-
1.
A randomized, double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/rosuvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension.
Kim, W, Chang, K, Cho, EJ, Ahn, JC, Yu, CW, Cho, KI, Kim, YJ, Kang, DH, Kim, SY, Lee, SH, et al
Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.). 2020;(2):261-269
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase III clinical trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a rosuvastatin + amlodipine combination compared with that of rosuvastatin or amlodipine monotherapy in hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia. A total of 106 patients of 15 institutions in Korea were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg, amlodipine 10 mg, or rosuvastatin 20 mg. After 8 weeks of treatment, the mean ± SD of change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) was -22.82 ± 12.99 mm Hg in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. The percentage of patients whose msSBP decreased ≥20 mm Hg or msDBP decreased ≥10 mm Hg was also highest in this group (74.29%). The mean ± SD percentage change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline after 8 weeks was -52.53% ± 11.21% in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. More patients in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group achieved their target LDL-C goal at 8 weeks, compared with the other treatment groups (97.14%). No serious adverse events or adverse drug reactions were observed in all groups. In hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia, combination treatment with rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg effectively reduced blood pressure and LDL-C levels while maintaining safety.
-
2.
Low Baseline High-Sensitive C-Reactive Protein is Associated with Coronary Atherosclerosis Regression: Insights from the MILLION Study.
Sakata, K, Gamou, T, Tada, H, Hayashi, K, Ino, H, Yamagishi, M, , , ,
Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis. 2019;(5):442-451
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: The prospective, randomized, multicenter Myocardial Ischemia Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Plaque Regression by Lipid Lowering & Blood Pressure Controlling assessed by Intravascular Ultrasonography (MILLION) study demonstrated that combined treatment with atorvastatin and amlodipine enhanced coronary artery plaque regression. Although the baseline high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) reportedly plays an important role in atherogenesis, few data exist regarding the relationship between hs-CRP and plaque regression in patients receiving a combined atorvastatin and amlodipine therapy. METHODS A total of 68 patients (male, 55; mean age, 64.2 years) with baseline and follow-up 3-dimensional intravascular ultrasound examinations in the MILLION study were stratified by baseline hs-CRP level quartiles. The serial measurements of lipid, blood pressure, and percentage changes in the plaque volume were compared between the groups, and the factors associated with the percentage change in the plaque volume were assessed. RESULTS There were no significant between-group differences in the extent of change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or systolic and diastolic blood pressure after 18-24 months of treatment. The percentage change in the plaque volume showed a linear association with the baseline hs-CRP (p for trend <0.05); however, there was no correlation with changes in LDL-C or systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In the multiple regression analysis, the baseline hs-CRP level was independently associated with the percentage change in the plaque volume (β=0.29, p=0.022). CONCLUSIONS Coronary plaque regression was associated with the baseline hs-CRP level in patients treated with a combined lipid- and blood pressure-lowering therapy.
-
3.
A randomized controlled trial on the blood pressure-lowering effect of amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS in sustained hypertension.
Huang, QF, Sheng, CS, Li, Y, Dou, Y, Zheng, MS, Zhu, ZM, Wang, JG, ,
Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.). 2019;(5):648-657
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
In a multicenter, randomized trial, we investigated whether the long half-time dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker amlodipine was more efficacious than the gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) formulation of nifedipine in lowering ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in sustained hypertension (clinic systolic/diastolic BP 140-179/90-109 mm Hg and 24-hour systolic/diastolic BP ≥ 130/80 mm Hg). Eligible patients were randomly assigned to amlodipine 5-10 mg/day or nifedipine-GITS 30-60 mg/day. Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed for 24 hours at baseline and 4-week treatment and for 48 hours at 8-week treatment with a dose of medication missed on the second day. After 8-week treatment, BP was similarly reduced in the amlodipine (n = 257) and nifedipine-GITS groups (n = 248) for both clinic and ambulatory (24-hour systolic/diastolic BP 10.3/6.5 vs 10.9/6.3 mm Hg, P ≥ 0.24) measurements. However, after missing a dose of medication, ambulatory BP reductions were greater in the amlodipine than nifedipine-GITS group, with a significant (P ≤ 0.04) between-group difference in 24-hour (-1.2 mm Hg) and daytime diastolic BP (-1.5 mm Hg). In conclusion, amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS were efficacious in reducing 24-hour BP. When a dose of medication was missed, amlodipine became more efficacious than nifedipine-GITS.
