-
1.
A Prospective Noninterventional, Observational Study to Describe the Effectiveness and Safety of Trandolapril and Verapamil Single-Pill Combination in the Management of Patients with Hypertension and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Harvest TR Study.
Atalar, E, Eskin, F, Tugtekin, HB, Karabulut, A, Kanyilmaz, S, Kirbiyik, H, Ozyildiz, AG
BioMed research international. 2020;:2123601
Abstract
Maintaining regular blood pressure control usually requires multidrug regimens rather than monotherapy. The objective of this study was to describe the effectiveness and safety of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and a nondihydropyridine calcium channel blocker in a single-tablet combination in patients with hypertension, a heart rate higher than 70 beats/min, and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study was conducted in Turkey as a prospective, noninterventional, observational study. At 22 clinical sites, the data of 200 patients with hypertension were used for efficacy analysis; however, 262 patients received at least one dose of trandolapril/verapamil fixed-dose combination at two dose strengths. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), heart rate, PR interval, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and albumin/creatinine ratios were recorded during 8 weeks of treatment. With treatment, the mean (±SD) SBP that was recorded as 162.8 (±14.642) mm Hg at baseline was reduced to 131.7 ± 11.1 mm Hg at week 8 (p < 0.05). Similarly, the mean DBP was reduced from 93.76 ± 9.16 mm Hg to 77.6 ± 7.6 mm Hg (p < 0.001). Following 8 weeks of treatment, SBP and DBP values were reduced below 140 mm Hg and 90 mm Hg in most patients (81.5%), respectively. The mean heart rate as evaluated using electrocardiography measurements was reduced to 78.25 beats/min at week 8 as compared with baseline during trandolapril/verapamil single-pill combination treatment (p < 0.001). Treatment with trandolapril and verapamil was well tolerated over 8 weeks with no unexpected safety signals. In conclusion, the single-pill combination of trandolapril and verapamil was considered effective in reducing and controlling blood pressure in patients with hypertension and T2DM. There was a significant improvement in HbA1c and ACR levels in a smaller subgroup of the patient cohort. The trandolapril/verapamil combination was evaluated as being safe and well-tolerated following a treatment period of 8 weeks. This trial was registered with NCT02298556.
-
2.
Isradipine Versus Placebo in Early Parkinson Disease: A Randomized Trial.
,
Annals of internal medicine. 2020;(9):591-598
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies suggest that dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers may be associated with reduced risk for Parkinson disease (PD). OBJECTIVE To assess the effect of isradipine, a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker, on the rate of clinical progression of PD. DESIGN Multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02168842). SETTING 57 Parkinson Study Group sites in North America. PARTICIPANTS Patients with early-stage PD (duration <3 years) who were not taking dopaminergic medications at enrollment. INTERVENTION 5 mg of immediate-release isradipine twice daily or placebo for 36 months. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome was change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) parts I to III score measured in the antiparkinson medication "ON" state between baseline and 36 months. Secondary outcomes included time to initiation and use of antiparkinson medications, time to onset of motor complications, change in nonmotor disability, and quality-of-life measures. RESULTS 336 patients were randomly assigned (mean age, 62 years [SD, 9]; 68% men; disease duration, 0.9 year [SD, 0.7]; mean UPDRS part I to III score, 23.1 [SD, 8.6]); 95% of patients completed the study. Adjusted least-squares mean changes in total UPDRS score in the antiparkinson medication ON state over 36 months for isradipine and placebo recipients were 2.99 (95% CI, 0.95 to 5.03) points versus 3.26 (CI, 1.25 to 5.26) points, respectively, with a treatment effect of -0.27 (CI, -3.02 to 2.48) point (P = 0.85). Statistical adjustment for antiparkinson medication use did not change the findings. Secondary outcomes showed no effect of isradipine treatment. The most common adverse effects of isradipine were edema and dizziness. LIMITATION The isradipine dose may have been insufficient to engage the target calcium channels associated with neuroprotective effects. CONCLUSION Long-term treatment with immediate-release isradipine did not slow the clinical progression of early-stage PD. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
-
3.
