Potassium Magnesium Citrate Is Superior to Potassium Chloride in Reversing Metabolic Side Effects of Chlorthalidone

BACKGROUND

Thiazide diuretics (TD) are the first-line treatment of hypertension because of its consistent benefit in lowering blood pressure and cardiovascular risk. TD is also known to cause an excess risk of diabetes, which may limit long-term use. Although potassium (K) depletion was thought to be the main mechanism of TD-induced hyperglycemia, TD also triggers magnesium (Mg) depletion. However, the role of Mg supplementation in modulating metabolic side effects of TD has not been investigated. Therefore, we aim to determine the effect of potassium magnesium citrate (KMgCit) on fasting plasma glucose and liver fat by magnetic resonance imaging during TD therapy.

METHODS

Accordingly, we conducted a double-blinded RCT in 60 nondiabetic hypertension patients to compare the effects of KCl versus KMgCit during chlorthalidone treatment. Each patient received chlorthalidone alone for 3 weeks before randomization. Primary end point was the change in fasting plasma glucose after 16 weeks of KCl or KMgCit supplementation from chlorthalidone alone.

RESULTS

The mean age of subjects was 59±11 years (30% Black participants). Chlorthalidone alone induced a significant rise in fasting plasma glucose, and a significant fall in serum K, serum Mg, and 24-hour urinary citrate excretion (all P<0.05). KMgCit attenuated the rise in fasting plasma glucose by 7.9 mg/dL versus KCl (P<0.05), which was not observed with KCl. There were no significant differences in liver fat between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

KMgCit is superior to KCl, the common form of K supplement used in clinical practice, in preventing TD-induced hyperglycemia. This action may improve tolerability and cardiovascular safety in patients with hypertension treated with this drug class.

Efficacy and safety of standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg in primary hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter phase 3 trial

The authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and characteristics of patients who respond well to standard dose triple combination therapy including chlorthalidone 25 mg with telmisartan 80 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg in hypertensive patients. This is a multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, randomized trial. Patients are randomized to triple combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 12.5 mg, TEL/AML/CHTD group) or dual combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg, TEL/AML group) treatment and then dose up titration to TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg and TEL80/AML5, respectively. The primary endpoint is the change of mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) at week 8. A Target BP achievement rate, a response rate, and the safety endpoints are also evaluated. Total 374 patients (mean age = 60.9 ± 10.7 years, male = 78.3%) were randomized to the study. The baseline MSSBPs/diastolic BPs were 149.9 ± 12.2/88.5 ± 10.4 mm Hg. After 8 weeks treatment, the change of MSSBPs at week 8 are -19.1 ± 14.9 mm Hg (TEL/AML/CHTD) and -11.4 ± 14.7 mm Hg (TEL/AML) (p < .0001). The achievement rates of target BP (53.8% vs. 37.8%, p = .0017) and responder rate (54.8% vs. 35.6%, p = .0001) at week 8 were significantly higher in TEL/AML/CHTD. There are no serious adverse event and no one discontinued medication due to adverse event. Among the TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg treatment group, patients of female or age ≥ 65 years old showed higher rate of target BP achievement than relatively young male. (61.4 vs. 46.8%, p = .042) Our study showed standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg is efficacious and safe in treatment of primary hypertension. Target BP achievement with triple therapy would be facilitated in female or old age.

[Chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide as the first choice in the treatment of people with hypertension]

INTRODUCTION

Chlorthalidone vs. Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension-Cardiovascular Events

BACKGROUND

Whether chlorthalidone is superior to hydrochlorothiazide for preventing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension is unclear.

METHODS

In a pragmatic trial, we randomly assigned adults 65 years of age or older who were patients in the Department of Veterans Affairs health system and had been receiving hydrochlorothiazide at a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg to continue therapy with hydrochlorothiazide or to switch to chlorthalidone at a daily dose of 12.5 or 25 mg. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure resulting in hospitalization, urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina, and non-cancer-related death. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 13,523 patients underwent randomization. The mean age was 72 years. At baseline, hydrochlorothiazide at a dose of 25 mg per day had been prescribed in 12,781 patients (94.5%). The mean baseline systolic blood pressure in each group was 139 mm Hg. At a median follow-up of 2.4 years, there was little difference in the occurrence of primary-outcome events between the chlorthalidone group (702 patients [10.4%]) and the hydrochlorothiazide group (675 patients [10.0%]) (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.94 to 1.16; P = 0.45). There were no between-group differences in the occurrence of any of the components of the primary outcome. The incidence of hypokalemia was higher in the chlorthalidone group than in the hydrochlorothiazide group (6.0% vs. 4.4%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large pragmatic trial of thiazide diuretics at doses commonly used in clinical practice, patients who received chlorthalidone did not have a lower occurrence of major cardiovascular outcome events or non-cancer-related deaths than patients who received hydrochlorothiazide. (Funded by the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02185417.).

Genetic Contributors of Efficacy and Adverse Metabolic Effects of Chlorthalidone in African Americans from the Genetics of Hypertension Associated Treatments (GenHAT) Study

Hypertension is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease mortality. African Americans (AAs) have the highest prevalence of hypertension in the United States, and to alleviate the burden of hypertension in this population, better control of blood pressure (BP) is needed. Previous studies have shown considerable interpersonal differences in BP response to antihypertensive treatment, suggesting a genetic component. Utilizing data from 4297 AA participants randomized to chlorthalidone from the Genetics of Hypertension Associated Treatments (GenHAT) study, we aimed to identify variants associated with the efficacy of chlorthalidone. An additional aim was to find variants that contributed to changes in fasting glucose (FG) in these individuals. We performed genome-wide association analyses on the change of systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) over six months and FG levels over 24 months of treatment. We sought replication in the International Consortia of Pharmacogenomics Studies. We identified eight variants statistically associated with BP response and nine variants associated with FG response. One suggestive LINC02211-CDH9 intergenic variant was marginally replicated with the same direction of effect. Given the impact of hypertension in AAs, this study implies that understanding the genetic background for BP control and glucose changes during chlorthalidone treatment may help prevent adverse cardiovascular events in this population.

