Efficacy and safety of triple versus dual combination blood pressure-lowering drug therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Triple Antihypertensive Medication Prediction Score After Intracerebral Hemorrhage (the TRICH Score)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Poor long-term blood pressure (BP) control due to undertreatment of hypertension is not uncommon after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). It heightens the risk of ICH recurrence and subsequent stroke, which is the highest within the first year. Promptly achieving BP targets would significantly reduce these risks. To accomplish this, upfront triple antihypertensive medications could be prescribed soon after ICH because many ICH survivors require ≥3 antihypertensives. However, not all would suit this approach, particularly those with cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), where elevated admission BP may be due to acute hypertensive response rather than underlying hypertension. In addition, overtreatment and excessive BP lowering would cause more side effects and have been associated with increased mortality in older patients. Hence, to facilitate individualized treatment, we aimed to develop a score (TRICH) to predict the need for ≥3 antihypertensives at 3 months after ICH.

METHODS

We developed the score using data from the University of Hong Kong prospective ICH registry (2011-2022) and validated it in 3 hospitals (2020-2022) locally. Consecutive patients with spontaneous ICH who survived >90 days and had follow-up BP 3 months after ICH were included. Predictors for needing ≥3 antihypertensive medications at 3 months were identified using multivariate logistic regression, and the score was created using the β-coefficients.

RESULTS

The TRICH score was developed from 462 patients (mean age 66.6 ± 14.3 years, 60% male) and validated in 203 patients (mean age 66.3 ± 14.6 years, 62% male). The 9-point score (age younger than 60 years = 1, male = 1, ischemic heart disease = 1, admission estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 = 2, admission systolic BP 190-230 mm Hg = 2 while >230 mm Hg = 4) has a c-statistic (95% CI) of 0.79 (0.75-0.83) in the development cohort and 0.76 (0.69-0.82) in validation. A dichotomized score (≥3 points) predicted the need for ≥3 antihypertensives with 0.73 (95% CI 0.67-0.80) sensitivity and 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.81) specificity. The score performed better in patients with untreated/uncontrolled hypertension before ICH than in controlled patients (c-statistic [95% CI] 0.81 [0.77-0.86] vs 0.74 [0.69-0.80], p = 0.037) but showed no difference between patients with CAA and non-CAA patients.

DISCUSSION

The TRICH score identifies patients with ICH who need ≥3 antihypertensive medications 3 months after ICH with good discrimination ability. It may guide upfront triple antihypertensive prescription, but further research is warranted, particularly in non-Han Chinese populations.

Association Between Genetically Proxied SLC12A2 Inhibition and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Mendelian Randomization Study

The global rise in hypertension prompts the use of medications to manage blood pressure. However, selecting first-line drugs remains challenging as their efficacy often stems from blood pressure reduction rather than specific pharmacological actions. Evaluating interactions between antihypertensive drugs and common diseases can aid tailored treatment. Here, we assess the potential link between antihypertensives and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Summary-level coronary heart disease (CHD) data (184,305 individuals), systolic BP (SBP) data (757,601 individuals), ulcerative ileocolitis data (361,188 individuals), ulcerative colitis data (364,454 individuals), other ulcerative colitis data (361,619 individuals), and ulcerative proctitis data (361,700 individuals) were all from genome-wide association studies (GWASs), FinnGen or eQTL studies publicly accessible. The DrugBank10 and ChEMBL11 databases function to identify genes encoding protein products targeted by active constituents of BP-lowering drugs. Summary-data-based MR (SMR) estimated the associations between expressions of drug target genes and symptoms of IBD. A multivariable MR study was further conducted to examine if the observed association was direct association. Subsequently, we collected blood samples from IBD patients in the Gastroenterology Department of Gastroenterology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University and blood from healthy individuals at the physical examination center. Real-time quantitative PCR was employed to detect the expression changes of drug target genes in the peripheral blood of patients with IBD. Furthermore, we used Caco2 cells to construct an in vitro model of IBD, examined the expression of the target molecules, and verified the potential of Bumetanide to improve IBD. SMR analysis revealed that enhanced SLC12A2 gene expression in blood (equivalent to a one standard deviation increase) was a risk factor for ulcerative ileocolitis (beta = 0.5861, se = 0.2972, p = 0.0486) and enhanced gene expression of ACE was a protective factor. Additionally, SCNN1D and SLC16A1 played protective roles of IBD, while NR3C1 was identified as a risk factor. However, among these genes, only SLC12A2 was considered to influence the progress of inflammatory bowel disease through systolic blood pressure based on Mendelian randomization analysis results. Other genes may be associated with IBD depending on the expression of their own proteins, independent of changes in blood pressure. In the peripheral blood of IBD patients and in vitro experiments, SCL12A2 has been shown to be highly expressed in IBD. In vitro experiments have confirmed that Bumetanide can inhibit SCL12A2 to improve tight junctions, reduce inflammation levels, and ameliorate IBD symptoms. Therapeutic inhibition of SCL12A2 may benefit patients with IBD. In the future, this study may contribute to the selection of more personalized antihypertensive medications for different subgroups of hypertensive patients.

Guidance for Prescribing Oral Antihypertensive Medications in the Emergency Department

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the most current recommendations regarding assessment and treatment of asymptomatic hypertension treatment in the emergency department (ED) and to provide guidance for prescribing oral antihypertensive therapy for ED providers.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are varying management strategies for the treatment of asymptomatic hypertension in the ED likely due to a lack of direct guidelines for treatment. There is an increasing body of evidence for the safety of initiating therapy to treat chronic asymptomatic hypertension in the ED. Initiation and optimization of oral antihypertensive therapy in indicated patients can be done by ED providers to enhance and expediate transition of care for patients and can ultimately aid in prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This review provides guidance of when oral antihypertensive therapy can be initiated, medication options depending on the patient's blood pressure and other concurrent medications (if applicable), as well as other factors that may influence choice of therapy are described. Oral antihypertensive therapies can be initiated and optimized in the ED for patients with asymptomatic chronic hypertension.

deliVERy of optimal blood pressure coNtrol in afrICA (VERONICA)-Nigeria study: Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure (BP) control among treated patients in Africa is very suboptimal, with low levels of combination therapy use and therapeutic inertia being among the major barriers to effective control of hypertension. The VERONICA-Nigeria study aims to evaluate, among Black African adults with hypertension, the effectiveness and safety of a triple pill-based treatment protocol compared to Nigeria hypertension treatment protocol (standard care protocol) for the treatment of hypertension.

METHODS

This study involves a randomized, parallel-group and open-label trial. Adults with uncontrolled hypertension (n = 300), untreated or receiving monotherapy, with no contraindication to study treatments will be randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with a triple pill based-treatment protocol or standard care protocol. Follow-up is for 6 months, with interim follow up visits at month 1, 2, and 3. In a noncomparative extension treatment period, participants completing the 6 months randomized period and on ≤3 BP-lowering drugs will receive treatment with the triple pill-based treatment protocol for 12 months. The primary outcome is change in home mean SBP from baseline to month 6, and key secondary efficacy outcome is percentage of participants with clinic BP <140/90 mmHg at month 6. The primary safety outcome is discontinuation of trial treatment due to adverse events from randomization to month 6. Economic evaluation will be conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness of the triple pill-based treatment protocol, and process evaluation will be conducted to understand the context in which the trial was conducted, implementation of the trial and interventions and mechanisms of effect, and potential barriers and facilitators to implementing the intervention in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The VERONICA-Nigeria trial will provide evidence of effectiveness and safety of the triple-based treatment protocol for the pharmacological management of hypertension, in Black African adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PACTR202107579572114.