-
4.
The Interaction of a Diabetes Gene Risk Score With 3 Different Antihypertensive Medications for Incident Glucose-level Elevation.
Barzilay, JI, Lai, D, Davis, BR, Pressel, S, Previn, HE, Arnett, DK
American journal of hypertension. 2019;(4):343-349
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Elevations of fasting glucose (FG) levels are frequently encountered in people treated with thiazide diuretics. The risk is lower in people treated with ACE inhibitors (ACEi). To determine if genetic factors play a role in FG elevation, we examined the interaction of a diabetes gene risk score (GRS) with the use of 3 different antihypertensive medications. METHODS We examined 376 nondiabetic hypertensive individuals with baseline FG <100 mg/dl who were genotyped for 24 genes associated with risk of elevated glucose levels. All participants had ≥1 follow-up FG level over 6 years of follow-up. Participants were randomized to treatment with a thiazide-like diuretic (chlorthalidone), a calcium channel blocker (CCB; amlodipine), or an ACEi (lisinopril). Outcomes were an FG increase of ≥13 or ≥27 mg/dl, the upper 75% and 90% FG increase in the parent cohort from which the present cohort was obtained. Odds ratios were adjusted for factors that increase FG levels. RESULTS For every 1 allele increase in GRS, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99, 1.14; P = 0.06) and 1.09 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.20; P = 0.08). When results were examined by randomized medications, participants randomized to amlodipine had statistically significant odds for either outcome (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.48; P = 0.01 and OR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.62; P = 0.01). No such risk increase was found in participants randomized to the other 2 medications. CONCLUSIONS A diabetes GRS predicts FG elevation in people treated with a CCB, but not with an ACEi or diuretic. These findings require confirmation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION Trial number NCT00000542.
-
5.
Randomized trial of an increased dose of calcium channel blocker or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker as an add-on intensive depressor therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension: the ACADEMIE Study.
Imaizumi, S, Shiga, Y, Ogawa, M, Sako, H, Nagata, Y, Matsunaga, A, Shirotani, T, Hoshino, F, Yahiro, E, Uehara, Y, et al
Heart and vessels. 2019;(4):698-710
Abstract
There is a lack of data on how to treat hypertensive patients with diabetes when treatment with medium doses of calcium channel blocker and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) is insufficient to achieve the target blood pressure (BP). A total of 121 participants with type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled essential hypertension, who were receiving medium doses of amlodipine (5 mg/day) and ARB, were enrolled. Participants were randomized to receive either a high dose of amlodipine (10 mg/day) plus a medium dose of ARB (high-AML) or a medium dose of amlodipine (5 mg/day) plus a high dose of ARB (high-ARB). The depressor effects of these two regimens were monitored using a telemonitoring home BP-measuring system. Fifty-four patients were excluded after an observation period, and the remaining 67 eligible participants were randomized into the two groups; 42 which had a record of their home BP for analysis. The change in morning home systolic and diastolic BP was greater in the high-AML than in the high-ARB (systolic BP; - 7.9 mmHg vs. + 2.7 mmHg; p = 0.0002, diastolic BP; - 3.9 mmHg vs. + 0.6 mmHg; p = 0.0007). In addition, the home systolic and diastolic BP before going to bed and office systolic BP were significantly reduced from week 0 only in the high-AML. An increased dose of amlodipine, but not ARB, reduced home morning BP in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes who were already receiving combination therapy with medium doses of amlodipine and ARB.
-
6.
Comparison of amlodipine versus other calcium channel blockers on blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients in China: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.
