomes?

Single-pill combination for treatment of hypertension: Just a matter of practicality or is there a real clinical benefit?

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is the largest contributor to the incident cardiovascular disease worldwide. Despite explicit guideline recommendations for the diagnosis and management of hypertension, a large proportion of patients remain undiagnosed, untreated, or treated but uncontrolled. Inadequate BP control is associated with many complex factors including patient preference, physician's inertia, health systems disparities, and poor adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatment. The primary driver for reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is lowering of BP ''per se'' and not class effects of specific pharmacotherapies. The recent ESH guidelines recommend the use of four major classes of drugs including renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS) blockers (angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)), calcium channel blockers (CCB), thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics, and betablockers. Initiation of treatment for hypertension with a two-drug regimen, preferably in a single pill combination (SPC), is recommended for most patients. Preferred combinations should comprise a RAS blocker (either an ACEi or an ARB) with a CCB or thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic. These strategies are supported by robust evidence that combination therapy produces greater BP reductions than monotherapy, reduces side effects of the individual components, improves therapeutic adherence and long-term persistence on treatment, and permits achievement of earlier BP control.

Hypertensive Heart Failure

Despite overwhelming epidemiological evidence, the contribution of hypertension (HTN) to heart failure (HF) development has been undermined in current clinical practice. This is because approximately half of HF patients have been labeled as suffering from HF with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) (HFpEF), with HTN, obesity, and diabetes mellitus (DM) being considered virtually equally responsible for its development. However, this suggestion is obviously inaccurate, since HTN is by far the most frequent and devastating morbidity present in HFpEF. Further, HF development in obesity or DM is rare in the absence of HTN or coronary artery disease (CAD), whereas HTN often causes HF per se. Finally, unlike HTN, for most major comorbidities present in HFpEF, including anemia, chronic kidney disease, pulmonary disease, DM, atrial fibrillation, sleep apnea, and depression, it is unknown whether they precede HF or result from it. The purpose of this paper is to provide a contemporary overview on hypertensive HF, with a special emphasis on its inflammatory nature and association with autonomic nervous system (ANS) imbalance, since both are of pathophysiologic and therapeutic interest.

Initial Antihypertensive Regimens in Newly Treated Patients: Real World Evidence From the OneFlorida+ Clinical Research Network

Background Knowledge of real-world antihypertensive use is limited to prevalent hypertension, limiting our understanding of how treatment evolves and its contribution to persistently poor blood pressure control. We sought to characterize antihypertensive initiation among new users. Methods and Results Using Medicaid and Medicare data from the OneFlorida+ Clinical Research Consortium, we identified new users of ≥1 first-line antihypertensives (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, angiotensin receptor blocker, thiazide diuretic, or β-blocker) between 2013 and 2021 among adults with diagnosed hypertension, and no antihypertensive fill during the prior 12 months. We evaluated initial antihypertensive regimens by class and drug overall and across study years and examined variation in antihypertensive initiation across demographics (sex, race, and ethnicity) and comorbidity (chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease). We identified 143 054 patients initiating 188 995 antihypertensives (75% monotherapy; 25% combination therapy), with mean age 59 years and 57% of whom were women. The most commonly initiated antihypertensive class overall was angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (39%) followed by β-blockers (31%), calcium channel blockers (24%), thiazides (19%), and angiotensin receptor blockers (11%). With the exception of β-blockers, a single drug accounted for ≥75% of use of each class. β-blocker use decreased (35%-26%), and calcium channel blocker use increased (24%-28%) over the study period, while initiation of most other classes remained relatively stable. We also observed significant differences in antihypertensive selection across demographic and comorbidity strata. Conclusions These findings indicate that substantial variation exists in initial antihypertensive prescribing, and there remain significant gaps between current guideline recommendations and real-world implementation in early hypertension care.