Efficacy and safety of a novel low-dose triple single-pill combination of telmisartan, amlodipine and indapamide, compared with dual combinations for treatment of hypertension: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, international clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Single-pill combinations (SPCs) of three low-dose antihypertensive drugs can improve hypertension control but are not widely available. A key issue for any combination product is the contribution of each component to efficacy and tolerability. This trial compared a new triple SPC called GMRx2, containing telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide, with dual combinations of components for efficacy and safety.

METHODS

In this international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial, we enrolled adults with hypertension receiving between zero and three antihypertensive drugs, with a screening systolic blood pressure (SBP) ranging from 140-179 mm Hg (on no drugs) to 110-150 mm Hg (on three drugs). Participants were recruited from Australia, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Poland, Sri Lanka, the UK, and the USA. In a 4-week active run-in, existing medications were switched to GMRx2 half dose (telmisartan 20 mg, amlodipine 2·5 mg, and indapamide 1·25 mg). Participants were then randomly allocated (2:1:1:1) to continued GMRx2 half dose or to each possible dual combination of components at half doses (telmisartan 20 mg with amlodipine 2·5 mg, telmisartan 20 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg, or amlodipine 2·5 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg). At week 6, doses were doubled in all groups, unless there was a clinical contraindication. The primary efficacy outcome was mean change in home SBP from baseline to week 12, and the primary safety outcome was withdrawal of treatment due to an adverse event from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy outcomes included differences in clinic and home blood pressure levels and control rates. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04518293, and is completed.

FINDINGS

The trial was conducted between July 9, 2021 and Sept 1, 2023. We randomly allocated 1385 participants to four groups: 551 to GMRx2, 276 to telmisartan-indapamide, 282 to telmisartan-amlodipine, and 276 to amlodipine-indapamide groups. The mean age was 59 years (SD 11), 712 (51%) participants self-reported as female and 673 (48·6%) male, and the mean clinic blood pressure at the screening visit was 142/85 mm Hg when taking an average of 1·6 blood pressure medications. Following the run-in on GMRx2 half dose, the mean clinic blood pressure level at randomisation was 133/81 mm Hg and the mean home blood pressure level was 129/78 mm Hg. At week 12, the mean home SBP was 126 mm Hg in the GMRx2 group, which was lower than for each of the dual combinations: -2·5 (95% CI -3·7 to -1·3, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-indapamide, -5·4 (-6·8 to -4·1, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-amlodipine, and -4·4 (-5·8 to -3·1, p<0·0001) versus amlodipine-indapamide. For the same comparisons, differences in clinic blood pressure at week 12 were 4·3/3·5 mm Hg, 5·6/3·7 mm Hg, and 6·3/4·5 mm Hg (all p<0·001). Clinic blood pressure control rate below 140/90 mm Hg at week 12 was superior with GMRx2 (74%) to with each dual combination (range 53-61%). Withdrawal of treatment due to adverse events occurred in 11 (2%) participants in the GMRx2 group, four (1%) in telmisartan-indapamide, three (1%) in telmisartan-amlodipine, and four (1%) in amlodipine-indapamide, with none of the differences being statistically significant.

INTERPRETATION

A novel low-dose SPC product of telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide provided clinically meaningful improvements in blood pressure reduction compared with dual combinations and was well tolerated. This SPC provides a new therapeutic option for the management of hypertension and its use could result in a substantial improvement in blood pressure control in clinical practice.

FUNDING

George Medicines.

Single-Pill Combination Therapy of Amlodipine, Telmisartan, and Chlorthalidone in the Management of Hypertension: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Hypertension is a major cause of cardiovascular disease and death worldwide. Low-dose combination therapy is a promising approach for managing hypertension due to its safety and efficacy. This systematic review evaluates the safety and efficacy of a single-pill, low-dose combination of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone for essential hypertension based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and searched the Cochrane, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases until July 01, 2024, using the following search string: (telmisartan) AND (amlodipine) AND (chlorthalidone) AND (randomized OR randomly). The quality of the RCTs was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary endpoint was the mean change in sitting systolic blood pressure (BP), with secondary endpoints including BP target achievement rates, BP response rates, and serious treatment-related adverse events. Overall, three RCTs met the inclusion criteria and exhibited a low risk of bias. The doses in the combination pill ranged from 2.5 to 5 mg of amlodipine, 20 to 80 mg of telmisartan, and 4.167 to 25 mg of chlorthalidone. Control groups varied, including usual care, amlodipine 10 mg, and dual therapy of telmisartan and amlodipine. Results showed significant reductions in mean sitting systolic and diastolic BP, improved BP control and response rates, and a generally safe profile with no significant differences in serious adverse events. Despite encouraging data, results should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity in doses and control groups. Further research should address the long-term effects and explore predictors of response to this therapy.

Efficacy and safety of a single-pill versus free combination of perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in Chinese patients with hypertension

BACKGROUND

In China, the prevalence of hypertension is high and the use of combination antihypertensive therapy is low, which contributes to inadequate blood pressure (BP) control. The availability of simplified treatments combining complementary BP-lowering agents may help more patients achieve their goals.

METHODS

This Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study included Chinese adults with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Following a 1-month run-in on perindopril/indapamide bi-therapy, patients with uncontrolled systolic/diastolic BP (≥140/90 mmHg) were randomized to perindopril 5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg/amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind/Aml) single-pill combination (SPC) or perindopril 4 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind + Aml) for 6 months. Uptitration was permitted from month 2 onwards. The primary efficacy objective was the noninferiority of Per/Ind/Aml in lowering office systolic BP at 2 months. The secondary objectives included the effectiveness of SPC on diastolic BP, uptitration efficacy, and office BP control (systolic/diastolic <140/90 mmHg). A subgroup of patients participated in 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).

RESULTS

A total of 532 patients were randomized: Per/Ind/Aml ( n  = 262) and Per/Ind + Aml ( n  = 269). Overall, the mean (±SD) age was 55.7 ± 8.8 years, 60.7% were male, and the mean office systolic/diastolic BP at baseline on Per/Ind was 150.4/97.2 mmHg. Systolic BP decreased in both groups at 2 months from baseline: -14.99 ± 14.46 mmHg Per/Ind/Aml versus -14.49 ± 12.87 mmHg Per/Ind +Aml. A predefined noninferiority margin of 4 mmHg was observed ( P  < 0.001). The effectiveness of the Per/Ind/Aml SPC was also demonstrated for all secondary endpoints. ABPM demonstrated sustained BP control over 24 h. Both treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Per/Ind/Aml is an effective substitute for Per/Ind + Aml, providing at least equivalent BP control over 24 h in a single pill, with comparable safety.

