Clinical outcomes and healthcare costs in hypertensive patients treated with a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/valsartan

Effect of single-pill versus free equivalent combinations on persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events in hypertension: a real-world analysis

OBJECTIVES

Hypertension guidelines recommend the use of single-pill combinations (SPCs) of antihypertensive drugs to improve treatment persistence and blood pressure control. This study aimed to investigate the long-term effects of ramipril/amlodipine (R/A) SPC versus free equivalent dose combinations (FEC) on cardiovascular outcomes and treatment persistence.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study analysed the database of the Hungarian National Health Insurance Fund. The study included patients with hypertension aged at least 18 years who were initiated on R/A SPC or FEC of different dose combinations (R/A 5/5, 5/10, 10/5 and 10/10 mg) between 2012 and 2018, with follow-up for up to 60 months. Imbalances in baseline characteristics were reduced with propensity score-based sub-classification. All analyses were performed with Cox proportional hazard model and propensity score sub-classification to adjust the imbalances in baseline characteristics. Drug persistence and MACEs were the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, 104 882 patients with SPC and 68 324 patients with FEC-treated hypertension were included. The R/A 5/5 mg combination represented the largest proportion (62%). The nonpersistence rate was significantly lower with SPC than with FEC from month 1 to month 24 in the R/A 5/5 mg combination ( P  < 0.001) and during the entire observation period in the remaining combinations. The MACE rate was significantly reduced with all R/A SPCs versus FECs. No effects on age and sex on both endpoints were noted.

CONCLUSION

This study further supports the beneficial effects of the use of SPC on 60-month persistence and MACEs in hypertension.

Impact of single-pill combinations versus free-equivalent combinations on adherence and persistence in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Hypertension is a leading cause of death and disease burden followed by dyslipidemia. Their asymptomatic nature leads to low adherence and persistence to treatments. A systematic literature review (SLR) investigated the impact of single-pill-combinations (SPC) compared to free-equivalent combination (FEC) on adherence, persistence, clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and patient-reported outcomes, in patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia, or both.

METHODS

MEDLINE, MEDLINE-IN-PROCESS, Embase, and Cochrane were searched from inception until 11 May 2021, for studies comparing SPC against FEC in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. Patient characteristics, study design, therapies, measures of adherence or persistence, clinical outcomes, and follow-up were extracted.

RESULTS

Among 52 studies identified in the SLR, 27 (n = 346,030 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. SPCs were associated with significantly improved adherence compared with FEC, as assessed through medication-possession-ratio ≥80% (odds ratio (OR) 0.42, p < 0.01) and proportion of days covered ≥80% (OR 0.45, p < 0.01). SPC also improved persistence (OR 0.44, p < 0.01) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction (mean difference -1.50, p < 0.01) compared with the FEC.

CONCLUSIONS

SPC use resulted in significantly improved adherence, persistence, and SBP levels compared with FEC in patients with hypertension. The findings support SPC use in reducing the burden of hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Clinical Benefit of Fixed-Dose Combination of Amlodipine and Potent Atorvastatin in Patients With Concomitant Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia

BACKGROUND

Hypertension and hypercholesterolemia are important risk factors for cardiovascular disease, and treatment with fixed-dose combination (FDC) regimens is recommended by current guidelines. However, the clinical outcomes of different FDC dosages remain unknown. This study aimed to examine the clinical outcomes of FDC regimens and the free combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin at different dosages.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with concurrent hypertension and hypercholesterolemia treated daily with an FDC of 5 mg amlodipine and 10 mg atorvastatin (5/10 fixed group), and FDC of 5 mg amlodipine and 20 mg atorvastatin (5/20 fixed group), or free combination of 5 mg amlodipine and 20 mg atorvastatin (5/20 free group) were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. The primary outcome was the composite cardiovascular outcomes, including cardiovascular death, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary intervention. A total of 9095 patients were eligible for inclusion. The incidence of primary outcome per 1000 person-years was 16.6 in the 5/10 fixed group, 12.6 in the 5/20 fixed group, and 16.5 in the 5/20 free group (5/20 fixed versus 5/20 free: hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.64-0.91]; 5/20 fixed versus 5/10 fixed: HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63-0.90]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with concomitant hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, treatment with an FDC of amlodipine and high-dose atorvastatin led to a lower risk of a composite of cardiovascular outcomes than treatment with the free combination or a similar FDC with a lower dose of atorvastatin.