Self-Reported Antihypertensive Medication Class and Temporal Relationship to Treatment Guidelines

The greater antihypertensive responses to initial therapy with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or thiazide-type diuretics than renin-angiotensin system blockers as initial therapy in non-Hispanic Black (NHB) adults was recognized in the US High BP guidelines from 1988 to 2003. The 2014 Report from Panel Members Appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (2014 aJNC8 Report) and the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association High Blood Pressure Guideline were the first to recommend CCBs or thiazide-type diuretics rather than renin-angiotensin system blockers as initial therapy in NHB. We assessed the temporal relationship of these recommendations on self-reported CCB or thiazide-type diuretics monotherapy by NHB and NHW adults with hypertension absent compelling indications for β-blockers or renin-angiotensin system blockers in National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2015 to 2018 versus 2007 to 2012 (after versus before 2014 aJNC8 Report). CCB or thiazide-type diuretics monotherapy was unchanged in NHW adults (17.1% versus 18.1%, P=0.711) and insignificantly higher after 2014 among NHB adults (43.7% versus 38.2%, P=0.204), although CCB monotherapy increased (29.5% versus 21.0%, P=0.021) and renin-angiotensin system blocker monotherapy fell (44.5% versus 31.0%, P=0.008). Although evidence-based CCB monotherapy increased among NHB adults in 2015 to 2018, hypertension control declined as untreated hypertension and monotherapy increased. While a gap between recommended and actual monotherapy persists, evidence-based monotherapy appears insufficient to improve hypertension control in NHB adults, especially given evidence for worsening therapeutic inertia. Initiating treatment with single-pill combinations and timely therapeutic intensification when required to control hypertension are evidence-based, race-neutral options for improving hypertension control among NHB adults.

Nifedipine plus candesartan combination increases blood pressure control regardless of race and improves the side effect profile: DISTINCT randomized trial results

OBJECTIVES

DISTINCT (reDefining Intervention with Studies Testing Innovative Nifedipine GITS - Candesartan Therapy) aimed to determine the dose-response and tolerability of nifedipine GITS and/or candesartan cilexetil therapy in participants with hypertension.

METHODS

In this 8-week, multinational, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, adults with mean seated DBP of at least 95 to less than 110 mmHg received combination or monotherapy with nifedipine GITS (N) 20, 30 or 60 mg and candesartan cilexetil (C) 4, 8, 16 or 32 mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint, change in DBP from baseline to Week 8, was analysed using the response surface model (RSM); this analysis was repeated for mean seated SBP.

RESULTS

Overall, 1381 participants (mean baseline SBP/DBP: 156.5/99.6 mmHg) were randomized. Both N and C contributed independently to SBP/DBP reductions [P < 0.0001 (RSM)]. A positive dose-response was observed, with all combinations providing statistically better blood pressure (BP) reductions from baseline versus respective monotherapies (P < 0.05) and N60C32 achieving the greatest reduction [-23.8/-16.5 mmHg; P < 0.01 versus placebo (-5.3/-6.7 mmHg) and component monotherapies]. Even very low-dose (N20 and C4) therapy provided significant BP-lowering, and combination therapy was similarly effective in different racial groups. N/C combination demonstrated a lower incidence of vasodilatory adverse events than N monotherapy (18.3 versus 23.6%), including headache (5.5 versus 11.0%; P = 0.003, chi-square test) and peripheral oedema over time (3.6 versus 5.8%; n.s.).

CONCLUSION

N/C combination was effective in participants with hypertension and showed an improved side effect profile compared with N monotherapy.

Early combination therapy with telmisartan plus amlodipine for rapid achievement of blood pressure goals

BACKGROUND

Rapid and sustained blood pressure (BP) goal attainment is important to reduce cardiovascular risk. Initial use of combination therapy may improve BP goal attainment.

METHODS

The Boehringer Ingelheim trial database was searched for randomised, double-blind studies comparing telmisartan/amlodipine combination therapy with monotherapy. Eight studies were identified. Eight separate analyses were used to compare combination therapy with respective monotherapies at the earliest available time points (weeks 1, 2 and/or 4).

RESULTS

In patients initiated on combination therapy, greater systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) reductions were seen with combination therapy (p < 0.0001); BP (< 140/90 mmHg), SBP (< 140 mmHg) and DBP (< 90 mmHg) goal attainment rates were significantly higher with combination therapy at all time points. In patients uncontrolled by monotherapy, greater SBP/DBP reductions were seen with combination therapy (p < 0.05 in all but one measure), and all goal attainment rates were significantly higher with combination therapy, except in one measure.

CONCLUSION

Many people can achieve their BP targets when taking a combination of telmisartan and amlodipine after failing to do so with monotherapy. Furthermore, BP targets can be achieved more rapidly using a combination of telmisartan and amlodipine as initial therapy than with either monotherapy.