Chlorthalidone for Hypertension in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Little evidence has been available to support the use of thiazide diuretics to treat hypertension in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease and poorly controlled hypertension, as confirmed by 24-hour ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring, in a 1:1 ratio to receive chlorthalidone at an initial dose of 12.5 mg per day, with increases every 4 weeks if needed to a maximum dose of 50 mg per day, or placebo; randomization was stratified according to previous use of loop diuretics. The primary outcome was the change in 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were the change from baseline to 12 weeks in the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level, plasma renin and aldosterone levels, and total body volume. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients underwent randomization, of whom 121 (76%) had diabetes mellitus and 96 (60%) were receiving loop diuretics. At baseline, the mean (±SD) estimated glomerular filtration rate was 23.2±4.2 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area and the mean number of antihypertensive medications prescribed was 3.4±1.4. At randomization, the mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure was 142.6±8.1 mm Hg in the chlorthalidone group and 140.1±8.1 mm Hg in the placebo group and the mean 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure was 74.6±10.1 mm Hg and 72.8±9.3 mm Hg, respectively. The adjusted change in 24-hour systolic blood pressure from baseline to 12 weeks was -11.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.9 to -8.1) in the chlorthalidone group and -0.5 mm Hg (95% CI, -3.5 to 2.5) in the placebo group. The between-group difference was -10.5 mm Hg (95% CI, -14.6 to -6.4) (P<0.001). The percent change in the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio from baseline to 12 weeks was lower in the chlorthalidone group than in the placebo group by 50 percentage points (95% CI, 37 to 60). Hypokalemia, reversible increases in serum creatinine level, hyperglycemia, dizziness, and hyperuricemia occurred more frequently in the chlorthalidone group than in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and poorly controlled hypertension, chlorthalidone therapy improved blood-pressure control at 12 weeks as compared with placebo. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the Indiana Institute of Medical Research; CLICK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02841280.).

Risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding in ALLHAT trial participants receiving diuretic, ACE-inhibitor, or calcium-channel blocker

OBJECTIVES

This post-trial data linkage analysis was to utilize the data of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants linked with their Medicare data to examine the risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding associated with antihypertensives.

SETTINGS

ALLHAT was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted in a total of 42,418 participants aged ≥55 years with hypertension in 623 North American centers. Data for ALLHAT participants who were aged at ≥65 have been linked with their Medicare claims data.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 16,676 patients (4,480 for lisinopril, 4,537 for amlodipine, and 7,659 for chlorthalidone) with complete Medicare claims data were available for the final analysis.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidences through March 31, 2002 of hospitalized GI bleeding were 5.4%, 5.8% and 5.4% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone arms, respectively, but were not statistically significant among the 3 arms after adjusting for confounders in Cox regression models. The cumulative incidences of non-hospitalized GI bleeding were also similar across the 3 arms (12.0%, 12.2% and 12.0% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone, respectively). The increased risk of GI bleeding by age was statistically significant after adjusting for confounders (HR = 1.04 per year, 95% CI: 1.03-1.05). Smokers also had a significantly higher risk of having hospitalized GI bleeding (1.45, 1.19-1.76). Hispanics, those who used aspirin or atenolol in-trial, had diabetes, more education, and a history of stroke had a significantly lower risk of having GI bleeding than their counterparts. Other factors such as gender, history of CHD, prior antihypertensive use, use of estrogen in women, and obesity did not have significant effects on the risk of GI bleeding.

CONCLUSION

There were no statistically significant differences on the risk of hospitalized or non-hospitalized GI bleeding among the 3 ALLHAT trial arms (amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone) during the entire in-trial follow-up.

[Hyponatremia and thiazides]

Thiazide diuretics (hydrochlorothiazide) and « thiazide-like » (chlorthalidone, indapamide) are widely prescribed due to their effectiveness in the treatment of arterial hypertension. The use of thiazides may be complicated by hyponatremia that is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The pathophysiology of thiazide-induced hyponatremia is not yet clear. It is currently difficult to predict who will develop thiazide-induced hyponatremia. Genetic predisposition is considered, and several studies are attempting to clarify it in order to identify patients at risk of developing hyponatremia after taking a thiazide. Their reintroduction to a patient who already presented hyponatremia upon thiazide should be avoided.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Safety Associated With Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide in Older Adults With Varying Levels of Kidney Function

IMPORTANCE

Thiazide diuretics are commonly prescribed for the treatment of hypertension, a disease highly prevalent among older individuals and in those with chronic kidney disease. How specific thiazide diuretics compare in regard to safety and clinical outcomes in these populations remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare safety and clinical outcomes associated with chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide use among older adults with varying levels of kidney function.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, from 2007 to 2015. Participants included adults aged 66 years or older who initiated chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide during this period. Data were analyzed from December 2019 through September 2020.

EXPOSURES

New chlorthalidone users were matched 1:4 with new hydrochlorothiazide users by a high-dimensional propensity score. Time-to-event models accounting for competing risks examined the associations between chlorthalidone vs hydrochlorothiazide use and the outcomes of interest overall and within estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) categories (≥60, 45-59, and <45 mL/min/1.73 m2).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The outcomes of interest were adverse kidney events (ie, eGFR decline ≥30%, dialysis, or kidney transplantation), cardiovascular events (composite of myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, heart failure, or atrial fibrillation), all-cause mortality, and electrolyte anomalies (ie, sodium or potassium levels outside reference ranges).

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, the study cohort included 12 722 adults (mean [SD] age, 74 [7] years; 7063 [56%] women; 5659 [44%] men; mean [SD] eGFR, 69 [19] mL/min/1.73 m2), including 2936 who received chlorthalidone and 9786 who received hydrochlorothiazide. Chlorthalidone use was associated with a higher risk of eGFR decline of 30% or greater (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24 [95% CI, 1.13-1.36]) and cardiovascular events (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.22]) across all eGFR categories compared with hydrochlorothiazide use. Chlorthalidone use was also associated with a higher risk of hypokalemia compared with hydrochlorothiazide use, which was more pronounced among those with higher eGFR (eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2: HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.67-2.08]; eGFR 45-59 mL/min/1.73 m2: HR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.25-1.96]; eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2: HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.84-1.45]; P for interaction = .001). No significant differences were observed between chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide for dialysis or kidney transplantation (HR, 1.44 [95% CI, 0.88-2.36]), all-cause mortality (HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.93-1.29]), hyperkalemia (HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.79-1.39]), or hyponatremia (HR, 1.14 [95% CI, CI 0.98-1.32]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that among older adults, chlorthalidone use was associated with a higher risk of eGFR decline, cardiovascular events, and hypokalemia compared with hydrochlorothiazide use. The excess risk of hypokalemia with chlorthalidone was attenuated in participants with reduced kidney function. Placed in context with prior observational studies comparing the safety and clinical outcomes associated with thiazide diuretics, these results suggest that there is no evidence to prefer chlorthalidone over hydrochlorothiazide.

Chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide: major cardiovascular events, blood pressure, left ventricular mass, and adverse effects

BACKGROUND

There is continuous debate whether chlorthalidone (CTD) and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) differ in reducing major cardiovascular events (MACE). HCTZ is prescribed 10 times more commonly than CTD.

METHOD

A systematic literature search yielded 14 references, including two network meta-analyses of randomized trials with MACE and left ventricular mass as outcomes.

RESULTS

The network meta-analysis of randomized trials showed CTD reducing MACE more than HCTZ, hazard ratio = 0.79 (0.72-0.88), P < 0.0001, and an observational cohort study gave an identical point estimate: hazard ratio = 0.79 (0.68-0.92), P = 0.002. In contrast, two observational cohort studies reported no differences between CTD and HCTZ. However, in the studies showing the superiority of CTD median follow-up was 4.3 and 7.0 years, respectively, whereas in the latter studies showing no difference between the two drugs follow-up was only 0.95 and 0.25 years. As differences in outcomes for MACE in hypertension trials with various interventions only emerge after prolonged (>1 year) therapy, differences in follow-up explain these discrepant results. CTD also more effectively reduced left ventricular mass in observational data and network analysis of trials. These advantages of CTD over HCTZ are consistent with greater reductions in night-time blood pressure, greater reductions in oxidative stress and platelet aggregation, and greater improvements in endothelial function.

CONCLUSION

Over the short-term there were no differences in the net clinical benefit between HCTZ and CTD. However, long-term available data document CTD to be significantly more effective in reducing MACE than HCTZ. The Veterans Administration's trial in progress may provide definitive answer to these questions.

Network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide in hypertensive patients

Hypertension is a chronic condition leading to increased stress on the heart and blood vessels, a critical risk factor for clinically significant events such as myocardial infarction heart failure, stroke and death. Chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide are first-line antihypertensive agents for most patients with hypertension. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of both therapies in patients with hypertension. Searches of electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycInfo and eLIBRARY.ru, were performed. We used network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence. Forest plots and closed loops depict estimated results from studies included in our meta-analysis. Of 1289 identified sources, only 37 were included in our meta-analysis. Our analysis has demonstrated a slight superiority for chlorthalidone regarding SBP and not statistically significant differences regarding DBP. Simultaneously, hydrochlorothiazide seems to be a safer choice of therapy, as evidenced by the levels of serum potassium. The two diuretics can be used interchangeably.

Effectiveness of chlorthalidone/amiloride versus losartan in patients with stage I hypertension and diabetes mellitus: results from the PREVER-treatment randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To compare the blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy of a chlorthalidone/amiloride combination pill with losartan, during initial management of JNC 7 Stage I hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

In an a priori subgroup analysis of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, volunteers aged 30-70 years, with stage I hypertension and diabetes mellitus, were randomized to 12.5/2.5 mg of chlorthalidone/amiloride (N = 47) or 50 mg of losartan (N = 50), and followed for 18 months in 21 clinical centers. If BP remained uncontrolled after three months, study medication dose was doubled, and if uncontrolled after six months, amlodipine (5 and 10 mg) and propranolol (40 and 80 mg BID) were added as open label drugs in a progressive fashion.

RESULTS

Systolic BP decreased to a greater extent in participants allocated to diuretics compared to losartan (P < 0.001). After 18 months of follow-up, systolic BP was 128.4 ± 10.3 mmHg in the diuretic group versus 133.5 ± 8.0 in the losartan group (P < 0.01). In the diuretic group, 36 out of 43 participants (83.7%) had a JNC 7 normal BP, compared to 31/47 (66%) in the losartan group (P = 0.089). Serum cholesterol was higher in the diuretic arm at the end of the trial. Other biochemical parameters and reports of adverse events did not differ by treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of hypertension based on a combination of chlorthalidone and amiloride is more effective for BP lowering compared to losartan in patients with diabetes mellitus and hypertension.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials registration number: NCT00971165.

Design and Baseline Characteristics of the Chlorthalidone in Chronic Kidney Disease (CLICK) Trial

BACKGROUND

Hypertension often accompanies chronic kidney disease (CKD), and diuretics are widely prescribed to reduce blood pressure (BP). Chlorthalidone (CTD) is a thiazide-like diuretic and an effective antihypertensive drug, yet little data exist to support its use in treating hypertension in individuals with advanced CKD.

METHODS

Chlorthalidone in Chronic Kidney Disease (CLICK) is a phase II, single-institution, multicenter, double-blind randomized control trial to test the hypothesis that CTD improves BP, through reduction of extracellular fluid volume, and results in target organ protection in patients with stage 4 CKD and poorly controlled hypertension. After a single-blind placebo run-in for 2 weeks and confirmation of hypertension by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), patients are randomized to either placebo or CTD 12.5 mg once daily (QD) followed by dose escalation. Randomization is stratified by prior loop diuretic use, and the double-blind phase lasts 12 weeks. With a total of 160 patients, the study will have ≥80% power to detect a 6 mm Hg difference in systolic 24-h ABP between the 2 treatment groups.

RESULTS

Between June 2016 and October 2019, 131 patients have been randomized. The baseline characteristics are as follows: average age 65.8 years, 79% men, 36% Black, 79% with diabetes, mean eGFR 23.2 mL/min/1.73 m2, median urine albumin/creatinine ratio 923 mg/g, average number of BP medications 3.4, 60% on loop diuretics, and 24-h ABP averaged 141.7/73.8 mm Hg.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with stage 4 CKD and uncontrolled hypertension, CLICK should answer the question whether CTD is safe and effective.

