A double-blind, parallel-group study of amlodipine versus long-acting nitrate in the management of elderly patients with stable angina

Advances in small-molecule therapy for managing angina pectoris in the elderly

Introduction: As our population ages, the prevalence of angina is growing, leading to increased morbidity and decreased quality of life. The management of angina in the elderly is challenging due to drug intolerance and/or drug resistance as well as frailty. Over the past decades, many new therapeutic small molecules have been investigated for the management of angina. Although none of these studies have specifically focused on the therapies for the elderly, they offer promising new avenues for the treatment of angina in the elderly. Areas covered: Herein, the authors provide a review of the recently published literature on the use of small-molecule therapies for angina management in the elderly and provide a brief overview of these therapies. Expert opinion: A variety of therapeutic classes of existing and newer small molecules are emerging for the management of angina in the elderly. An individualized approach to the management of angina in this growing population is critical for good outcomes. Many small molecules are in their initial stages of clinical use, and further research should be conducted on their utility, especially in the elderly.

Anti-anginal drugs: Systematic review and clinical implications

BACKGROUND

The cornerstone of the treatment of patients affected by stable angina is based on drugs administration classified as first (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, short acting nitrates) or second line treatment (long-acting nitrates, ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine and trimetazidine). However, few data on comparison between different classes of drugs justify that one class of drugs is superior to another.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

i) paper published in English; ii) diagnosis of stable coronary disease; iii) randomized clinical trial; iv) comparison of two anti-angina drugs; v) a sample size >100 patients; vi) a follow-up lasting at least 2 weeks; vii) paper published after 1999, when a meta-analysis of trials comparing beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and nitrates for stable angina of Heidenreich et al. was published.

OUTCOME

to establish whether the categorization in first and second line antianginal treatment is scientifically supported.

RESULTS

Eleven trials fulfilled inclusion criteria. The results show that there is a paucity of data comparing the efficacy of antianginal agents. The little data available show that there are not compounds superior to others in terms of improvement in exercise test duration, frequency of anginal attacks, need for sub-lingual nitroglycerin.

CONCLUSION

The categorization of antianginal drug in first and second line is not confirmed.

Comparison of benazepril plus amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide in high-risk patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease

Combination therapy with benazepril 40 mg and amlodipine 10 mg (B+A) has been shown to be more effective than benazepril 40 mg and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg (B+H) in reducing cardiovascular (CV) events in high-risk patients with stage 2 hypertension with similar blood pressure reductions. In the present post hoc analysis, we evaluated whether B+A is more effective than B+H for reducing CV events in patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD) at baseline in a subgroup analysis of the Avoiding Cardiovascular events through COMbination therapy in Patients LIving with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH) study. The main trial randomized 11,506 patients. Of those, 5,744 received B+A and 5,762 received B+H. Of the 11,506 patients, 5,314 (46%) were classified as having CAD at baseline. The mean patient follow-up period was 35.7 months for the B+A group and 35.6 months for the B+H group. The primary end point was the interval to the first event of composite CV morbidity and mortality. At baseline, significant differences were present between the 5,314 with CAD and the 6,192 without CAD. The patients with CAD had a lower systolic blood pressure and heart rate, a lower incidence of diabetes, and greater incidence of dyslipidemia. However, no baseline differences were found between the randomized B+A and B+H groups. In the patients with CAD, an 18% reduction occurred in the hazard ratio for CV events (primary end point) with B+A versus B+H (p = 0.0016). In a prespecified secondary analysis of the composite end point, including only CV death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, the hazard ratio in the patients with CAD was reduced by 25% (p = 0.0033) in the B+A group compared with the B+H group. B+A was more effective than B+H at comparable blood pressure reductions for reducing CV events in patients, regardless of the presence of CAD. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the combination of B+A should be preferentially used for older patients with high-risk, stage 2 hypertension.

Tolerability to 1-year treatment with once-daily molsidomine in patients with stable angina