Hypertension management initiative prospective cohort study: comparison between immediate and delayed intervention groups

The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario's Hypertension Management Initiative (HMI) was a pragmatic implementation of clinical practice guidelines for hypertension management in primary care clinics. The HMI was a prospective delayed phase cohort study of 11 sites enrolling patients in two blocks starting 9 months apart in 2007. The intervention was an evidence-informed chronic disease management program consisting of an interprofessional educational intervention with practice tools to implement the Canadian Hypertension Education Program's clinical practice guidelines. This study compares the change in blood pressure (BP) from baseline to 9 months after the intervention between groups. In the immediate intervention group, the mean BP at baseline was 134.6/79.1 mm Hg (18.2/11.5) and in the delayed intervention group 134.2/77.1 mm Hg (18.9/11.8). The fall in BP in the immediate intervention group from baseline to 9 months after the intervention was 7.3/3.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.9-8.7/2.6-4.5) and in the delayed group 8.1/3.3 mm Hg (95% CI: 7.0-9.3/2.5-4.1) (all P<0.0001 were compared from baseline to the end of 9 months of the program in both groups). This study is the first to demonstrate that implementation of an interprofessional knowledge integration initiative for the control of hypertension can rapidly lead to lower BP levels.

Are fixed-dose combination antihypertensives suitable as first-line therapy?

OBJECTIVE

To contemplate how initial antihypertensive therapy with fixed-dose combinations (FDC) might be incorporated into clinical practice, based on a compilation of evidence comparing FDCs with monotherapy and loose-dose combinations in varying patient populations.

METHODS

A non-systematic search of PubMed (from 2007 to 2012) was performed for randomized, controlled trials in order to capture the evidence on FDC versus monotherapy and loose-dose combinations as first-line therapy. The literature search focused on calcium channel blocker (CCB)-renin angiotensin system (RAS) blocker combinations. Additionally, any relevant papers known to the authors were included. International recommendations from published hypertension treatment guidelines were also consulted.

RESULTS

The results of this literature review identified two emergent issues. Firstly, there is a discord between antihypertensive use and actual blood pressure (BP) control achieved - despite an increase in the use of antihypertensives over the last 10 years, BP control rates remain low. Secondly, a greater association between BP and cardiovascular risk in Asians may magnify this discrepancy. A number of international guidelines are recommending early combination therapy, such as CCB-RAS blocker combinations in the majority of patients based on the available evidence, with such combinations showing benefits in terms of compliance, BP lowering and control, and safety. Additionally, recent studies have indicated that improved BP control may be achieved with simplified guidelines and the use of FDCs. Overall, these findings indicate that FDC could be used as first-line.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this literature review suggest that physicians may need to readdress their approach to antihypertensive treatment. Earlier use of antihypertensive FDC (including first-line) may help to shrink the current gap between antihypertensive use and BP target control achieved. Most guidelines acknowledge that combination therapy is required in the majority of patients, and FDC are regarded as a suitable alternative, having demonstrated better compliance compared with loose-dose combinations.

Triple-Combination therapy with olmesartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide in black and non-black study participants with hypertension: the TRINITY randomized, double-blind, 12-week, parallel-group study

BACKGROUND

Although awareness of hypertension in Black patients has increased, blood pressure (BP) is frequently inadequately controlled.

OBJECTIVE

This prespecified subgroup analysis of the TRINITY study evaluated the efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil (OM) 40 mg, amlodipine besylate (AML) 10 mg, and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg triple-combination treatment compared with the component dual-combination treatments in Black and non-Black study participants.

STUDY DESIGN

TRINITY was a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group evaluation. The first patient was enrolled in May 2008 and the last patient completed the study in February 2009. The study consisted of a 3-week washout period for participants receiving antihypertensive therapy and a 12-week double-blind treatment period. For the treatment phase, all study participants were stratified by age, race, and diabetes mellitus status and randomized to a treatment sequence that led to their final treatment assignment, which they received from weeks 4 to 12 (OM 40 mg/AML 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, OM 40 mg/AML 10 mg, OM 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, or AML 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg). In the first 2 weeks of the double-blind treatment period, all participants received either dual-combination treatment or placebo. Participants assigned to dual-combination treatment continued treatment until week 4, and participants receiving placebo were switched at week 2 to receive one of the dual-combination treatments until week 4. At week 4, participants either continued dual-combination treatment or randomly received triple-combination treatment until week 12.