Comparative efficacy and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide-meta-analysis

Hypertension is a complex syndrome of multiple hemodynamic, neuroendocrine, and metabolic abnormalities. The goals of treatment in hypertension are to optimally control high blood pressure and to reduce associated cardiovascular morbidity and mortality using the most suitable therapy available. Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and chlorthalidone (CTLD) are with proven hypertensive effects. The topic of our meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of HCTZ and CTLD therapy in patient with hypertension. A search of electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsyInfo, eLIBRARY.ru was performed. We chose the random-effects method for the analysis and depicted the results as forest plots. Sensitivity analyses were performed in order to evaluate the degree of significance of each study. Of the 1289 identified sources, only nine trials directly compared HCTZ and CTLD and were included in the meta-analysis. Changes in SBP lead to WMD (95% CI) equal to -3.26 mmHg showing a slight but statistically significant prevalence of CTLD. Results from analyzed studies referring to DBP lead to WMD (95% CI) equal to -2.41 mmHg, which is also statistically significant. During our analysis, we found that there were not enough studies presenting enough data on the effect of CTLD and HCTZ on levels of serum potassium and serum sodium. Our meta-analysis has demonstrated a slight superiority for CTLD regarding blood pressure control. At the same time, the two medications do not show significant differences in their safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil/chlortalidone fixed-dose combination in hypertensive patients uncontrolled on azilsartan medoxomil alone: A randomized trial

Patients with grade 2-3 essential hypertension and postplacebo mean clinic systolic blood pressure (SBP) 160-190 mm Hg and 24-hour SBP 140-175 mm Hg by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) received 40 mg azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) monotherapy for 4 weeks. "Nonresponders" were then randomized to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with AZL-M 40 mg, AZL-M/chlortalidone (CLD) 40/25, or AZL-M/CLD 40/12.5 mg. After 8 weeks, mean clinic SBP change was -21.1 (±1.04) mm Hg for AZL-M/CLD 40/25 mg, -15.8 (±1.08) mm Hg for AZL-M/CLD 40/12.5 mg, and -6.4 (±1.05) mm Hg for AZL-M 40 mg (P < 0.001 for both AZL-M/CLD vs AZL-M, ANCOVA). Drug discontinuation rates were 8.9% (AZL-M/CLD 40/25 mg), 7.5% (AZL-M 40 mg), and 3.9% (AZL-M/CLD 40/12.5 mg). Creatinine increased in 8.1% (AZL-M/CLD 40/25), 3.1% (AZL-M/CLD 40/12.5 mg), and 3.0% (AZL-M 40 mg) of patients. AZL-M/CLD was effective and well tolerated in patients not achieving blood pressure targets with AZL-M.

Fixed Low-Dose Triple Combination Antihypertensive Medication vs Usual Care for Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Mild to Moderate Hypertension in Sri Lanka: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Poorly controlled hypertension is a leading global public health problem requiring new treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a low-dose triple combination antihypertensive medication would achieve better blood pressure (BP) control vs usual care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized, open-label trial of a low-dose triple BP therapy vs usual care for adults with hypertension (systolic BP >140 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP >90 mm Hg; or in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease: >130 mm Hg and/or >80 mm Hg) requiring initiation (untreated patients) or escalation (patients receiving monotherapy) of antihypertensive therapy. Patients were enrolled from 11 urban hospital clinics in Sri Lanka from February 2016 to May 2017; follow-up ended in October 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

A once-daily fixed-dose triple combination pill (20 mg of telmisartan, 2.5 mg of amlodipine, and 12.5 mg of chlorthalidone) therapy (n = 349) or usual care (n = 351).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion achieving target systolic/diastolic BP (<140/90 mm Hg or <130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included mean systolic/diastolic BP difference during follow-up and withdrawal of BP medications due to an adverse event.

RESULTS

Among 700 randomized patients (mean age, 56 years; 58% women; 29% had diabetes; mean baseline systolic/diastolic BP, 154/90 mm Hg), 675 (96%) completed the trial. The triple combination pill increased the proportion achieving target BP vs usual care at 6 months (70% vs 55%, respectively; risk difference, 12.7% [95% CI, 3.2% to 22.0%]; P < .001). Mean systolic/diastolic BP at 6 months was 125/76 mm Hg for the triple combination pill vs 134/81 mm Hg for usual care (adjusted difference in postrandomization BP over the entire follow-up: systolic BP, -9.8 [95% CI, -7.9 to -11.6] mm Hg; diastolic BP, -5.0 [95% CI, -3.9 to -6.1] mm Hg; P < .001 for both comparisons). Overall, 419 adverse events were reported in 255 patients (38.1% for triple combination pill vs 34.8% for usual care) with the most common being musculoskeletal pain (6.0% and 8.0%, respectively) and dizziness, presyncope, or syncope (5.2% and 2.8%). There were no significant between-group differences in the proportion of patient withdrawal from BP-lowering therapy due to adverse events (6.6% for triple combination pill vs 6.8% for usual care).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with mild to moderate hypertension, treatment with a pill containing low doses of 3 antihypertensive drugs led to an increased proportion of patients achieving their target BP goal vs usual care. Use of such medication as initial therapy or to replace monotherapy may be an effective way to improve BP control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12612001120864; slctr.lk Identifier: SLCTR/2015/020.

A randomized trial of the efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil combined with chlorthalidone

INTRODUCTION

We measured the effects of azilsartan medoxomil co-administered with chlorthalidone 25 mg in stage 2 hypertension.

METHODS

Azilsartan medoxomil 40 or 80 mg plus chlorthalidone were compared with placebo plus chlorthalidone once daily in a randomized, double-blind, 6-week trial. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in 24-hour mean systolic blood pressure by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

RESULTS

Patients ( N=551; mean age 59 years; 51.7% men) were randomly assigned to placebo plus chlorthalidone ( n=184), azilsartan medoxomil 40 mg plus chlorthalidone ( n=185), or azilsartan medoxomil 80 mg plus chlorthalidone ( n=182). Baseline systolic blood pressures were similar among groups. After 6 weeks, least squares mean (standard error) reductions with azilsartan medoxomil 40 mg and 80 mg plus chlorthalidone were similar in magnitude (-31.7 (1.0) and -31.3 (1.0) mmHg, respectively), but greater than chlorthalidone alone (-15.9 (1.0) mmHg). Hypotension and serum creatinine elevations were more frequent with azilsartan medoxomil plus chlorthalidone than chlorthalidone alone (reversed with drug discontinuation). Notably, plasma potassium reduction of 0.43 meq/L with chlorthalidone was attenuated to 0.13 and 0.05 meq/L by azilsartan medoxomil 40 mg and 80 mg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Azilsartan medoxomil 40 mg or 80 mg plus chlorthalidone 25 mg was significantly more efficacious than chlorthalidone alone in reducing blood pressure and was well tolerated. Clinicaltrial.gov , https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00591773 , NCT00591773.