Efficacy and safety of a four-drug, quarter-dose treatment for hypertension: the QUARTET USA randomized trial

New approaches are needed to lower blood pressure (BP) given persistently low control rates. QUARTET USA sought to evaluate the effect of four-drug, quarter-dose BP lowering combination in patients with hypertension. QUARTET USA was a randomized (1:1), double-blinded trial conducted in federally qualified health centers among adults with hypertension. Participants received either a quadpill of candesartan 2 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, indapamide 0.625 mg, and bisoprolol 2.5 mg or candesartan 8 mg for 12 weeks. If BP was >130/>80 mm Hg at 6 weeks in either arm, then participants received open label add-on amlodipine 5 mg. The primary outcome was mean change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 12 weeks, controlling for baseline BP. Secondary outcomes included mean change in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and safety included serious adverse events, relevant adverse drug effects, and electrolyte abnormalities. Among 62 participants randomized between August 2019-May 2022 (n = 32 intervention, n = 30 control), mean (SD) age was 52 (11.5) years, 45% were female, 73% identified as Hispanic, and 18% identified as Black. Baseline mean (SD) SBP was 138.1 (11.2) mmHg, and baseline mean (SD) DBP was 84.3 (10.5) mmHg. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in SBP (-4.8 mm Hg [95% CI: -10.8, 1.3, p = 0.123] and a -4.9 mmHg (95% CI: -8.6, -1.3, p = 0.009) greater mean DBP change in the intervention arm compared with the control arm at 12 weeks. Adverse events did not differ significantly between arms. The quadpill had a similar SBP and greater DBP lowering effect compared with candesartan 8 mg. Trial registration number: NCT03640312.

Participants' views of ultra-low dose combination therapy for high blood pressure: a mixed-methods study from the QUARTET trial

Single-pill combination therapy containing four quarter-dose medications for high blood pressure improves BP control compared to monotherapy, however patient-reported acceptance of the quadpill as a treatment strategy remains undescribed. We collected within-trial feedback and interviewed participants from the quadruple ultra-low-dose treatment for hypertension (QUARTET) trial to characterise patient attitudes to this intervention. All trial participants were asked about ease and preference for the quadpill and provided an opportunity to give further comments on the trial at 12 weeks (trial primary endpoint) and 52 weeks extended follow-up. Separately, we used purposive and quota sampling for the semi-structured telephone interviews, with the resultant verbatim transcripts analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Themes were re-evaluated after each successive interview, and at suspected data saturation, an additional interview conducted for confirmation. At 12 weeks follow-up, 502 of 591 (85%) participants responded to acceptability questions, and 359 of 417 (86%) responded at week 52. Most reported the trial capsule easy or very easy to take. From eight sites, 16 participants were interviewed between 5 August 2020 and 19 November 2020. All described a positive experience, preferred once-daily morning dosing and found routine facilitated adherence. Participants valued individual responsibility for adherence, and involvement of the general practitioner in blood-pressure management. Most reported capsule size did not deter adherence but desired a smaller capsule. Participants described a preference for minimising number and dosage of medications, reduced capsule size, and once-daily morning dosing. These findings suggest a preference for single-pill combination therapy for blood pressure lowering.

Rationale for a New Low-Dose Triple Single Pill Combination for the Treatment of Hypertension

Two recent large trials showed the potential of single pill combinations (SPCs) with ≥3 low-dose components among people with hypertension who were untreated or receiving monotherapy. In both trials, these 'hypertension polypills' were superior to usual care, achieving >80% BP control without increasing withdrawal due to side effects. However, there are no such products available for prescribers. To address this unmet need, George Medicines developed GMRx2 with telmisartan/amlodipine/indapamide in three strengths (mg): 10/1.25/0.625, 20/2.5/1.25; 40/5/2.5. Two pivotal trials are ongoing to support FDA submission for the treatment of hypertension, including initial treatment. These assess efficacy and safety of GMRx2 compared to: placebo, and each of the three possible dual combinations. Regulatory submissions are planned for 2024, with the aim of providing access to GMRx2 in developed and developing regions. Wider implementation of GMRx2-based treatment strategies will be guided by further research to inform access and appropriate scale up.

The Safety and Efficacy of Quadruple Ultra-Low-Dose Combination (Quadpill) for Hypertension Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Quadpill, a single pill containing a quadruple combination of quarter doses of four antihypertensive agents, has been investigated for hypertension treatment. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of quadpill for hypertension management.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials evaluating quadpill versus monotherapy or placebo in patients with hypertension, which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through 17 February, 2023. Continuous and dichotomous outcomes were pooled using mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) along with confidence interval (CI), using Revman Version 5.4 software. Our protocol has been published in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42023406527.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials with a total of 779 patients were included in our analysis. Quadpill was effective in controlling systolic blood pressure in the short term [4-6 weeks] (RR: - 13.00 with 95% CI [- 17.22, - 8.78], p = 0.00001) and in the long term [12 weeks] (RR: - 6.18 with 95% CI [- 9.35, - 3.01], p = 0.0001). Quadpill was also effective in controlling automated diastolic blood pressure in the short term [4-6 weeks] (MD: - 8.15 with 95% CI [- 9.42, - 6.89], p = 0.00001) and in the long term [12 weeks] (MD: - 6.35 with 95% CI [- 10.37, - 2.33], p = 0.002). Moreover, patients in the quadpill group significantly achieved target blood pressure <140/90 (RR: 1.77 with 95% CI [1.26, 2.51], p = 0.001) compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The quadruple ultra-low-dose combination of antihypertensive drugs (quadpill) was effective and safe for hypertension treatment. However, further large-scale, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are still warranted before endorsement in clinical practice.

Uncontrolled Hypertension, Treatment, and Predictors among Hypertensive Out-Patients Attending Primary Health Facilities in Johannesburg, South Africa

Hypertension is a poorly controlled risk factor for cardiovascular disease in South Africa, particularly among patients receiving care in the public sector who are mostly from low socioeconomic backgrounds. This cross-sectional study investigated uncontrolled hypertension, treatment, and predictors among hypertensive out-patients attending primary health care facilities in Johannesburg, South Africa. The WHO STEPwise approach to the surveillance of non-communicable diseases was used to collect data, including sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, health status, and measurements for anthropometry and blood pressure along with self-reported adherence to treatment, estimated through the general medication adherence scale. Uncontrolled hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg in diagnosed patients receiving anti-hypertensive treatment. Overweight and obesity were defined as a body mass index ≥25 and ≥30 kg/m2, respectively. Logistic regression models were used to assess the predictors of uncontrolled hypertension. Four hundred (n = 400) hypertensive out-patients (mean age: 50 ± 8 years) participated in this study, with most living in poor sociodemographic environments. The prevalence rate of uncontrolled hypertension was 57%. Obesity (62% vs. 42%, p ≤ 0.0001), salt consumption (90% vs. 55%, p ≤ 0.0001), alcohol intake (42% vs. 19%, p ≤ 0.0001), a smoking habit (23% vs. 4%, p ≤ 0.0001), alternative medicine use (51% vs. 40%, p = 0.043), and comorbidities (64% vs. 36%, p ≤ 0.0001) were higher in the uncontrolled group than the controlled group, whereas the prevalence of physical activity (38% vs. 15%, p ≤ 0.0001) was high in the controlled group vs. the uncontrolled. Overall, 85% of the patients moderately adhered to treatment, only 2% exhibited high adherence, and 13% demonstrated low adherence; over half of the patients received tri-therapy treatment. The predictors of uncontrolled hypertension are a number of prescribed antihypertensive therapies [adjusted odds ration = 2.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.48-3.87], treatment adherence [0.46; 0.21-0.97], salt consumption [28.35; 7.87-102.04], physical activity [0.22; 0.13-0.37], current alcohol use [2.10; 1.22-3.61], and current cigarette smoking [4.79; 1.88-12.18]. The high prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension in this study suggests a need to optimize prescriptions, adherence to BP-lowering medications, and lifestyle modifications. The management of comorbidities such as diabetes could offer considerable benefits in controlling blood pressure.