Medication adherence with fixed-dose versus free-equivalent combination therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: We conducted a large-scale meta-analysis and subgroup analysis to compare the effect of fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy with that of free-equivalent combination (FEC) therapy on medication adherence. Methods: Studies published in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Embase up to May 2022 were identified according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The primary assessed outcomes were the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC). We investigated the probability of being adherent to the prescribed treatment (MPR or PDC ≥80%) or the average estimate of these two parameters. Studies reporting such results were included in this meta-analysis. The summary measures were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the weighted mean difference (MD) with 95% of confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. The quality of the cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Of the 1,814 screened studies, 61 met the predefined inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the results showed that compared to FEC, FDC significantly improved the medication compliance of patients by 1.29 times (95% CI:1.23-1.35, p < 0.00001). I² of 99% represent high heterogeneity across studies. The mean difference in medication adherence between FDC and FEC was 0.10 (95% CI: 0.06-0.14, p < 0.00001) with an I² estimate of 100%. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies that reported adherence outcomes according to disease type, period of evaluation and compliance indicators. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to exclude the results of low-quality studies, as well as studies in which there was ambiguity in the method of calculating the estimator. Conclusion: Analysis of the assessed parameters for the intention-to-treat and subgroup populations suggests that FDC can improve adherence to treatment and its advantages over FEC may increase over time. Further research is needed to better understand how medical conditions affect the impact of reduced pill burden on adherence, particularly in diseases other than cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Beneficial Effects of Fixed-Dose Combination of Amlodipine and Atorvastatin in Patients with Concomitant Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia: A Multi-Institutional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are important risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) diseases. Although treating these factors simultaneously is recommended by current guidelines, only short-term clinical results are available.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the longer-term efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) versus free combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with concomitant hypertension and hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

Patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia were stratified into three groups [FDC of amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 10 mg (Fixed 5/10), FDC of amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 20 mg (Fixed 5/20), and free combination of amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 10 mg (Free 5/10)]. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, the composite CV outcome, liver function, BP, LDL-C and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) changes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1,788 patients were eligible for analysis, and the mean follow-up period was 1.7 year. There was no significant difference in the composite CV outcome among the three groups (Fixed 5/10 6.1%, Fixed 5/20 6.3% and Free 5/10 6.0%). The LDL-C level was significantly reduced in the Fixed 5/20 group (-35.7 mg/dL) compared to the Fixed 5/10 (-23.6 mg/dL) and Free 5/10 (-10.3 mg/dL) groups (p = 0.001 and < 0.001, respectively). The changes in HbA1c were similar among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FDC of amlodipine and atorvastatin, especially the regimen with a higher dosage of statins, significantly reduced the mid-term LDL-C level compared to a free combination in patients with concomitant hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. Blood sugar level was not significantly changed by this aggressive treatment strategy.

Single-Pill Combination to Improve Hypertension Treatment: Pharmaceutical Industry Development

Multiple illness is an increasingly common phenomenon. Its consequence is the need for polytherapy, which is particularly common among people suffering from arterial hypertension. The development of combined preparations (containing at least two API-active pharmaceutical ingredients) dedicated to the treatment of hypertension is a response to increased compliance, especially in elderly patients. In our work, we describe in particular the possibilities of using β-adrenergic receptors blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in combinations. The combinations of APIs are used as single pills in patients with arterial hypertension with concomitant diseases such as hyperlipidemia; blood coagulation problems and diabetes mellitus were also discussed successively. Pharmacoeconomic analysis for the API combinations shown is also presented. As a final conclusion, numerous benefits of using the combined preparations should be indicated, especially by the elderly and/or in patients with coexistence of other diseases.