Beta blockers versus calcium channel blockers for provocation of vasospastic angina after drug-eluting stent implantation: a multicentre prospective randomised trial.
Sawano, M, Katsuki, T, Kitai, T, Tamita, K, Obunai, K, Ikegami, Y, Yamane, T, Ueda, I, Endo, A, Maekawa, Y, et al
Open heart. 2020;(2)
Abstract
BACKGROUND Drug-eluting stent-induced vasospastic angina (DES-VSA) has emerged as a novel complication in the modern era of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Although beta blockers (BBs) are generally recommended for coronary heart disease, they may promote incidence of DES-VSA. This study aimed to compare the effects of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) perceived to be protective against DES-VSA and BBs on subsequent coronary events after second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation. METHODS In this multicentre prospective, randomised study, 52 patients with coronary artery disease who underwent PCI for a single-vessel lesion with everolimus-eluting stent placement were randomised into post-stenting BB (N=26) and CCB (N=26) groups and followed for 24 months to detect any major cardiovascular events (MACE). A positive result on acetylcholine provocation testing during diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG) at 9 months was the primary endpoint for equivalence. MACE included all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, cerebrovascular disease or coronary revascularisation for stable coronary artery disease after index PCI. RESULTS At 9 months, 42 patients (80.8%) underwent diagnostic coronary angiography and acetylcholine provocation testing. Among them, seven patients in each group were diagnosed with definite vasospasm (intention-to-treat analysis 26.9% vs 26.9%, risk difference 0 (-0.241, 0.241)). Meanwhile, the secondary endpoint, 24-month MACE, was higher in the CCB group (19.2%) than in the BB group (3.8%) (p=0.01). In detail, coronary revascularisation for stable coronary artery disease was the predominant endpoint that contributed to the greater proportion of MACE in the CCB group (CCB (19.2%) vs BB (3.8%), p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS The incidence of acetylcholine-induced coronary artery spasms did not differ between patients receiving BBs or CCBs at 9 months after PCI. However, a higher incidence of 2-year MACE was observed in the CCB group, suggesting the importance of BB administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER This study was registered at the Japanese University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trial Registry (The Prospective Randomized Trial for Optimizing Medical Therapy After Stenting: Calcium-Beta Trial; UMIN000008321, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000009536).
-
4.
Reaching blood pressure guideline targets with the CNIC polypill in patients with a previous cardiovascular event in Mexico: a post hoc analysis of the SORS study.
Gómez-Álvarez, E, Verdejo, J, Ocampo, S, Ruiz, E, Martinez-Rios, MA
Future cardiology. 2020;(1):53-60
Abstract
Aim: To determine the effectiveness of Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares (CNIC)-polypill (acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg, ramipril 5/10 mg, simvastatin 40 mg) in achieving blood pressure (BP) goals. Patients & methods: A multicenter, observational, one cohort, prospective study. BP targets were analyzed in patients with cardiovascular disease after 12-months treatment with the CNIC polypill. Results: A total of 572 patients (59.4 ± 13.9 years, 57.3% men) were analyzed. At baseline, BP was 147.1 ± 18.1/88.3 ± 10.6 mmHg, 97.1% of patients were taken renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, 5.4% calcium antagonists, 1.9% diuretics and 13.1% β-blockers. The proportion of patients who achieved BP targets increased from 20.1 to 55.4% (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In routine practice, switching from usual care to the CNIC-polypill in patients with cardiovascular disease could facilitate achieving BP goals.
-
5.
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.
-
6.
The effect of an L/N-type calcium channel blocker on intradialytic blood pressure in intradialytic hypertensive patients.