Azilsartan: Novel Angiotensin Receptor Blocker

OBJECTIVE

To describe the efficacy and safety profile of the new angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), "Azilsartan Medoxomil", reviewing data available from both clinical and pre-clinical studies.

MATERIAL

We completed a review of the English literature from PubMed using the keywords- azilsartan medoxomil, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and hypertension.

DATA EVALUATION

Many clinical trials have been conducted comparing the efficacy of azilsartan with other ARB's and also with the ACEi ramipril. The trials have shown azilsartan to be more effective in reducing the mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure compared to its counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Azilsartan is a recently approved ARB and appears to be more efficacious in reducing blood pressure (BP) than the other ARBs with a similar safety and tolerability profile. Azilsartan's very high affinity to and slow dissociation from the angiotensin 1 receptor (AT1R) along with its inverse agonistic properties make it a very good candidate for clinical effects beyond simple BP control, potentially counteracting cardiac hypertrophy, cardiac fibrosis and insulin resistance, together with improved reno-protection and atherosclerotic plaque stabilization.

Comparison of new-onset gout in adults prescribed chlorthalidone vs. hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension

This study assessed the risk of new-onset gout following prescribing of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) compared with chlorthalidone (CTD). This retrospective cohort analysis used administrative claims from 2000 to 2012 to identify patients aged 18 to 89 years with hypertension who were prescribed CTD or HCTZ. Patients were excluded if they had a prior diagnosis of gout, conditions or prescription claims for medications that alter risk of gout, or if they switched between these two diuretics. A total of 1011 patients prescribed CTD were matched with 2022 patients prescribed HCTZ based on age, sex, and Chronic Condition Indicator. New-onset gout occurred in 17 of 1011 (1.68%) patients in the CTD group and in 26 of 2022 (1.29%) patients in the HCTZ group (P=.27). The number of days to first occurrence of gout was 183.6 days and 152.7 days in the CTD and HCTZ groups, respectively (P=.39). The mean daily dose was 22.7 mg for CTD and 24.3 mg for HCTZ, and the median dose of both CTD and HCTZ was 25 mg at the time of new-onset gout. Patients prescribed CTD for hypertension have a similar risk of developing new-onset gout compared with patients prescribed similar doses of HCTZ.

Blood pressure-lowering efficacy of monotherapy with thiazide diuretics for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is a modifiable cardiovascular risk factor. Although it is established that low-dose thiazides reduce mortality as well as cardiovascular morbidity, the dose-related effect of thiazides in decreasing blood pressure has not been subject to a rigorous systematic review. It is not known whether individual drugs within the thiazide diuretic class differ in their blood pressure-lowering effects and adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the dose-related decrease in systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure due to thiazide diuretics compared with placebo control in the treatment of patients with primary hypertension. Secondary outcomes included the dose-related adverse events leading to patient withdrawal and adverse biochemical effects on serum potassium, uric acid, creatinine, glucose and lipids.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to February 2014), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to February 2014) and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fixed-dose thiazide diuretic monotherapy with placebo for a duration of 3 to 12 weeks in the treatment of adult patients with primary hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened articles, assessed trial eligibility, extracted data and determined risk of bias. We combined data for continuous variables using a mean difference (MD) and for dichotomous outcomes we calculated the relative risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 60 randomized, double-blind trials that evaluated the dose-related trough blood pressure-lowering efficacy of six different thiazide diuretics in 11,282 participants treated for a mean duration of eight weeks. The mean age of the participants was 55 years and baseline blood pressure was 158/99 mmHg. Adequate blood pressure-lowering efficacy data were available for hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone and indapamide. We judged 54 (90%) included trials to have unclear or high risk of bias, which impacted on our confidence in the results for some of our outcomes.In 33 trials with a baseline blood pressure of 155/100 mmHg, hydrochlorothiazide lowered blood pressure based on dose, with doses of 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, 25 mg and 50 mg/day lowering blood pressure compared to placebo by 4 mmHg (95% CI 2 to 6, moderate-quality evidence)/2 mmHg (95% CI 1 to 4, moderate-quality evidence), 6 mmHg (95% CI 5 to 7, high-quality evidence)/3 mmHg (95% CI 3 to 4, high-quality evidence), 8 mmHg (95% CI 7 to 9, high-quality evidence)/3 mmHg (95% CI 3 to 4, high-quality evidence) and 11 mmHg (95% CI 6 to 15, low-quality evidence)/5 mmHg (95% CI 3 to 7, low-quality evidence), respectively.Direct comparison of doses did not show evidence of dose dependence for blood pressure-lowering for any of the other thiazides for which RCT data were available: bendrofluazide, chlorthalidone, cyclopenthiazide, metolazone or indapamide.In seven trials with a baseline blood pressure of 163/88 mmHg, chlorthalidone at doses of 12.5 mg to 75 mg/day reduced average blood pressure compared to placebo by 12.0 mmHg (95% CI 10 to 14, low-quality evidence)/4 mmHg (95% CI 3 to 5, low-quality evidence).In 10 trials with a baseline blood pressure of 161/98 mmHg, indapamide at doses of 1.0 mg to 5.0 mg/day reduced blood pressure compared to placebo by 9 mmHg (95% CI 7 to 10, low-quality evidence)/4 (95% CI 3 to 5, low-quality evidence).We judged the maximal blood pressure-lowering effect of the different thiazides to be similar. Overall, thiazides reduced average blood pressure compared to placebo by 9 mmHg (95% CI 9 to 10, high-quality evidence)/4 mmHg (95% CI 3 to 4, high-quality evidence).Thiazides as a class have a greater effect on systolic than on diastolic blood pressure, therefore thiazides lower pulse pressure by 4 mmHg to 6 mmHg, an amount that is greater than the 3 mmHg seen with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and renin inhibitors, and the 2 mmHg seen with non-selective beta-blockers. This is based on an informal indirect comparison of results observed in other Cochrane reviews on ACE inhibitors, ARBs and renin inhibitors compared with placebo, which used similar inclusion/exclusion criteria to the present review.Thiazides reduced potassium, increased uric acid and increased total cholesterol and triglycerides. These effects were dose-related and were least for hydrochlorothiazide. Chlorthalidone increased serum glucose but the evidence was unclear for other thiazides. There is a high risk of bias in the metabolic data. This review does not provide a good assessment of the adverse effects of these drugs because there was a high risk of bias in the reporting of withdrawals due to adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review shows that hydrochlorothiazide has a dose-related blood pressure-lowering effect. The mean blood pressure-lowering effect over the dose range 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, 25 mg and 50 mg/day is 4/2 mmHg, 6/3 mmHg, 8/3 mmHg and 11/5 mmHg, respectively. For other thiazide drugs, the lowest doses studied lowered blood pressure maximally and higher doses did not lower it more. Due to the greater effect on systolic than on diastolic blood pressure, thiazides lower pulse pressure by 4 mmHg to 6 mmHg. This exceeds the mean 3 mmHg pulse pressure reduction achieved by ACE inhibitors, ARBs and renin inhibitors, and the 2 mmHg pulse pressure reduction with non-selective beta-blockers as shown in other Cochrane reviews, which compared these antihypertensive drug classes with placebo and used similar inclusion/exclusion criteria.Thiazides did not increase withdrawals due to adverse effects in these short-term trials but there is a high risk of bias for that outcome. Thiazides reduced potassium, increased uric acid and increased total cholesterol and triglycerides.