Prolonged-release molsidomine 16 mg once daily) QD (has proved effective in the short-term treatment of patients with stable angina. The purpose of this multicenter study was to assess its long-term tolerability and clinical effectiveness. A total of 320 patients with stable angina were treated for 1 year with molsidomine 16 mg QD administered open label as monotherapy or add-on therapy, when beta blockers and/or calcium antagonists were prescribed concomitantly) in 128 patients, ie, 40% of cases), depending on the severity of disease and/or local therapeutic policies. In all, 293 patients (91.6%) completed the study. The proportion of patients who reported drug-related adverse events (AEs) was 9.1%, which is not significantly different (P=.13) from the 5.9% observed during previous short-term (2-4 wk) treatment. Headache accounted for 80.6% of all drug-related AEs and required discontinuation of the drug in one quarter of patients who reported the symptom (ie, 1.9% of the 320 patients involved in the study). No serious drug-related AEs occurred during the study. Tolerability to molsidomine, evaluated with use of a visual analog scale (VAS), improved by 20% from beginning to end of 1-year follow-up. Two-by-two Bonferroni's comparisons were significant at the .05 level between the 2-month assessment and assessments performed at 8, 10, and 12 months. No age-time interaction was noted (P=.82). Heart rate, blood pressure, electrocardiogram, and blood parameters showed no statistically significant or clinically relevant changes during the study. Compliance with treatment was satisfactory throughout the follow-up period. There was no significant change in the weekly frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting nitroderivatives during the 1-year study (P=.07 and P=.12,respectively), but their frequency was significantly (ie, approximately 50%) lower than during a preceding short-term treatment period (P<.0001 and P=.014, respectively). Subjective clinical status, evaluated through an appropriate VAS, improved by 38% from start to end of 1-year follow-up. Bonferroni's comparisons between baseline and subsequent 2-month evaluations were all significant at the .05 level. No age-time interaction could be seen for frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting nitroderivatives, nor for clinical status )P=.10, P=.11, and P=.51, respectively). Neither tolerability to molsidomine nor effectiveness of the drug was biased by concomitant antianginal therapies, insofar as none of these parameters showed a significant treatment type (ie, molsidomine administered as monotherapy or add-on therapy)-time interaction (VAS for tolerability: P=.44; angina: P=.39; nitroderivatives: P=.72; VAS for clinical status: P=.62). Molsidomine 16 mg QD administered for 1 y to patients with stable angina was well tolerated and remained effective during the entire treatment period, independent of age and concomitant antianginal therapy.

Comparison of efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine orotate versus amlodipine besylate in adult patients with mild to moderate hypertension: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 8-week follow-up, noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine orotate with those of amlodipine besylate in Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was designed as a noninferiority study. To be included in the study, previously untreated patients had to have a sitting diastolic blood pressure (SiDBP) of 90 to 109 mm Hg. Previously treated patients had to discontinue their current annhypertensive medications and have a baseline SiDBP between 90 and 109 mm Hg after a 2-week washout period. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive 5 mg amlodipine orotate or 5 mg amlodipine besylate for 8 weeks. The medication dose was doubled (10 mg QD for either amlodipine orotate or amlodipine besylate) 4 weeks after enrollment if SiDBP was >or=90 mm Hg. The primary efficacy analysis was noninferiority of the difference in mean trough SiDBP changes from baseline for amlodipin eorotate as compared with amlodipine besylate after 8 weeks of treatment. For the secondary efficacy analysis, 2 other measures were analyzed after 8 weeks of treatment. The SiDBP response rate was defined as an SiDBP measurement<90 mm Hg at the last clinical follow-up visit or an absolute reduction of >or=10 mm Hg in SiDBP from baseline until the last clinical follow-up visit. In addition, noninferiority of the difference in mean trough sitting systolic blood pressure (SiSBP) changes from baseline was analyzed for amlodipine orotate as compared with amlodipine besylate. The drug compliance rate was estimated by pillcount.

RESULTS

Eligible patients (n=109; 43 women and 66 men) were randomly assigned to receive amlodipine orotate (n=53) or amlodipine besylate (n=56). No significant differences were found in sex, age, weight, or current smoking between the groups (all, P=NS). The proportion of patients with previous antihypertensive medications was not different between the groups (47.2% [25/53] in the amlodipine orotate group and 50.0% [28/56] in the amlodipine besylate group; P=NS). No significant differences were found in baseline SiDBP (mean [SD], 100 [6] mm Hg [range, 90-109 mm Hg] in the amlodipine orotate group and 100 [6] mm Hg [range, 90-108 mm Hg] in the amlodipine besylate group; P=NS) or in baseline SiSBP (mean [SD], 149 [14] mm Hg [range, 125-179 mm Hg] in the amlodipine orotate group and 146 [10] mm Hg [range, 123-167 mm Hg] in the amlodipine besylate group; p=NS). The mean (SD) changes in SiDBP were -15.6 (6.3) mm Hg for the amlodipine orotate group and -14.5 (5.5) mm Hg for the amlodipine besylate groups was 1.1 (5.9) mm Hg (95% CI, -0.87 to infinity), and because the lower boundary of the 95% CI was greater than -5 mm Hg, amlodipine orotate was considered noninferior to amlodipine besylate. The response rate was 48 of 51 (94.1%) in the amlodipine orotate group compared with 50 (92.6%) of 54 in the amlodipine besylate group after 8 weeks of treatment (P=NS). The mean (SD) compliance rates were 97.6% (3.6%) in the amlodipine orotate group and 96.5% (4.3%) in the amlodipine besylate group (P=NS). The incidence of drug-related adverse events (AEs) was similar between the groups (1/53 [1.9%]) in the amlodipine orotate group vs 4/55 [7.3%] in the amlodipine besylate group; P=NS). The most common drug-related AE overall was peripheral edema (2/55 [3.6%]), and the most common of all the AEs was upper respiratory tract infection (4/55 [7.3%]) in the amlodipine besylate group. The most common drug-related AE was headache (1/53 [1.9%]) in the amlodipine orotate group and peripheral edema (2/55 [3.6%]) in the amlodipine besylate group. No severe AEs were found in either group.