Ito, T, Fujimoto, N, Ishikawa, E, Dohi, K, Fujimoto, M, Murata, T, Kiyohara, M, Takeuchi, H, Koyabu, S, Nishimura, H, et al
Clinical and experimental hypertension (New York, N.Y. : 1993). 2019;(1):92-99
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intradialytic hypertension (HTN), which is one of the poor prognostic markers in patients undergoing hemodialysis, may be associated with sympathetic overactivity. The L/N-type calcium channel blocker, cilnidipine, has been reported to suppress sympathetic nerves activity in vivo. Therefore, we hypothesized that cilnidipine could attenuate intradialytic systolic blood pressure (SBP) elevation. METHODS Fifty-one patients on chronic hemodialysis who had intradialytic-HTN (SBP elevation ≥10 mmHg during hemodialysis) and no fluid overload were prospectively randomized into two groups: control and cilnidipine groups. Cilnidipine group patients took cilnidipine (10 mg/day) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the intradialytic SBP elevation before and after the 12-week intervention. RESULTS Before the intervention, no differences were observed in age, sex or pre-dialytic SBP (148.5 ± 12.9 vs. 148.3 ± 19.3 mmHg) between the two groups. Intradialytic SBP elevation was unchanged in the control group. Cilnidipine significantly lowered the post-dialytic SBP with an attenuation of the intradialytic SBP elevation from 12.0 ± 15.4 mmHg to 4.8 ± 10.1 mmHg. However, the observed difference in the intradialytic SBP elevation by cilnidipine did not reach statistical significance (group×time interaction effect p = 0.25). Cathecolamine levels were unaffected by the intervention in both groups. CONCLUSION Cilnidipine lowers both the pre- and post-dialytic SBP and might attenuate intradialytic SBP elevation. Therefore, cilnidipine may be effective in lowering SBP during HD in patients with intradialytic-HTN.
-
7.
Effects of Nilvadipine on Cerebral Blood Flow in Patients With Alzheimer Disease.
de Jong, DLK, de Heus, RAA, Rijpma, A, Donders, R, Olde Rikkert, MGM, Günther, M, Lawlor, BA, van Osch, MJP, Claassen, JAHR
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979). 2019;(2):413-420
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Cerebrovascular changes, including reduced cerebral blood flow (CBF), occur early in the development of Alzheimer disease and may accelerate disease progression. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated how 6 months of treatment with the calcium antagonist nilvadipine would affect CBF in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease. CBF was measured with magnetic resonance arterial spin labeling in whole-brain gray matter and in a priori defined regions of interest including the hippocampus. Fifty-eight patients were randomly assigned (29 in each group), of whom 22 in both groups had no magnetic resonance exclusion criteria and were medication compliant over 6 months. Mean age was 72.8±6.2 years, mean mini-mental state examination was 20.4±3.4. Nilvadipine treatment lowered systolic blood pressure (Δ=-11.5 [95% CI, -19.7 to -3.2] mm Hg; P<0.01), while whole-brain gray-matter CBF remained stable (Δ=5.4 [95% CI, -6.4 to 17.2] mL/100 g per minute; P=0.36). CBF in the hippocampus increased (left: Δ=24.4 [95% CI, 4.3-44.5] mL/100 g per minute; P=0.02; right: Δ=20.1 [95% CI, -0.6 to 40.8] mL/100 g per minute; P=0.06). There was no significant change in CBF in the posterior cingulate cortex (Δ=5.2 [95% CI, -16.5 to 27.0] mL/100 g per minute; P=0.63) or other regions of interest. In conclusion, nilvadipine reduced blood pressure and increased CBF in the hippocampus, whereas other regions showed stable or small nonsignificant increases in CBF. These findings not only indicate preserved cerebral autoregulation in Alzheimer disease but also point toward beneficial cerebrovascular effects of antihypertensive treatment. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02017340.
-
8.
Efficacy and safety of a T-type calcium channel blocker in patients with neuropathic pain: A proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blind and controlled trial.