Hypertension therapy using fixed-dose polypills that contain at least three medications

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy may provide a solution to treatment gaps by overcoming reasons for therapeutic inertia. To synthesise and report on available evidence on standard or low-dose combination medicines that combine at least three antihypertensive medicines. A literature search was conducted via Scopus, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane clinical trials database. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomised clinical trials that included adults (>18 years) and examined the impact of at least three antihypertensive medications on blood pressure (BP). A total of 18 trials (n=14 307) were identified that examined combinations of three or four antihypertensive medicines. Ten trials investigated the effect of a standard dose triple combination polypill, four the effect of a low-dose triple and four the effect of a low-dose quadruple combination polypill. The mean difference (MD) in systolic BP ranged from -10.6 to -41.4 for the standard dose triple combination polypill in comparison with 2.1 to -34.5 for dual combination; -9.8 to -20.6 for a low-dose combination polypill in comparison with a MD of -0.9 to -5.2 for placebo; -9.0 to -29.3 for a low-dose combination polypill compared with -2.0 to -20.6 for monotherapy or usual care. All trials reported similar rates of adverse events. Ten studies reported medication adherence, six reported >95% adherence. Triple and quadruple combination antihypertensive medications are effective. Studies of low-dose triple and quadruple combinations involving treatment naïve populations suggest initiating such combinations are safe and effective as first-line therapy for stage 2 hypertension (BP >140/90 mm Hg).

Single-Pill Combination Product Availability of the Antihypertensive Regimens Used for Intensive Systolic Blood Pressure Treatment in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive products improve blood pressure control and medication adherence among patients with hypertension. It is unknown to what degree commercially available SPC products could be used to target an intensive systolic blood pressure goal of <120 mm Hg.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis included participants randomized to the intensive treatment arm (goal systolic blood pressure <120 mm Hg) of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) using ≥2 antihypertensive medication classes at the 12-month postrandomization visit. Antihypertensive medication data were collected using pill bottle review by research coordinators, and regimens were categorized by the unique combinations of antihypertensive classes. We calculated the proportion of regimens used, which are commercially available as one of the 7 SPC class combinations in the United States as of January 2023.

RESULTS

Among the 3833 SPRINT intensive arm participants included (median age, 67.0 years; 35.5% female), participants were using 219 unique antihypertensive regimens. The 7 regimens for which there are class-equivalent SPC products were used by 40.3% of participants. Only 3.2% of all medication class regimens used are available as a class-equivalent SPC product (7/219). There are no SPC products available with 4 or more medication classes, which were used by 1060 participants (27.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Most SPRINT participants in the intensive arm used an antihypertensive medication regimen, which is not commercially available as a class equivalent SPC product. To achieve the SPRINT results in real-world settings, maximize the potential benefit of SPCs, and reduce pill burden, improvements in the product landscape are needed.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT01206062; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Antihypertensive Medication Regimens Used by US Adults With Hypertension and the Potential for Fixed-Dose Combination Products: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2015 to 2020

Background Fixed-dose combination (FDC) antihypertensive products improve blood pressure control and adherence among patients with hypertension. It is unknown to what degree commercially available FDC products meet the current hypertension management prescription patterns in the United States. Methods and Results This cross-sectional analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2015 to March 2020 included participants with hypertension taking ≥2 antihypertensive medications (N=2451). After constructing each participant's regimen according to antihypertensive classes used, we estimated the extent to which the 7 class-level FDC regimens available in the United States as of January 2023 would match the regimens used. Among a weighted population of 34.1 million US adults (mean age, 66.0 years; 52.8% women; 69.1% non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity), the proportions using 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 antihypertensive classes were 60.6%, 28.2%, 9.1%, and 1.6%, respectively. The 7 FDC regimens were among 189 total regimens used (3.7%), and 39.2% of the population used one of the FDC regimens (95% CI, 35.5%-43.0%; 13.4 million US adults); 60.8% of the population (95% CI, 57.0%-64.5%; 20.7 million US adults) were using a regimen not available as a class-equivalent FDC product. Conclusions Three in 5 US adults with hypertension taking ≥2 antihypertensive classes are using a regimen that is not commercially available as a class-equivalent FDC product as of January 2023. To maximize the potential benefit of FDCs to improve medication adherence (and thus blood pressure control) among patients taking multiple antihypertensive medications, use of FDC-compatible regimens and improvements in the product landscape are needed.

Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Triple and Quadruple Combination Pills vs Monotherapy, Usual Care, or Placebo for the Initial Management of Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Low-dose combination (LDC) antihypertensives consisting of 3 or 4 blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs have emerged as a potentially important therapy for the initial management of hypertension.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of LDC therapies for the management of hypertension.

Data Sources

PubMed and Medline were searched from date of inception until September 2022.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials comparing LDC consisting of 3 or 4 BP-lowering drugs compared to either monotherapy, usual care, or placebo.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted by 2 independent authors and synthesized using both random and fixed-effects models using risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was mean reduction in systolic BP (SBP) between LDC and monotherapy, usual care, or placebo. Other outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients achieving BP less than 140/90 mm Hg, rates of adverse effects, and treatment withdrawal.

Results

Seven trials with a total of 1918 patients (mean [mean range] age, 59 [50-70] years; 739 [38%] female) were included. Four trials involved triple-component LDC and 3 involved quadruple-component LDC. At 4 to 12 weeks follow-up, LDC was associated with a greater mean reduction in SBP than initial monotherapy or usual care (mean reduction, 7.4 mm Hg; 95% CI, 4.3-10.5) and placebo (mean reduction, 18.0 mm Hg; 95% CI, 15.1-20.8). LDC was associated with a higher proportion of participants achieving BP less than 140/90 mm Hg at 4 to 12 weeks compared to both monotherapy or usual care (66% vs 46%; RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.27-1.52) and placebo (54% vs 18%; RR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.93-4.77). There was no significant heterogeneity between trials enrolling patients with and without baseline BP-lowering therapy. Results from 2 trials indicated LDC remained superior to monotherapy or usual care at 6 to 12 months. LDC was associated with more dizziness (14% vs 11%; RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.00-1.63) but no other adverse effects nor treatment withdrawal.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings in the study showed that LDCs with 3 or 4 antihypertensives were an effective and well-tolerated BP-lowering treatment option for the initial or early management of hypertension.

Frontiers of cardiovascular polypills: From atherosclerosis and beyond

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies (also known as polypills) remain underutilized in clinical practice despite over two decades of evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrating increased adherence to multidrug therapy, improved cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor control, and lower incidence of cardiovascular events. Evidence demonstrates that FDC-based implementation strategies can substantially complement and augment current strategies for CVD risk prevention globally. The next decade is likely to extend the frontier of cardiovascular FDC therapies, particularly given expected advances in FDC manufacturing technology and accessibility. FDC-based anti-hypertensive therapies are emerging as integral components of a pragmatic blood pressure lowering strategy. Cardiovascular FDCs are rapidly approaching its coming of age, transforming from heavily hyped research tools to pragmatic clinical instruments. This review evaluates the current evidence for cardiovascular FDCs, barriers to current use, and potential next generation advances.