The use of single-pill combinations as first-line treatment for hypertension: translating guidelines into clinical practice

: The 2008 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension guidelines recommend the first-line prescription of two antihypertensive drugs in single-pill combinations (SPCs), also known as fixed-dose combinations, for the treatment of most patients with hypertension. This recommendation is based on a large amount of data, which shows that first-line treatment with SPCs supports reaching blood pressure targets rapidly and reducing cardiovascular outcome risk while keeping the therapeutic strategies as simple as possible and fostering adherence and persistence. As this approach constitutes a big shift from the stepped-care approaches that have been dominant for many years, practicing physicians have expressed concerns about using SPCs as first-line agents. In this review, we will discuss the barriers to the uptake of this recommendation. We will also offer suggestions to reduce the impact of these barriers and address specific concerns that have been raised.

Impact of single-pill combination therapy on adherence, blood pressure control, and clinical outcomes: a rapid evidence assessment of recent literature

The 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension raised the need for evidence to support the use of single-pill combination (SPC) therapy in preference to free-dosed therapy for hypertension. This systematic rapid evidence assessment sought to determine if initiating SPC therapy improves adherence, blood pressure (BP) control and/or cardiovascular outcomes vs. initiation of free-dose combination therapy.

Fixed-dose combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin improves clinical outcomes in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia

Hypertension and dyslipidemia are important risk factors for cardiovascular disease. However, the clinical outcomes of fixed-dose combination (FDC) versus free-equivalent combination (FEC) of amlodipine and atorvastatin in the treatment of concurrent hypertension and dyslipidemia remain unknown. In this study, we included patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia, without previously established cardiovascular disease, and treated with either FDC or FEC of amlodipine and atorvastatin were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan and follow-up for 5 years. By using 1:1 propensity score matching, a total of 1756 patients were enrolled in this study. The composite of major adverse cardiovascular events, including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and coronary revascularization, occurred more frequently in the FEC group than in the FDC group (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 2.5). Although the all-cause mortality did not differ (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.59), the FEC group developed increased MI, stroke, and coronary revascularization (hazard ratio, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.07 to 7.68; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.74; and hazard ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.26 to 4.69, respectively). Furthermore, as an unexpected result, a higher risk to develop new-onset diabetes mellitus was observed with FEC regimens (hazard ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0). In conclusion, although the all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups, the FDC regimen of amlodipine and atorvastatin improved clinical outcomes when compared to FEC in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Amlodipine/Valsartan (Avsar®): Efficacy in Hypertensive Patients - A Real World Observational Study (ALERT)

OBJECTIVES

Hypertension is a significant public health problem and one of the major noncommunicable diseases at the endemic level in Pakistan. This study was done to determine the efficacy of amlodipine/valsartan (Aml/Val) once-daily dose in reducing blood pressure (BP) after eight weeks of therapy.

METHODS

This study is an open-labeled observational study carried out for a period of 12 months. Some 769 participants of either gender between the ages of 18 and 70 years selected after taking written informed consent had a BP of >139/89 mmHg (not controlled) on monotherapy with a minimum 30 days of treatment. Therapy to control their high BP was initiated with Aml/Val (Avsar®, PharmEvo Pvt Ltd, Karachi, Pakistan) at the time of their enrolment in the study. Pregnant females and patients with secondary hypertension were excluded. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0 and chi-square test was used for inferential analysis. p-values less than 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

At the end of week one, less than half of the patients achieved the desired level of BP while the majority achieved this level by the end of the study. Some 75.6% patients achieved targeted BP with Aml/Val 80/5 mg tablet, 18.5% achieved targeted BP with Aml/Val 160/5 mg tablet, and 5.9% achieved the targeted BP with Aml/Val 160/10 mg tablet at the end of the eighth week. The compliance rate was 99.2% at the first week, 98.9% at the fourth week, and 99.9% at the eighth week of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our study concluded that Aml/Val (Avsar) combination therapy was very effective in controlling BP among patients who were uncontrolled with other monotherapies for at least one month.