Chlorthalidone for poorly controlled hypertension in chronic kidney disease: an interventional pilot study

To test the hypothesis that thiazide-type diuretics effectively lower blood pressure (BP) in moderate to advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD; estimated GFR 20-45 ml/min/ 1.73 m(2)), after confirming poorly controlled hypertension with 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring, chlorthalidone was added to existing medications in a dose of 25 mg/day, and the dose doubled every 4 weeks if the BP remained elevated. The average age of the 14 subjects was 67.5 years, a median of 4 antihypertensive drugs were used and estimated GFR was 26.8 ± 8.8 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Twelve subjects completed the 12-week treatment phase, and the 24-hour BP, which was 143.1/75.1 mm Hg at baseline, was reduced by 10.5/ 3.1 mm Hg (p = 0.01/p = 0.17). Home BP prior to initiating chlorthalidone was 152.4/82.6 mm Hg and fell at 4, 8, and 12 weeks by 10.2/4.8, 13.4/6.0, and 9.4/3.7 mm Hg (all p < 0.05). Maximal reduction in body weight and total body volume (measured by air displacement plethysmography) was seen at 8 weeks, concurrent with the maximal elevation in serum creatinine concentration and plasma renin activity. Albuminuria was significantly reduced by 40-45%. Adverse events were seen following chlorthalidone therapy in 7 subjects who experienced 18 events as follows: hypokalemia (n = 4), hyperuricemia (4), hyponatremia (3), transient creatinine changes (3), dizziness (2), hyperglycemia (1), and constipation (1). One subject had ischemic stroke during the study. In conclusion, among people with moderate to advanced CKD with poorly controlled hypertension, chlorthalidone may significantly reduce BP via volume contraction; a randomized trial is needed to define the risks and benefits. Adverse effects may occur within a few weeks and should be carefully monitored.

Drug-induced acute myopia following chlorthalidone treatment

We report a case of sudden loss of vision due to the development of acute myopia after the intake of chlorthalidone used for treating systemic hypertension. Clinically this was associated with ciliary spasm, shallow peripheral choroidal effusion and retinal striae at the macula with increase in macular thickness seen on optical coherence tomography. All these findings were reversed completely once the drug was discontinued. Development of acute myopia should be kept in mind as an adverse effect of a commonly used antihypertensive drug, namely chlorthalidone.

Fasting glucose levels and incident diabetes mellitus in older nondiabetic adults randomized to receive 3 different classes of antihypertensive treatment: a report from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

BACKGROUND

Elevated blood glucose levels are reported with thiazide-type diuretic treatment of hypertension. The significance of this finding is uncertain. Our objectives were to compare the effect of first-step antihypertensive drug therapy with thiazide-type diuretic, calcium-channel blocker, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor on fasting glucose (FG) levels and to determine cardiovascular and renal disease risks associated with elevated FG levels and incident diabetes mellitus (DM) in 3 treatment groups.

METHODS

We performed post hoc subgroup analyses from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) among nondiabetic participants who were randomized to receive treatment with chlorthalidone (n = 8419), amlodipine (n = 4958), or lisinopril (n = 5034) and observed for a mean of 4.9 years.

RESULTS

Mean FG levels increased during follow-up in all treatment groups. At year 2, those randomized to the chlorthalidone group had the greatest increase (+8.5 mg/dL [0.47 mmol/L] vs +5.5 mg/dL [0.31 mmol/L] for amlodipine and +3.5 mg/dL [0.19 mmol/L] for lisinopril). The odds ratios for developing DM with lisinopril (0.55 [95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.70]) or amlodipine (0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.91]) vs chlorthalidone at 2 years were significantly lower than 1.0 (P<.01). There was no significant association of FG level change at 2 years with subsequent coronary heart disease, stroke, cardiovascular disease, total mortality, or end-stage renal disease. There was no significant association of incident DM at 2 years with clinical outcomes, except for coronary heart disease (risk ratio, 1.64; P = .006), but the risk ratio was lower and nonsignificant in the chlorthalidone group (risk ratio, 1.46; P = .14).

CONCLUSIONS

Fasting glucose levels increase in older adults with hypertension regardless of treatment type. For those taking chlorthalidone vs other medications, the risk of developing FG levels higher than 125 mg/dL (6.9 mmol/L) is modestly greater, but there is no conclusive or consistent evidence that this diuretic-associated increase in DM risk increases the risk of clinical events.

Incidence and predictors of angioedema in elderly hypertensive patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease: a report from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

Angioedema is a rare, potentially life-threatening condition that has been associated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors since their introduction in the 1980s. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), the largest antihypertensive study conducted to date, randomized 42,418 participants to a diuretic (chlorthalidone), a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril), or an alpha-blocker (doxazosin). Patients who developed angioedema were compared for baseline characteristics and changes in antihypertensive drug administration. Fifty-three participants developed angioedema during active follow-up: 55% were black, 60% men, and 70% were assigned to lisinopril (including 62% of black participants with angioedema), 15% to chlorthalidone, 9% to doxazosin, and 6% to amlodipine. Six percent occurred within a day of randomization and 23% within the first week. Over half did not have an increase in their assigned (blinded) antihypertensive drug before angioedema onset; 3 (6%) had a dose increase within a week before onset. One patient died following an angioedema episode. The occurrence of angioedema in the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor arm corresponds with previously reported angioedema-angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor associations.