Determinants of Self-Care and Home-Based Management of Hypertension: An Integrative Review

Introduction

Patients with hypertension should perform diverse self-care activities that incorporate medication adherence and lifestyle modification, such as no smoking or alcohol, weight reduction, a low-salt diet, increased physical activity, increased self-monitoring, and stress reduction, for effective management at home.

Aim

This systematic review assessed and synthesized the factors that are associated with self-care and home-based management of hypertension.

Methods

The search of the articles incorporated the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. The literature was searched in four databases (PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], Embase, and Web of Science) until 2022. The articles retrieved and searched from the reference list (531) were transported to EndNote version 20, and duplicates (19) were identified and removed to produce 512 titles. Following the eventual title, abstracts, and full-text screening, 13 articles were appropriate for this study. The narrative and thematic data analysis were used to analyze and integrate the data.

Results

The analysis showed five themes were associated with home-based self-care and blood pressure (BP) control among patients diagnosed with hypertension. These themes that emerged were (1) the prevalence of control of BP, (2) sociodemographic factors, (3) treatment-related factors, (4) knowledge of management, and (5) knowledge of the prevention of risk factors of hypertension. The demographic factors influencing home-based self-care for hypertension were gender, age, and socioeconomic status. In contrast, the treatment factors were duration of hypertension treatment, medication burden, and medication adherence. Other factors that influenced self-care were inadequate knowledge of BP management, follow-up care, and risk factors of hypertension.

Conclusion

Hypertension self-care interventions must incorporate individual, societal, and cultural perspectives in increasing knowledge and improving home-based hypertension management. Therefore, well-designed clinical and community-dwelling interventions should integrate personal, social, and cultural perspectives to improve behavior in the home management of hypertension by increasing knowledge and self-efficacy.

Pharmacotherapy Decision Aids for the American Heart Association 2021 Statement on Management of Stage 1 Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This is a pragmatic decision aid for initiating pharmacotherapy for stage 1 hypertension.

RECENT FINDINGS

If a stage 1 patient presents with clinical signs of fluid retention, then a diuretic should be the primary agent. However, if the patient is normovolemic, then a vasodilator should be the primary agent. If targeted blood pressure is not achieved with the primary agent, then the choices are dose escalation or the addition of a second drug. For stage 1, the addition of secondary agents is preferred. This approach includes the polypill (a single pill with multiple low-dose antihypertensive agents). The positives are the polypill lessens the need to make decisions associated with up-titration and the low doses mitigate adverse side effects. The polypill targets several concurrent mechanisms to counteract hypertension. For stage 1, the goal should be to lower blood pressure with a simple regiment which minimizes adverse side affects.

An evidence-based guide to the efficacy and safety of isometric resistance training in hypertension and clinical implications

More than 30 randomized controlled trials, supported by individual patient-level and group-level meta-analyses and a Delphi analysis of expert opinion, unequivocally show isometric resistance training (IRT) elicits antihypertensive benefits in healthy people and those with chronic illness. We aim to provide efficacy and safety evidence, and a guide for IRT prescription and delivery. Recommendations are made for the use of IRT in specific patient populations and appropriate methods for IRT delivery. Published data suggest IRT consistently elicits mean blood pressure reductions of 7.4/3.3 mmHg systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure, equivalent to antihypertensive medication monotherapy. Blood pressure reductions of this size are associated with an approximate 13% to 22% reduction in major cardiovascular events. Moreover, IRT is safe in a range of patient populations. We suggest that IRT has the greatest potential benefit when used as an antihypertensive therapy in individuals unwilling and/or unable to complete aerobic exercise, or who have had limited adherence or success with it; individuals with resistant or uncontrolled hypertension, already taking at least two pharmacological antihypertensive agents; and healthy or clinical populations, as an adjunct to aerobic exercise and dietary intervention in those who have not yet attained control of their hypertension. IRT is efficacious and produces clinically meaningful blood pressure reductions (systolic blood pressure, 7 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure, 3 mmHg). IRT is safe and typical program delivery requires only about 17 min weekly. IRT should be used as an adjunct to other exercise modalities, in people unable to complete other types of exercise, or in resistant hypertension.

The Therapeutic Intensity Score as Predictor of Clinical Outcomes after Total and Partial Adrenalectomy for Unilateral Primary Aldosteronism: Results of a Multicentric Series

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the ability of therapeutic intensity score (TIS) in predicting the clinical outcomes of partial (PA) and total adrenalectomy (TA) for UPA.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2022, a four-center adrenalectomy dataset was queried for "unilateral adrenal mass" and "UPA" (n = 90). Preoperative TIS of each antihypertensive medication were individually calculated and merged to create a single, cumulative variable. Probability of complete clinical, partial, and absent pooled success rates according to TIS were assessed for the overall cohort by Kaplan-Meier. Cox analyses were used to identify predictors of complete clinical and partial/absent success, respectively. For all analyses, a two-sided p < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 27-54) complete partial, and absent clinical success were observed in 60%, 17.7%, and 22.3%, respectively. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, TIS < 1 predicted higher complete success rates (p < 0.001), while TIS ≥ 1 was predictor of either partial and absent clinical success (p = 0.008). On multivariable analysis, TIS < 1 (HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.11-0.57; p = 0.001) and adenoma size (HR 1.11; 95% CI 1-1.23; p = 0.0049) were independent predictors of complete clinical success, while TIS ≥ 1 (HR 2.84; 95% CI 1.32-6.1; p = 0.007) was the only independent predictor of absent clinical success.

CONCLUSIONS

TIS score and adenoma size may help to identify patients who are likely to be at risk of persistent hypertension after surgery.

Genetic Variation in CYP2D6 and SLC22A1 Affects Amlodipine Pharmacokinetics and Safety

Amlodipine is an antihypertensive drug with unknown pharmacogenetic biomarkers. This research is a candidate gene study that looked for associations between amlodipine pharmacokinetics and safety and pharmacogenes. Pharmacokinetic and safety data were taken from 160 volunteers from eight bioequivalence trials. In the exploratory step, 70 volunteers were genotyped for 44 polymorphisms in different pharmacogenes. CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (PMs) showed higher half-life (t1/2) (univariate p-value (puv) = 0.039, multivariate p-value (pmv) = 0.013, β = -5.31, R2 = 0.176) compared to ultrarapid (UMs), normal (NMs) and intermediate metabolizers (IMs). SLC22A1 rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with higher dose/weight-corrected area under the curve (AUC72/DW) (puv = 0.025; pmv = 0.026, β = 578.90, R2 = 0.060) compared to the G/G genotype. In the confirmatory step, the cohort was increased to 160 volunteers, who were genotyped for CYP2D6, SLC22A1 and CYP3A4. In addition to the previous associations, CYP2D6 UMs showed a lower AUC72/DW (puv = 0.046, pmv = 0.049, β = -68.80, R2 = 0.073) compared to NMs, IMs and PMs and the SLC22A1 rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with thoracic pain (puv = 0.038) and dizziness (puv = 0.038, pmv = 0.014, log OR = 10.975). To our knowledge, this is the first work to report a strong relationship between amlodipine and CYP2D6 and SLC22A1. Further research is needed to gather more evidence before its application in clinical practice.