Zhang, L, Yang, J, Li, L, Liu, D, Xie, X, Dong, P, Lin, Y
Journal of comparative effectiveness research. 2018;(7):651-660
Abstract
AIM: Reducing the fluctuation of blood pressure has recently been recognized as a potential target for improving management of hypertension to prevent cardiovascular events, particularly for strokes. Some randomized controlled trials demonstrated that amlodipine can effectively reduce blood pressure as a well-established, long-acting calcium channel blocker (CCB). However, few data are available for amlodipine on blood pressure variability (BPV) in China in a real-world setting. This study aimed to assess the effect of amlodipine versus other CCB antihypertensive agents on BPV. MATERIALS & METHODS A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis was conducted, which retrieved the encounter data from 5582 hypertensive inpatients (with a median age of 69, female percentage of 48%, diastolic blood pressure ≥40 and <150 mmHg; systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥70 mmHg and <260 mmHg), who had taken at least one antihypertensive agent and completed at least three SBP measurements during the visit. International Classification of Diseases was used to identify the hypertensive patients. BPV was calculated with standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) of SBP during a single inpatient visit. The Propensity Score Matching was used to balance the cohort of patients prescribed amlodipine or other CCBs. A series of appropriate statistical tests were applied to the propensity score-matched samples to examine the different effects on BPV. Additionally, the hypertensive patients with comorbidity such as coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, heart failure and chronic kidney disease were analyzed. RESULTS For the hypertensive patients (n = 1756, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine showed lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs (12.90 vs 13.76 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.47 vs 10.06, p < 0.05 [CV]). For the hypertensive patients with comorbidity (n = 1080, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine had lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs as well (13.24 vs 14.23 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.66 vs 10.28, p < 0.05 [CV]). CONCLUSION amlodipine was associated with lower BPV than other CCBs for both hypertensive patients and hypertensive patients with comorbidity.
-
7.
Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Exercise-Induced Lipid Metabolism in Patients With Obesity and Hypertension.
Engeli, S, Stinkens, R, Heise, T, May, M, Goossens, GH, Blaak, EE, Havekes, B, Jax, T, Albrecht, D, Pal, P, et al
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979). 2018;(1):70-77
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
UNLABELLED Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696), a novel angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, was recently approved for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Neprilysin degrades several peptides that modulate lipid metabolism, including natriuretic peptides. In this study, we investigated the effects of 8 weeks' treatment with sacubitril/valsartan on whole-body and adipose tissue lipolysis and lipid oxidation during defined physical exercise compared with the metabolically neutral comparator amlodipine. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group study enrolling subjects with abdominal obesity and moderate hypertension (mean sitting systolic blood pressure ≥130-180 mm Hg). Lipolysis during rest and exercise was assessed by microdialysis and [1,1,2,3,3-2H]-glycerol tracer kinetics. Energy expenditure and substrate oxidation were measured simultaneously using indirect calorimetry. Plasma nonesterified fatty acids, glycerol, insulin, glucose, adrenaline and noradrenaline concentrations, blood pressure, and heart rate were also determined. Exercise elevated plasma glycerol, free fatty acids, and interstitial glycerol concentrations and increased the rate of glycerol appearance. However, exercise-induced stimulation of lipolysis was not augmented on sacubitril/valsartan treatment compared with amlodipine treatment. Furthermore, sacubitril/valsartan did not alter energy expenditure and substrate oxidation during exercise compared with amlodipine treatment. In conclusion, sacubitril/valsartan treatment for 8 weeks did not elicit clinically relevant changes in exercise-induced lipolysis or substrate oxidation in obese patients with hypertension, implying that its beneficial cardiovascular effects cannot be explained by changes in lipid metabolism during exercise. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01631864.
-
8.
Reduction in microalbuminuria by calcium channel blockers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension-A randomized, open-label, active-controlled, superiority, parallel-group clinical trial.
Hwang, YC, Yoon, KH, Cha, BS, Lee, KW, Jang, HC, Min, KW, Chung, CH, Lee, MK
International journal of clinical practice. 2017;(9)
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND It has been suggested that renoprotection with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) may differ. This study aimed to compare the anti-proteinuric effect of different CCBs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS A multicentre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study was performed in seven centres in Korea. A total of 74 patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers were randomized to a cilnidipine 10 mg treatment (n=38) or amlodipine 5 mg treatment (n=36). RESULTS Urine albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR) reduction was similar between the two groups at 12 weeks (-53.0±123.2 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -35.7±83.6 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.29) or 24 weeks (-57.3±106.9 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -20.0±110.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.24). In a subgroup analysis, cilnidipine treatment showed a larger ACR reduction than amlodipine treatment at 12 weeks (-84.7±106.8 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -9.5±79.2 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.01) and 24 weeks (-84.0±111.7 mg/g in cilnidipine group and 14.6±119.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.008), particularly in patients with a longer duration of diabetes more than 10 years. CONCLUSIONS Cilnidipine did not show any additional anti-albuminuric effect compared with amlodipine in patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with an RAS blocker. However, the anti-albuminuric effect of cilnidipine might differ according to the duration of diabetes.
-
9.