Survival of severe amlodipine intoxication due to medical intensive care

We report the case of attempted suicide with amlodipine, chlorthalidone and mefenamic acid and subsequent medical intensive care measures which resulted in total recovery of a 42-year-old male. After admission to the medical intensive care unit the intoxicated patient was deeply hypotensive and needed fluid replacement, dobutamine and norepinephrine. Additionally insulin and calcium gluconate were given. Since hypotension persisted and the patient developed oliguria, terlipressin was applied and finally showed an effect on blood pressure and on urinary output. A volume overload of 7 L in the first 24 h resulted in a pulmonary edema. The patient was started on non-invasive ventilation with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and frusemide was added to the therapy with good success. Quantitative determination of amlodipine in plasma samples was performed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The highest amlodipine concentrations was measured in the plasma sample collected approximately 8 h after ingestion of the drug, and was 393 microg/L. Four days later, it was possible to stop the treatment with catecholamines, at that time the amlodipine plasma concentration had declined to 132 microg/L, still tenfold higher than therapeutic (5-18 microg/L). Elimination half-life of amlodipine is approximately 55 h. After 6 days in the intensive care unit the patient was transferred to psychiatric treatment. Intensive care management and plasma levels in this intoxication case are compared to data from literature on other cases.

Comparative antihypertensive effects of hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone on ambulatory and office blood pressure

Low-dose thiazide-type diuretics are recommended as initial therapy for most hypertensive patients. Chlorthalidone has significantly reduced stroke and cardiovascular end points in several landmark trials; however, hydrochlorothiazide remains favored in practice. Most clinicians assume that the drugs are interchangeable, but their antihypertensive effects at lower doses have not been directly compared. We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, 8-week active treatment, crossover study comparing chlorthalidone 12.5 mg/day (force-titrated to 25 mg/day) and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg/day (force-titrated to 50 mg/day) in untreated hypertensive patients. The main outcome, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring, was assessed at baseline and week 8, along with standard office BP readings every 2 weeks. Thirty patients completed the first active treatment period, whereas 24 patients completed both. An order-drug-time interaction was observed with chlorthalidone; therefore, data from only the first active treatment period was considered. Week 8 ambulatory BPs indicated a greater reduction from baseline in systolic BP with chlorthalidone 25 mg/day compared with hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg/day (24-hour mean = -12.4+/-1.8 mm Hg versus -7.4+/-1.7 mm Hg; P=0.054; nighttime mean = -13.5+/-1.9 mm Hg versus -6.4+/-1.8 mm Hg; P=0.009). Office systolic BP reduction was lower at week 2 for chlorthalidone 12.5 mg/day versus hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg/day (-15.7+/-2.2 mm Hg versus -4.5+/-2.1 mm Hg; P=0.001); however, by week 8, reductions were statistically similar (-17.1+/-3.7 versus -10.8+/-3.5; P=0.84). Within recommended doses, chlorthalidone is more effective in lowering systolic BPs than hydrochlorothiazide, as evidenced by 24-hour ambulatory BPs. These differences were not apparent with office BP measurements.

Renal outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or a calcium channel blocker vs a diuretic: a report from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to determine whether, in high-risk hypertensive patients with a reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR), treatment with a calcium channel blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lowers the incidence of renal disease outcomes compared with treatment with a diuretic.

METHODS

We conducted post hoc analyses of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Hypertensive participants 55 years or older with at least 1 other coronary heart disease risk factor were randomized to receive chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril for a mean of 4.9 years. Renal outcomes were incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and/or a decrement in GFR of 50% or more from baseline. Baseline GFR, estimated by the simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation, was stratified into normal or increased (> or =90 mL /min per 1.73 m(2), n = 8126), mild reduction (60-89 mL /min per 1.73 m(2), n = 18 109), or moderate-severe reduction (<60 mL /min per 1.73 m(2), n = 5662) in GFR. Each stratum was analyzed for effects of the treatments on outcomes.

RESULTS

In 448 participants, ESRD developed. Compared with patients taking chlorthalidone, no significant differences occurred in the incidence of ESRD in patients taking amlodipine in the mild (relative risk [RR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-2.23) or moderate-severe (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24) reduction in GFR groups. Compared with patients taking chlorthalidone, no significant differences occurred in the incidence of ESRD in patients taking lisinopril in the mild (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.87-2.06) or moderate-severe (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.73-1.31) reduction in GFR groups. In patients with mild and moderate-severe reduction in GFR, the incidence of ESRD or 50% or greater decrement in GFR was not significantly different in patients treated with chlorthalidone compared with those treated with amlodipine (odds ratios, 0.96 [P = .74] and 0.85 [P = .23], respectively) and lisinopril (odds ratios, 1.13 [P = .31] and 1.00 [P = .98], respectively). No difference in treatment effects occurred for either end point for patients taking amlodipine or lisinopril compared with those taking chlorthalidone across the 3 GFR subgroups, either for the total group or for participants with diabetes at baseline. At 4 years of follow-up, estimated GFR was 3 to 6 mL /min per 1.73 m(2) higher in patients assigned to receive amlodipine compared with chlorthalidone, depending on baseline GFR stratum.

CONCLUSIONS

In hypertensive patients with reduced GFR, neither amlodipine nor lisinopril was superior to chlorthalidone in reducing the rate of development of ESRD or a 50% or greater decrement in GFR. Participants assigned to receive amlodipine had a higher GFR than those assigned to receive chlorthalidone, but rates of development of ESRD were not different between the groups.

Antihypertensive Treatment in Diabetic Patients

In hypertensive diabetic patients, reducing blood pressure is among the best evaluated and most effective interventions for lowering mortality and morbidity. First line antihypertensive agents are: chlorthalidone or other thiazide-type diuretics, beta-blockers and ACE-inhibitors. In type 2 diabetic patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, the ARB Cosaar has been proven to be effective. To achieve an effective blood pressure reduction, a combination of different antihypertensive agents is necessary for most patients. Specially structured patient education programmes are another effective means of achieving this goal.