Efficacy and safety of a quadruple ultra-low-dose treatment for hypertension (QUARTET USA): Rationale and design for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Over half of patients with elevated blood pressure require multi-drug treatment to achieve blood pressure control. However, multi-drug treatment may lead to lower adherence and more adverse drug effects compared with monotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The Quadruple Ultra-low-dose Treatment for Hypertension (QUARTET) USA trial was designed to evaluate whether initiating treatment with ultra-low-dose quadruple-combination therapy will lower office blood pressure more effectively, and with fewer side effects, compared with initiating standard dose monotherapy in treatment naive patients with SBP < 180 and DBP < 110 mm Hg and patients on monotherapy with SBP < 160 and DBP < 100 mm Hg.

METHODS/DESIGN

QUARTET USA was a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03640312) conducted in federally qualified health centers in a large city in the US. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ultra-low-dose quadruple combination therapy or standard dose monotherapy. The primary outcome was mean change from baseline in office systolic blood pressure at 12-weeks, adjusted for baseline values. Secondary outcomes included measures of blood pressure change and variability, medication adherence, and health related quality of life. Safety outcomes included occurrence of serious adverse events, relevant adverse drug effects, and electrolyte abnormalities. A process evaluation aimed to understand provider experiences of implementation and participant experiences around side effects, adherence, and trust with clinical care.

DISCUSSION

QUARTET USA was designed to evaluate whether a novel approach to blood pressure control would lower office blood pressure more effectively, and with fewer side effects, compared with standard dose monotherapy. QUARTET USA was conducted within a network of federally qualified healthcare centers with the aim of generating information on the safety and efficacy of ultra-low-dose quadruple-combination therapy in diverse groups that experience a high burden of hypertension.

Triple Therapy Prevention of Recurrent Intracerebral Disease Events Trial: Rationale, design and progress

BACKGROUND

Patients who suffer intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) are at very high risk of recurrent ICH and other serious cardiovascular events. A single-pill combination (SPC) of blood pressure (BP) lowering drugs offers a potentially powerful but simple strategy to optimize secondary prevention.

OBJECTIVES

The Triple Therapy Prevention of Recurrent Intracerebral Disease Events Trial (TRIDENT) aims to determine the effects of a novel SPC "Triple Pill," three generic antihypertensive drugs with demonstrated efficacy and complementary mechanisms of action at half standard dose (telmisartan 20 mg, amlodipine 2.5 mg, and indapamide 1.25 mg), with placebo for the prevention of recurrent stroke, cardiovascular events, and cognitive impairment after ICH.

DESIGN

An international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial in adults with ICH and mild-moderate hypertension (systolic BP: 130-160 mmHg), who are not taking any Triple Pill component drug at greater than half-dose. A total of 1500 randomized patients provide 90% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.5, over an average follow-up of 3 years, according to a total primary event rate (any stroke) of 12% in the control arm and other assumptions. Secondary outcomes include recurrent ICH, cardiovascular events, and safety.

RESULTS

Recruitment started 28 September 2017. Up to 31 October 2021, 821 patients were randomized at 54 active sites in 10 countries. Triple Pill adherence after 30 months is 86%. The required sample size should be achieved by 2024.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose Triple Pill BP lowering could improve long-term outcome from ICH.

Effects of elevated systolic blood pressure on ischemic heart disease: a Burden of Proof study

High systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a major risk factor for ischemic heart disease (IHD), the leading cause of death worldwide. Using data from published observational studies and controlled trials, we estimated the mean SBP-IHD dose-response function and burden of proof risk function (BPRF), and we calculated a risk outcome score (ROS) and corresponding star rating (one to five). We found a very strong, significant harmful effect of SBP on IHD, with a mean risk-relative to that at 100 mm Hg SBP-of 1.39 (95% uncertainty interval including between-study heterogeneity 1.34-1.44) at 120 mm Hg, 1.81 (1.70-1.93) at 130 mm Hg and 4.48 (3.81-5.26) at 165 mm Hg. The conservative BPRF measure indicated that SBP exposure between 107.5 and 165.0 mm Hg raised risk by 101.36% on average, yielding a ROS of 0.70 and star rating of five. Our analysis shows that IHD risk was already increasing at 120 mm Hg SBP, rising steadily up to 165 mm Hg and increasing less steeply above that point. Our study endorses the need to prioritize and strengthen strategies for screening, to raise awareness of the need for timely diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and to increase the resources allocated for understanding primordial prevention of elevated blood pressure.

Review of Long-Term Blood Pressure Control After Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Challenges and Opportunities

Blood pressure (BP) is the most important modifiable risk factor for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Elevated BP is associated with an increased risk of ICH, worse outcome after ICH, and in survivors, higher risks of recurrent ICH, ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and cognitive impairment/dementia. As intensive BP control probably improves the chances of recovery from acute ICH, the early use of intravenous or oral medications to achieve a systolic BP goal of <140 mm Hg within the first few hours of presentation is reasonable for being applied in most patients. In the long-term, oral antihypertensive drugs should be titrated as soon as possible to achieve a goal BP <130/80 mm Hg and again in all ICH patients regardless of age, location, or presumed mechanism of ICH. The degree of sustained BP reduction, rather than the choice of BP-lowering agent(s), is the most important factor for optimizing risk reduction, with varying combinations of thiazide-type diuretics, long-acting calcium channel blockers, ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, being the mainstay of therapy. As most patients will require multiple BP-lowering agents, and physician inertia and poor adherence are major barriers to effective BP control, single-pill combination therapy should be considered as the choice of management where available. Increased population and clinician awareness, and innovations to solving patient, provider, and social factors, have much to offer for improving BP control after ICH and more broadly across high-risk groups. It is critical that all physicians, especially those managing ICH patients, emphasize the importance of BP control in their practice.

Characteristics, treatment, and control of hypertension in public primary healthcare centers in Nigeria: baseline results from the Hypertension Treatment in Nigeria Program

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on large-scale, multilevel implementation research studies to improve hypertension diagnosis, treatment, and control rates at the primary healthcare (PHC) level in Africa. We describe the characteristics, treatment, and control rates of patients with hypertension in public PHC centers in the Hypertension Treatment in Nigeria Program.

METHODS

Data were collected from adults at least 18 years at 60 public PHC centers between January 2020 and November 2020. Hypertension treatment rates were calculated at registration and upon completion of the initial visit. Hypertension control rates were calculated based on SBP and DBPs less than 140/90 mmHg. Regression models were created to evaluate factors associated with hypertension treatment and control status.

RESULTS

Four thousand, nine hundred and twenty-seven individuals [66.7% women, mean (SD) age = 48.2 (12.9) years] were included. Mean (SD) SBP was higher in men compared with women [152.9 (20.0) mmHg versus 150.8 (21) mmHg, P = 0.001]. Most (58.3%) patients were on treatment at the time of registration, and by the end of the baseline visit, 89.2% of patients were on treatment. The baseline hypertension control rate was 13.1%, and control was more common among patients who were older [adjusted OR (95% CI) 1.01 [1.01 -1.02)], women [adjusted OR (95% CI) 1.30 (1.05- 1.62)], who used fixed dose combination therapy [adjusted OR (95% CI) 1.83 (1.49 -2.26)], and had higher education levels.