CONCLUSION

The reduction in SiDBP after 8 weeks of amlodipine orotate treatment was noninferior to that of amlodipine besylate in these Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension. The SiDBP response rate and the reduction in SISBP after 8 weeks of amlodipine orotate treatment were not significantly different from those of amlodipine besylate treatment. Both agents were wel tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of once- and twice-daily formulations of molsidomine in patients with stable angina pectoris: double-blind and open-label studies

Molsidomine, a sydnonimine acting as a heterocyclic direct nitric oxide donor, has been used for many years in several European countries for the treatment of patients with stable angina pectoris. The efficacy and tolerability of a novel once-daily 16-mg formulation of molsidomine (M16) were compared with those of the currently used twice-daily 8-mg molsidomine tablet (M8) in 666 patients. Study 1, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, twin crossover study, involved 533 patients given acute and 2-week treatment with each drug formulation. Study 2, a multicenter, open-label, sequential, add-on trial, compared M16 and M8 in 133 patients. Drug effects on exercise capacity (study 1 only), frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting itroderivatives, and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Compared with placebo, M16 increased exercise capacity by 15% (P<.001) at the start of study 1 and by 13% (P<.001) after 2 weeks' treatment, and was not inferior to M8. In terms of anginal attack frequency and nitroderivative consumption, M16 was not inferior to M8 in either study. Moreover, compared with M8, M16 produced a statistically and clinically significant reduction in the incidence of anginal attacks in elderly (>/=75 y) but not in younger patients (<75 y) (study 2), nor in patients from study 1. No significant difference from M8 was found in either study in short-acting nitroderivative consumption. No tolerance to M8 or M16 was observed after 2-week treatment. No statistically significant differences in incidences of all AEs and drug-related AEs were observed between M16 and M8 in either study. The same held true for proportions of patients experiencing AEs and drug-related AEs on M16 vs M8: in study 1-14.3% and 11.8% for all AEs (P=.218), 6.9% and 5.4% for drug-related AEs (P=.280); in study 2-1.3% and 1.3% for all AEs, 0% and 1.3% for drug-related AEs (P>.10) in young patients; and in the elderly, 3.6% and 0% for drug-related AEs (P>.10). Only the proportion of elderly patients with all AEs was significantly higher with M16 than with M8: 14.5% vs 1.8% (P=.039). M16 once daily was effective and well tolerated in investigated patients with stable angina pectoris, particularly the elderly, affording 24 hours of therapeutic activity. M16 was not inferior to M8 given twice daily in terms of efficacy, safety profile, and tolerability.

A population-based study on well-being in the very old: the role of cardiovascular diseases and drugs

Cardiovascular diseases constitute the most common health problems in very old people. Consequently, cardiovascular drugs are the medicines that are most frequently used by elderly subjects. Although many studies have examined the physiological effect and adverse reactions of these drugs, knowledge on their effect on emotional well-being is missing. The present study aims to examine the association between cardiovascular diseases and their medical treatment on the emotional well-being of very old people. We investigated a representative group of elderly subjects gathered from a population-based study (n=235). Participants were 84 years or older and cognitively intact (mini-mental state examination (MMSE) > or =24 points). Well-being was assessed with the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS), measuring different mood categories. Cardiovascular diseases were diagnosed following the International Classification of Diseases. In this population the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases was high (62%). Multivariate regression analysis showed that while being affected by a cardiovascular disease did not affect the emotional well-being of the subjects (PANAS-PA, p=0.171; PANAS-NA, p=0.209), the use of some cardiovascular drugs showed an association. Cardiac glycosides (p=0.006) and nitrates (p=0.008) were associated with increased negative feelings. Due to high prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and use of cardiovascular medicines, this finding has relevance on the quality of life of elderly people. However, due to the nature of this study we cannot assess cause-effect relationship of this positive association. Therefore, the present findings suggest that there is a need for clinical studies in this increasing and limited studied age group.