[Severe perioperative hypotension after nephrectomy with adrenalectomy]

A 70-year-old obese, hypertensive woman taking angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and chlorthalidone but with no history of corticosteroid treatment or hypothalamus-hypophyseal-adrenal disease, underwent nephrectomy and adrenalectomy under combined general and epidural anesthesia. Severe hypotension with oliguria developed during surgery and persisted during postoperative recovery, with anuria, metabolic acidosis, hyponatremia and hyperpotassemia. Although the symptoms were initially attributed to prior treatment with ACE inhibitors and diuretics together with combined anesthesia, the patient's lack of response to crystalloid, colloid and inotropic catecholamine therapy in the context of anuria, metabolic acidosis, hyponatremia and hyperpotassemia led us to consider a diagnosis of Addisonian crisis. Blood samples were taken to determine adrenocorticotropic hormone levels, and hydrocortisone treatment was started. The patient responded to treatment and cortisol levels fell, confirming the diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency. Compensatory endrocrine secretion of cortisol by the contralateral adrenal gland has been observed in patients undergoing nephrectomy and adrenalectomy for excision of a hypernephroma, and replacement therapy is therefore not recommended. Perioperative Addisonian crises have also been described in patients suffering great surgical stress, and severe hypotension has been observed in patients on long-term treatment with ACE inhibitors after induction of general anesthesia and after epidural anesthesia with local anesthetics. The combination of these factors made rapid diagnosis and start of appropriate therapy difficult.

Amlodipine versus chlorthalidone versus placebo in the treatment of stage I isolated systolic hypertension

The study was to compare the effects of amlodipine (calcium channel antagonist), chlorthalidone (diuretic), and placebo in adults more than 50 years of age with stage 1 isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). After a 4-week placebo run-in phase, 150 patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to treatment with 5 mg of amlodipine (n = 48), 15 mg of chlorthalidone (n = 50), or placebo (n = 52). Patients who failed to meet the systolic blood pressure (BP) reduction goal by week 4 had their dose increased to 10 mg of amlodipine or 30 mg of chlorthalidone, and maintained at this increased dose for 12 weeks. Results showed a mean reduction (mean +/- SD) in sitting systolic BP from baseline to the last treatment visit of -14.6+/-12.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] -18.2, -11.0), -14.0+/-13.46 mm Hg (95% CI -17.8, -10.2), and -3.4+/-11.83 mm Hg (95% CI -6.7, -0.1) for the amlodipine, chlorthalidone, and the placebo treatment groups, respectively. Both active treatments showed significantly greater reductions than the placebo group (P < or = .001), but were not significantly different from each other. Sixty-seven percent of the amlodipine, 69% of the chlorthalidone, and 25% of the placebo-treated patients reached the protocol defined systolic BP goal (P = .001). Both active treatment groups showed a trend of better systolic BP response in older patients (> or =65 years). Secondary efficacy measures including pulse pressure, standing systolic, diastolic, and the 24-h ambulatory BP were also statistically significantly improved for both active treatments at the end of treatment, except for chlorthalidone in standing diastolic BP. Adverse events that occurred during the study were as expected and were well tolerated. The results of this study support the efficacy and safety of amlodipine and chlorthalidone for the treatment of stage 1 ISH during 20 weeks of treatment.

Hypokalemia associated with diuretic use and cardiovascular events in the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program

The treatment of hypertension with high-dose thiazide diuretics results in potassium depletion and a limited benefit for preventing coronary events. The clinical relevance of hypokalemia associated with low-dose diuretics has not been assessed. To determine whether hypokalemia that occurs with low-dose diuretics is associated with a reduced benefit on cardiovascular events, we analyzed data of 4126 participants in the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP), a 5-year randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of chlorthalidone-based treatment of isolated systolic hypertension in older persons. After 1 year of treatment, 7.2% of the participants randomized to active treatment had a serum potassium <3.5 mmol/L compared with 1% of the participants randomized to placebo (P<0.001). During the 4 years after the first annual visit, 451 participants experienced a cardiovascular event, 215 experienced a coronary event, 177 experienced stroke, and 323 died. After adjustment for known risk factors and study drug dose, the participants who received active treatment and who experienced hypokalemia had a similar risk of cardiovascular events, coronary events, and stroke as those randomized to placebo. Within the active treatment group, the risk of these events was 51%, 55%, and 72% lower, respectively, among those who had normal serum potassium levels compared with those who experienced hypokalemia (P<0.05). The participants who had hypokalemia after 1 year of treatment with a low-dose diuretic did not experience the reduction in cardiovascular events achieved among those who did not have hypokalemia.

Comparison of chlorthalidone, propranolol and bopindolol in six-month treatment of arterial hypertension

The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that prolonged treatment of mild to moderate hypertension with low-dose thiazide diuretics or beta blockers does not induce any of the major untoward biochemical changes, such as hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, hyperuricemia and electrolyte imbalances. The effect of these drugs was analyzed in 100 outpatients (52 males and 48 females) aged 52.0 +/- 7.9 years with mild to moderate hypertension, in a prospective 6-month study. After an appropriate workup, the patients were randomized to either 25 mg chlorthalidone (40 patients), 120 mg propranolol (30 patients), or 2 mg per day bopindolol (30 patients). A significant reduction of approximately 10% in systolic and diastolic blood pressure was recorded in all the groups. At the end of the 6th month, in the chlorthalidone group triglycerides increased to 3.0 +/- 2.1 mmol/l from 2.8 +/- 1.6 mmol/l, while cholesterol after an initial increase to 6.6 +/- 1.6 from 6.4 +/- 1.6 mmol/l returned to the baseline level. Uricemia and serum potassium concentration decreased by 4%. The body weight was reduced to 83.8 +/- 13.4 kg from 86.1 +/- 13.4 kg. There was no change in serum glucose level. In the propranolol group, as expected, heart rate decreased by 20%, but there were no significant changes in glucose and potassium plasma concentration. Triglycerides did not change significantly, while cholesterol, after a small increase, returned to the initial levels. Similar results were obtained in the bopindolol group, apart from the triglycerides, which increased significantly (to 2.5 +/- 1.1 from 2.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/l), probably because of the lower baseline concentration. We conclude that in prolonged treatment, chlorthalidone, propranolol and bopindolol do not induce significant untoward biochemical changes that alone might increase cardiovascular risk.