CONCLUSION

This baseline report of the largest facility-based hypertension study in Africa demonstrates high hypertension treatment rates but low control rates.

Surgical Quality, Antihypertensive Therapy, and Electrolyte Balance: A Novel Trifecta to Assess Long-Term Outcomes of Adrenal Surgery for Unilateral Primary Aldosteronism

BACKGROUND

To propose a trifecta that summarizes endpoints and predicts their maintenance after adrenalectomy (n = 90) for unilateral primary aldosteronism (UPA).

METHODS

Trifecta was defined as coexistence of: ≥50% antihypertensive therapeutic intensity score reduction (∆TIS), no hypokalemia at 3 months, and no Clavien grade 2-5. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of trifecta. Probability of clinical, biochemical, and simultaneous success according to trifecta were assessed by Kaplan-Meier. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of long-term clinical, biochemical, and simultaneous success. For all analyses, a two-sided p < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Simultaneous success rate was 50%. On multivariable analysis, TIS was an independent predictor of trifecta achievement (HR 3.28; 95% CI 1.07-10.9; p = 0.03). At Kaplan-Meier, trifecta predicted higher success for all endpoints (each p < 0.03). On multivariable Cox analysis, adenoma size (AS) ≥6 cm and trifecta were independent predictors of biochemical (AS: HR 2.87; 95% CI 1.53-5.36; trifecta: HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.13-3.90; each p < 0.02) and simultaneous success (AS: HR 3.81; 95% CI 1.68-8.65; trifecta: HR 4.29; 95% CI 2.08-8.86; each p < 0.01), while trifecta was an independent predictor of complete clinical success (HR 2.84; 95% CI 1.45-5.58; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Trifecta and AS are independent predictors of either long-term complete clinical, biochemical, or combined success after adrenalectomy for UPA.

Antihypertensive drug effects on long-term blood pressure: an individual-level data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Objective

Evidence from randomised trials of pharmacological treatments on long-term blood pressure (BP) reduction is limited. We investigated the antihypertensive drug effects on BP over time and across different participant characteristics.

Methods

We conducted an individual patient-level data meta-analysis of 52 large-scale randomised clinical trials in the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration using mixed models to examine treatment effects on BP over 4 years of mean follow-up.

Results

There were 363 684 participants (42% women), with baseline mean age=65 years and mean systolic/diastolic BP=152/87 mm Hg, and among whom 19% were current smokers, 49% had cardiovascular disease, 28% had diabetes and 69% were taking antihypertensive treatment at baseline. Drugs were effective in lowering BP showing maximal effect after 12 months and gradually attenuating towards later years. Based on measures taken ≥12 months postrandomisation, mean systolic/diastolic BP difference (95% CI) between more and less intense BP-lowering treatment was −11.1 (−11.3 to −10.8)/−5.6 (−5.7 to −5.4) mm Hg; between active treatment and placebo was −5.1 (−5.3 to −5.0)/−2.3 (−2.4 to −2.2) mm Hg; and between active and control arms for drug comparison trials was −1.4 (−1.5 to −1.3)/−0.6 (−0.7 to −0.6) mm Hg. BP reductions were observed across different baseline BP values and ages, and by sex, history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes and prior antihypertensive treatment use.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that BP-lowering pharmacotherapy is effective in lowering BP, up to 4 years on average, in people with different characteristics. Appropriate treatment strategies are needed to sustain substantive long-term BP reductions.

Herb-drug interaction: Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anti-hypertensive drug amlodipine besylate in presence of lepidium sativum and curcuma longa

1. Effects of Lepidium sativum and Curcuma longa were investigated on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antihypertensive drug (amlodipine).2. Hypertensive rats were treated with amlodipine, Lepidium sativum, Lepidium sativum + amlodipine, Curcuma longa, and Curcuma longa + amlodipine; and their blood pressures were measured. Amlodipine in plasma samples was analysed using UPLC-TQD. Product ions of amlodipine were monitored at m/z 409.18 > 238 and 409.18 > 294; and of nitrendipine at m/z 361.16 > 315.1 and 361.16 > 329.10.3. Lepidium sativum + amlodipine treatment showed highest reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP). Mean anti-hypertensive effect of Lepidium sativum and Curcuma longa was similar to amlodipine. Mean SBPs (1-24 h) of amlodipine, Lepidium sativum, Lepidium sativum + amlodipine, Curcuma longa, and Curcuma longa + amlodipine treated animals were found as 149.5 ± 2.4 mmHg, 151.6 ± 1.09 mmHg, and 141.8 ± 2.5 mmHg, 154.9 ± 2.2 mmHg and 144.4 ± 2.6 mmHg (p-values ≪0.05); respectively. Lepidium sativum and Curcuma longa significantly increased amlodipine C_max by 83% (p-value 0.018) and 53% (p-value 0.035); and AUC_0-t by 48% (p-value >0.05) and 56% (p-value 0.033); respectively.4. Results of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies are in agreement. Lepidium sativum and Curcuma longa augment antihypertensive effect of amlodipine, which is also supported by pharmacokinetic observations.

Reasons for Uncontrolled Blood Pressure Among US Adults: Data From the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

[Figure: see text].

Effect of Hibiscus sabdariffa and Zingiber officinale on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of amlodipine

OBJECTIVES

To study the effect of Zingiber officinale and Hibiscus sabdariffa on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of amlodipine.

METHODS

Hypertension was induced in rats (SBP 173.2 ± 1.7 mmHg, mean, 1-24 h). Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP) and heart rate (HR) of group-I (amlodipine treated), group-II (Z. officinale, and Z. officinale + amlodipine) and group-III (H. sabdariffa, and H. sabdariffa + amlodipine) animals were measured by "tail-cuff system". Pharmacokinetics of amlodipine with and without herbs (Z. officinale or H. sabdariffa) was also investigated.

RESULTS

Z. officinale as well as H. sabdariffa decreased the SBP, DBP and MBP. Concurrent treatment with Z. officinale + amlodipine (SBP 129.4 ± 4.5) or H. sabdariffa + amlodipine (SBP 130.4 ± 3.9) showed higher decrease in BP (mean, 1-24h), than individually administered amlodipine (SBP 149.5 ± 2.4) or Z. officinale (SBP 150.2 ± 3.1) or H. sabdariffa (SBP 139.1 ± 1.2). These herbs also influenced the Cmax, AUC0-t, and Tmax of amlodipine. H. sabdariffa increased AUC0-t of amlodipine from 81.8 ± 14.7 to 125.0 ± 10.6 (ng h/mL).

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous administration of Z. officinale or H. sabdariffa with amlodipine, improves its pharmacodynamic response.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Hypertension Treatment by Pharmacists in Black Barbershops

BACKGROUND

In LABBPS (Los Angeles Barbershop Blood Pressure Study), pharmacist-led hypertension care in Los Angeles County Black-owned barbershops significantly improved blood pressure control in non-Hispanic Black men with uncontrolled hypertension at baseline. In this analysis, 10-year health outcomes and health care costs of 1 year of the LABBPS intervention versus control are projected.

METHODS

A discrete event simulation of hypertension care processes projected blood pressure, medication-related adverse events, fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease events, and noncardiovascular disease death in LABBPS participants. Program costs, total direct health care costs (2019 US dollars), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated for the LABBPS intervention and control arms from a health care sector perspective over a 10-year horizon. Future costs and QALYs were discounted 3% annually. High and intermediate cost-effectiveness thresholds were defined as <$50 000 and <$150 000 per QALY gained, respectively.