Fixed dose drug combinations - are they pharmacoeconomically sound? Findings and implications especially for lower- and middle-income countries

Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and noninfectious diseases and issues of affordability.Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where there are concerns with their value.Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates, and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis, and hypertension are valued and listed in the country's essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which are being addressed.

Does the Polypill Improve Patient Adherence Compared to Its Individual Formulations? A Systematic Review

Many patients, especially those with a high pill burden and multiple chronic illnesses, are less adherent to medication. In medication treatments utilizing polypills, this problem might be diminished since multiple drugs are fused into one formulation and, therefore, the therapy regimen is simplified. This systematic review summarized evidence to assess the effect of polypills on medication adherence. The following databases were searched for articles published between 1 January 2000, and 14 May 2019: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Medication adherence was the only outcome assessed, regardless of the method of measuring it. Sixty-seven original peer-reviewed articles were selected. Adherence to polypill regimens was significantly higher in 56 articles (84%) compared to multiple pill regimens. This finding was also supported by the results of 13 out of 17 selected previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses dealing with this topic. Adherence can be improved through the formulation of polypills, which is probably why the interest in researching them is growing. There are many polypills on the market, but the adherence studies so far focused mainly on a small range of medical conditions.

A new strategy for taste masking on bitter drug by other combined drug in fixed-dose combination: bitterness of Amlodipine besylate could be masked efficiently by Valsartan

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate the bitterness of amlodipine besylate (AML) combined with other five antihypertensive drugs: alacepril, benazepril, hydrochlorothiazide, telmisartan (TEL) and valsartan (VAL), which have possibility of usage as a fixed-dose combination (FDC) drugs.

Methods

The bitterness of individual six drugs and AML combined with each of the five drugs was evaluated using taste sensor SA402B (Intelligent Sensor Technology Inc.). AML combined with TEL or VAL was evaluated by taste sensor and human gustatory sensation tests. The interaction between AML with TEL or VAL was evaluated by 1H-NMR.

Key findings

The bitterness of AML was significantly decreased by addition of VAL, whereas it remained unchanged by the addition of TEL in taste sensor and human gustatory sensation test. In the 1H-NMR spectrum of AML with VAL, signal shifts of protons in AML were observed compared to that in AML alone. On the other hand, in the 1H-NMR spectrum of AML with TEL, signal shifts of protons in AML were not observed.

Conclusions

It was suggested that when VAL was mixed with AML, the electrostatic interactions between positive charged amino group of AML and negative charged tetrazole group of VAL were caused, and thereby led the suppression the bitterness of AML.

Fixed-dose vs free-dose combinations for the management of hypertension-An analysis of 81 958 patients

Fixed-dose combinations (FDC) have been developed to reduce the pill burden for hypertensive patients. Data on fixed-dose or free-dose (freeDC) ramipril/amlodipine (R/A) or candesartan/amlodipine (C/A) combination treatment initiation were assessed. 71 463 patients were prescribed R/A and 10 495 C/A. For both R/A and C/A, FDC patients were younger (both P < .001) and less comorbid. Prior MI (OR: 0.61 and 0.60), prior stroke (OR: 0.68 and 0.70) and CHD (OR: 0.68 and 0.64) were negatively associated with FDC use, whereas hyperlipidemia was positively associated (OR: 1.26 and 1.19). Use of antihypertensive comedication (OR: 0.78; OR: 0.55) and treatment discontinuation within 12 months (HR: 0.65 and 0.82) were less likely in FDC patients, who also showed superior adherence (mean MPR; both P < .001). Cost of the combination was higher for FDCs (both P < .001). FDCs improve persistence and adherence, although they are more commonly prescribed in patients with less cardiovascular disease.