SETTING

317 clinical sites in the USA and Puerto Rico were included in the study.

PATIENTS

Study participants eligible for randomization (N = 2492) were ≥18 years of age with mean seated blood pressure (SeBP) ≥140/100 mmHg or ≥160/90 mmHg (off antihypertensive medication).

INTERVENTION

The intervention was with dual- or triple-combination antihypertensive treatment: OM 40 mg/AML 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, OM 40 mg/AML 10 mg, OM 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, or AML 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary efficacy variable was the change in least squares (LS) mean seated diastolic BP (SeDBP) from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy variables included the LS mean change in seated systolic BP (SeSBP), percentage of study participants reaching BP goal, and safety parameters.

RESULTS

In both Black and non-Black participants, triple-combination treatment resulted in significant and similar mean reductions in SeDBP and SeSBP (p ≤ 0.0001 vs each dual-combination treatment) with a greater proportion of participants reaching BP goal compared with dual-combination treatments, regardless of race. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and no new safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSION

Triple-combination treatment provided greater BP reductions than dual-combination treatments regardless of race.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00649389.

Prevalence and predictors of abnormal arterial function in statin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus patients

Arterial dysfunction (AD) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) predicts cardiovascular events. The objective was to investigate the prevalence and predictors of AD in statin-treated T2DM patients. We measured flow-mediated (FMD) and nitrate-mediated (NMD) brachial artery dilatation in 86 statin-treated T2DM patients. Patients were classified into 2 groups: normal arterial function (FMD ≥3.7% with NMD ≥11.9%) or AD (FMD <3.7% with or without NMD <11.9%). Endothelial dysfunction without smooth muscle cell dysfunction (ED) was defined as FMD less than 3.7% with NMD of at least 11.9%, and endothelial dysfunction with smooth muscle cell dysfunction (ED/SMD) was defined as FMD less than 3.7% with NMD less than 11.9%. Predictors of arterial function were investigated using linear and logistic regression methods. The prevalence of AD was 33.7% (23.2% with ED and 10.5% with ED/SMD). In multivariate linear regression, history of hypertension (P < .01), statin dose (P < .05), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (P = .02) were significant predictors of FMD. Sex (P < .01) and creatinine (P = .03) or eGFR (P = .02) predicted NMD. In multivariate logistic regression, the independent predictors of AD were history of hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 8.79; 95% confidence interval, 2.14-36.12; P < .01), age (OR, 1.08; 1.01-1.17; P = .03), and statin dose (OR, 0.33; 0.12-0.87; P = .02). A history of hypertension (OR, 8.99; 1.87-43.26; P < .01) was the sole independent predictor of ED; eGFR (OR, 0.01; 0.00-0.26; P < .01) independently predicted ED/SMD. Our data suggest that one third of statin-treated diabetic patients have residual AD, mainly due to ED alone. Earlier identification and treatment of hypertension and renal impairment may improve AD and further decrease cardiovascular risk in such patients.

Single-pill triple-combination therapy: an alternative to multiple-drug treatment of hypertension

Hypertension (HTN) affects an estimated 76.4 million US adults. Despite improvements in blood pressure (BP) control rates and the availability of effective antihypertensive agents, only 50% of these individuals achieve BP control. It is now recognized that many patients will require ≥ 2 antihypertensive agents to achieve BP control. Both the current US and reappraisal of the 2007 European guidelines include dual-combination regimens among recommended treatments for initial HTN therapy. For patients requiring 3 drugs, the combination of agents with complementary mechanisms of action (ie, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blocker, calcium channel blocker, and diuretic) has been recognized as rational and effective. Three single-pill triple-drug combinations have recently been approved for use in HTN in the United States: valsartan (VAL)/amlodipine (AML)/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ); olmesartan medoxomil (OM)/AML/HCTZ; and aliskiren (ALI)/VAL/HCTZ. Triple-combination regimens have resulted in a greater proportion of patients achieving BP control compared with dual-combination regimens, with significantly lower BP levels documented after only 2 weeks at maximum doses. Single-pill combinations offer convenience to address barriers to BP control such as poor adherence to therapy and therapeutic inertia. Additional benefits of combining antihypertensive agents from different classes include improved efficacy, safety, and reduction of cardiovascular risk. In patients with essential HTN for whom dual therapy is inadequate, single-pill triple-drug therapy can offer a simplified and effective treatment strategy.