RESULTS

At 10 years, the intervention was projected to cost an average of $2356 (95% uncertainty interval, -$264 to $4611) more per participant than the control arm and gain 0.06 (95% uncertainty interval, 0.01-0.10) QALYs. The LABBPS intervention was highly cost-effective, with a mean cost of $42 717 per QALY gained (58% probability of being highly and 96% of being at least intermediately cost-effective). Exclusive use of generic drugs improved the cost-effectiveness to $17 162 per QALY gained. The LABBPS intervention would be only intermediately cost-effective if pharmacists were less likely to intensify antihypertensive medications when systolic blood pressure was ≥150 mm Hg or if pharmacist weekly time driving to barbershops increased.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertension care delivered by clinical pharmacists in Black barbershops is a highly cost-effective way to improve blood pressure control in Black men.

Statin therapy is associated with better ambulatory blood pressure control: a propensity score analysis

OBJECTIVE

Statin therapy was associated with lower blood pressure (BP) in some but not all studies. We evaluated the association between statin therapy and ambulatory BP in a large hypertensive population using 'propensity score matching'.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study on 1827 consecutive essential hypertensive patients evaluated with 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring. Antihypertensive treatment intensity (ATI) was calculated to compare different drug associations. We used a propensity score matching to compare two equally-sized cohorts of patients with similar characteristics according to statin therapy. Matching was performed on log-transformed propensity score in a 1 : 1 fashion with a caliper of 0.1, in order to account for the different baseline characteristics between statin and no-statin group.

RESULTS

Mean age: 58.1 ± 13.8 years; male sex: 55%. Patients on statin therapy: 402 (22%). These patients showed lower 24-h BP (-2.8/-7.1 mmHg), daytime (-3.3/-7.6 mmHg) and night-time BP (-2.5/-6.0 mmHg, all P < 0.001). They also showed better ambulatory BP control, even after adjustment for confounding factors. The analyses on the groups derived from the 'propensity score matching' (369 patients in each group) confirmed these results (OR 1.8 for 24-h BP control; OR = 1.6 for daytime BP control; OR = 1.7 for night-time BP control, all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Statin therapy is associated with better ambulatory BP control in essential hypertensive patients. This result is not affected by the intensity of the antihypertensive treatment or by the several cofactors analyzed.

Low-Dose Combination Therapy for Initial Treatment of Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarise the advances that have been made from 2017 in dual, triple, and quadruple low-dose combination therapy for treating high blood pressure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many people require multiple blood pressure lowering medicines to achieve target blood pressures, and initiating treatment with combination blood pressure lowering therapy is being increasingly investigated and recommended. Low-dose combinations of blood pressure lowering provide more effective blood pressure lowering, with fewer adverse events. Recent advances include listing of four dual combinations on the WHO Essential Medicines List, completion of a triple half-dose combination trial, and a pilot of quadruple quarter-dose combination, and recent cardiovascular polypill trials have included two blood pressure lowering medicines at low dose. These trials all demonstrated improvements in achieving blood pressure targets with low-dose combination therapy. Low-dose combination therapy is a promising option for initial treatment of hypertension that appears to be safe and effective. Larger trials of triple and quadruple low-dose combination therapy in multiple locations are underway and should provide stronger evidence of efficacy as well as information on the side effect profile.

Reducing Premature Mortality from Cardiovascular and Other Non-Communicable Diseases by One Third: Achieving Sustainable Development Goal Indicator 3.4.1

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the world's leading causes of death and disability, with cardiovascular disease (CVD) accounting for half of NCD deaths. An ambitious global target established by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals - indicator 3.4.1 - aims to reduce the risk of premature death among people aged 30-69 years from CVD, cancer, diabetes, and chronic lung disease by one third by 2030. This article reviews the science and practice informing what is required to achieve this target, identifying seven interventions that can accelerate progress: 1) tobacco control; 2) treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk; 3) reduction of dietary sodium; 4) reduction of household air pollution; 5) elimination of artificial trans fat; 6) reduction of alcohol use; and 7) prevention, detection, and treatment of cancers. Achieving the target is possible - there has already been progress in some areas, particularly related to CVD reduction - but only if there is faster, more concerted action.

Effect of Nigella sativa and Fenugreek on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Amlodipine in Hypertensive Rats

BACKGROUND

The present article is related to in-vitro and in-vivo herb-drug interaction studies.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the effect of Nigella sativa and fenugreek on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine.

METHOD

Hypertensive rats of group-I were treated with amlodipine and rats of group-II and III were treated with N. sativa, and N. sativa + amlodipine and fenugreek, and fenugreek + amlodipine, respectively. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and mean blood pressure (MBP) of group-I, II and III rats were measured by the "tail-cuff system".

RESULTS

N. sativa, as well as fenugreek, reduced the SBP, DBP and MBP. Simultaneously, administration of fenugreek + amlodipine or N. sativa + amlodipine showed better control of BP. Individually, fenugreek, as well as N. sativa, showed a surprising reduction in the heart rate. There was no remarkable effect of any of these two herbs on Cmax, AUC0-t, Kel, and terminal elimination half-life of amlodipine, but fenugreek altered the Tmax of amlodipine significantly, from 2 ± 1.2h in control to 7.2 ± 1.7h in fenugreek treated group, probably by delaying the absorption.

CONCLUSION

Results of pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics studies suggested that simultaneous administration of fenugreek or N. sativa with amlodipine improved the pharmacological response of amlodipine in hypertensive rats, though there was no remarkable change in pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, Kel, elimination t1/2, and AUC0-t).

Trends in Antihypertensive Medication Monotherapy and Combination Use Among US Adults, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2016

Blood pressure (BP) control rates among US adults taking antihypertensive medication have not increased over the past decade. Many adults require 2 or more classes of antihypertensive medication to achieve guideline-recommended BP goals, but the proportion of US adults taking antihypertensive medication monotherapy, versus combination therapy, has not been quantified using contemporary data. We analyzed data from 2005 to 2008, 2009 to 2012, and 2013 to 2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to determine trends in monotherapy and combinations of antihypertensive medication classes among US adults age ≥20 years with hypertension taking antihypertensive medication (n=7837). The proportion of US adults taking antihypertensive medication with uncontrolled BP (ie, systolic BP ≥140 or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg) was 32.3%, 30.2%, and 31.0% in 2005 to 2008, 2009 to 2012, and 2013 to 2016, respectively (Ptrend=0.37). Between 2005 to 2008 and 2013 to 2016, there was no evidence of changes in the proportions of US adults taking antihypertensive monotherapy (39.5%-40.4%, Ptrend=0.67), dual-therapy (37.9%-38.3%, Ptrend=0.75), triple-therapy (17.6%-16.5%, Ptrend=0.36), or quadruple-therapy (4.4%-4.3%, Ptrend=0.93). Between 2005 to 2008 and 2013 to 2016, there was no evidence of changes in the proportions of US adults with uncontrolled BP taking antihypertensive monotherapy (39.3%-40.6%, Ptrend=0.78). A high proportion of US adults with hypertension, including those with uncontrolled BP, are taking one antihypertensive medication class. Increasing the use of dual- and triple-therapy antihypertensive medication regimens may restore the upward trend in BP control rates among US adults.