Improving Adherence to Treatment and Reducing Economic Costs of Hypertension: The Role of Olmesartan-Based Treatment

Poor adherence to antihypertensive treatment is the single most important factor of unsatisfactory blood pressure (BP) control. This review focuses on therapy-related factors affecting adherence and suggests how to improve it with a wise choice of treatment schedule. Complex drug treatment schemes, poor tolerability and drug substitutions are frequent causes of poor adherence which, in turn, causes insufficient BP control, greater incidence of cardiovascular events and, finally, higher global health costs. The effects of prescribing generic drugs and of drug substitutions on adherence is also discussed. In terms of adherence, generic drugs do not seem to be better than branded drugs, unless patients have to bear very high "out of pocket" expenses to buy original drugs, suggesting no advantages in switching drug with the mere goal of reducing the cost of therapy. An important role in improving adherence (and thus cardiovascular events and health expenditure) is also played by the availability of fixed-dose combinations; among antihypertensive drugs, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are those associated with higher levels of adherence and persistence. Among ARBs, olmesartan stands out for a wide choice of effective fixed-dose combinations.

Fixed-Dose Combinations of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Calcium Channel Blockers in the Treatment of Hypertension: A Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors

Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of different regimens are recommended in guidelines for the treatment of hypertension. However, clinical studies comparing FDCs of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/calcium channel blocker (CCB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE inhibitor)/CCB in hypertensive patients are lacking.Using a propensity score matching of 4:1 ratio, this retrospective claims database study compared 2 FDC regimens, ARB/CCB and ACE inhibitor/CCB, in treating hypertensive patients with no known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. All patients were followed for at least 3 years or until the development of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) during the study period. In addition, the effect of medication adherence on clinical outcomes was evaluated in subgroup analysis based on different portions of days covered.There was no significant difference in MACE-free survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.50; P = 0.08) and survival free from hospitalization for heart failure (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 082-1.61; P = 0.431), new diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 071-1.36; P = 0.906), and initiation of dialysis (HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 050-1.92; P = 0.965) between the 2 study groups. The results remained the same within each subgroup of patients with different adherence statuses.ARBs in FDC regimens with CCBs in the present study were shown to be as effective as ACE inhibitors at reducing the risks of MACEs, hospitalization for heart failure, new diagnosis of chronic kidney disease, and new initiation of dialysis in hypertensive patients, regardless of the medication adherence status.

Safety of Fixed Dose of Antihypertensive Drug Combinations Compared to (Single Pill) Free-Combinations: A Nested Matched Case-Control Analysis

To compare serious adverse events of fixed-dose dual antihypertensive drug combination (FIXED) to component-based free-combination (FREE).A population-based nationwide cohort from the French Health Insurance System included subjects over 50 years with first time claims (new user) in the second half of 2009 for a calcium-channel blocker or a thiazide-like diuretic in combination with either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker as FREE or FIXED. We designed a nested matched case-control analysis with 304 cases, hospitalized for hypotension, syncope, or collapse (n = 224), renal failure (n = 19), hyponatremia, hyper- or hypokalemia (n = 61) and 1394 controls matched for gender, age, date of inclusion in the cohort, and administrative county. Subjects with a medical history of cardiovascular disease, chronic renal failure, or cancer were excluded.The mean age ± SD was 73 ± 10 years and 70% were women. Based on the last delivery preceding the index date, 1414 patients (83%) were exposed to FIXED. Homogeneity of FIXED effect compared to FREE across components of the main composite outcome was rejected (P = 0.0099). FIXED formulation significantly increased the odd of the most frequent component (ie, hypotension, syncope, or collapse): OR = 1.88 (95% CI: 1.15-3.05) compared to FREE after adjusting for confounding factors including dose.Serious adverse event occurring in the early phase of treatment deserves attention of physicians because it could alter the benefit/risk ratio of antihypertensive drug combination.