A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and the Tolerability of a Triple Combination of Amlodipine/Losartan/Rosuvastatin in Patients With Comorbid Essential Hypertension and Hyperlipidemia.
Lee, HY, Kim, SY, Choi, KJ, Yoo, BS, Cha, DH, Jung, HO, Ryu, DR, Choi, JH, Lee, KJ, Park, TH, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2017;(12):2366-2379
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a triple combination of amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. METHODS A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted. Eligible patients with hypertension and a sitting diastolic blood pressure (SiDBP) of >90 mm Hg and LDL-C levels <250mg/dL were screened. After a 4-week run-in period with therapeutic lifestyle changes and losartan potassium 100mg once daily, patients who met both blood pressure criteria (80 mm Hg ≤ SiDBP < 110 mm Hg) and the LDL-C level criteria (defined in the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III cardiovascular risk categories) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups and treated once daily for 8 weeks: losartan potassium 100mg + rosuvastatin 20mg treatment (L/R 100/20) group, amlodipine camsylate 5mg + losartan potassium 100mg treatment (A/L 5/100) group, and amlodipine 5mg+ losartan potassium 100mg + rosuvastatin 20mg (A/L/R 5/100/20) group. The primary efficacy variables were the percent change in LDL-C in the A/L/R 5/100/20 and A/L 5/100 groups and the mean change of SiDBP in the A/L/R 5/100/20 and L/R 100/20 groups after 8 weeks of treatment, relative to baseline values. FINDINGS A total of 146 patients were enrolled and the demographic characteristics were similar among the 3 treatment groups. After 8 weeks of treatment, the mean (SD) percent change in LDL-C was significantly greater in the A/L/R group than in the A/L group (-48.40% [2.77%] vs -6.70% [3.00%]; P < 0.0001). Moreover, the mean change in SiDBP was significantly greater in the A/L/R group than in the L/R group (-9.75 [0.92] mm Hg vs -1.73 [1.03] mm Hg; P < 0.0001). SiDBP and LDL-C reductions in the A/L/R group were comparable to reductions in the A/L and L/R groups, respectively. Ten adverse events were reported in 7 patients (4.83%), and 1 patient from the A/L group (0.69%) experienced 2 adverse drug reactions (tachycardia and face edema), which were mild and resolved without specific treatment. There were no clinically significant tolerability issues during the treatment period. IMPLICATIONS Triple combination therapy with amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin can be an effective therapeutic strategy in patients with hypertension combined with dyslipidemia. These findings will form the foundation of the future development of a single-pill triple combination. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02899455.
-
10.
Comparative Effects of an Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker (ARB)/Diuretic vs. ARB/Calcium-Channel Blocker Combination on Uncontrolled Nocturnal Hypertension Evaluated by Information and Communication Technology-Based Nocturnal Home Blood Pressure Monitoring - The NOCTURNE Study.
Kario, K, Tomitani, N, Kanegae, H, Ishii, H, Uchiyama, K, Yamagiwa, K, Shiraiwa, T, Katsuya, T, Yoshida, T, Kanda, K, et al
Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society. 2017;(7):948-957
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) is an independent risk factor of cardiovascular events. The NOCTURNE study, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT) using our recently developed information and communication technology (ICT) nocturnal home BP monitoring (HBPM) device, was performed to compare the nocturnal HBP-lowering effects of differential ARB-based combination therapies in 411 Japanese patients with nocturnal hypertension (HT).Methods and Results:Patients with nocturnal BP ≥120/70 mmHg at baseline even under ARB therapy (100 mg irbesartan daily) were enrolled. The ARB/CCB combination therapy (irbesartan 100 mg+amlodipine 5 mg) achieved a significantly greater reduction in nocturnal home systolic BP (primary endpoint) than the ARB/diuretic combination (daily irbesartan 100 mg+trichlormethiazide 1 mg) (-14.4 vs. -10.5 mmHg, P<0.0001), independently of urinary sodium excretion and/or nocturnal BP dipping status. However, the change in nocturnal home systolic BP was comparable among the post-hoc subgroups with higher salt sensitivity (diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and elderly patients). CONCLUSIONS This is the first RCT demonstrating the feasibility of clinical assessment of nocturnal BP by ICT-nocturnal HBPM. The ARB/CCB combination was shown to be superior to ARB/diuretic in patients with uncontrolled nocturnal HT independently of sodium intake, despite the similar impact of the 2 combinations in patients with higher salt sensitivity.