Kerckhove, N, Pereira, B, Soriot-Thomas, S, Alchaar, H, Deleens, R, Hieng, VS, Serra, E, Lanteri-Minet, M, Arcagni, P, Picard, P, et al
European journal of pain (London, England). 2018;(7):1321-1330
Abstract
BACKGROUND T-type calcium channels have been shown to play an important role in the initiation and maintenance of neuropathic pain and represent a promising therapeutic target for new analgesic treatments. Ethosuximide (ETX), an anticonvulsant and a T-type channel blocker has shown analgesic effect in several chronic pain models but has not yet been evaluated in patients with neuropathic pain. METHODS This proof-of-concept, multicentre, double-blind, controlled and randomized trial compared the efficacy and safety of ETX (given as add-on therapy) to an inactive control (IC) in 114 patients with non-diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. After a 7-day run-in period, eligible patients aged over 18 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to ETX or IC for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the difference between groups in the pain intensity (% of change from the baseline to end of treatment) assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with EudraCT (2013-004801-26) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02100046). RESULTS The study was stopped during the interim analysis due to the high number of adverse events in the active treatment group. ETX failed to reduce total pain and showed a poor tolerance in comparison to IC. In the per-protocol analysis, ETX significantly reduced pain intensity by 15.6% (95% CI -25.8; -5.4) from baseline compared to IC (-7.8%, 95% CI -14.3; -1.3; p = 0.033), but this result must be interpreted with caution because of a small subgroup of patients. CONCLUSION Ethosuximide did not reduce the severity of neuropathic pain and induces, at the doses used, many adverse events. SIGNIFICANCE This article shows that ETX is not effective to treat neuropathic pain. Nevertheless, per-protocol analysis suggests a possible analgesic effect of ETX. Thus, our work adds significant knowledge to preclinical and clinical data on the benefits of T-type calcium channel inhibition for the treatment of neuropathic pain.
-
9.
Efficacy and safety of pregabalin for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy in a population of Chinese patients: A randomized placebo-controlled trial.
Mu, Y, Liu, X, Li, Q, Chen, K, Liu, Y, Lv, X, Xu, X, Fan, D, Shang, N, Yang, R, et al
Journal of diabetes. 2018;(3):256-265
Abstract
BACKGROUND Limited information exists regarding the efficacy of pregabalin in Chinese patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN). METHODS An 11-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial was performed in Chinese pDPN patients randomized (1 : 1) to 300 mg/day pregabalin or placebo. The primary outcome was change from baseline to endpoint in mean pain score (MPS; 0, no pain; 10, worst possible pain; using the mean of the last seven daily pain scores). Secondary outcomes included weekly MPS and responder status (MPS reduced by ≥30% or ≥50% vs baseline). Subgroup analysis assessed patients with severe (≥7) baseline MPS. Adverse events (AEs) were reported. RESULTS In all, 620 patients were randomized (pregabalin, n = 313; placebo, n = 307). Improvement in MPS with pregabalin versus placebo was not significant (P = 0.0559). Post hoc sensitivity analyses, excluding one patient/site due to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) non-compliance, showed pregabalin significantly improved MPS when excluding the patient (P = 0.0448) or site (P = 0.0142). Pregabalin significantly improved weekly MPS (P = 0.0164) and ≥50% responders at endpoint (P = 0.0384). Improvement in proportion of ≥30% responders, impression of change, pain intensity, and sleep did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. In the severe pDPN subpopulation, pregabalin significantly improved MPS versus placebo (P = 0.0040). The most commonly reported AE was dizziness (9.6% vs 3.9% with placebo). CONCLUSIONS Pregabalin did not significantly improve the primary measure of pain in the trial. Significant reductions in MPS were observed when excluding the GCP non-compliant patient/site and in the severe pDPN subpopulation. Pregabalin was well tolerated in Chinese pDPN patients.
-
10.
Nilvadipine in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: A randomised controlled trial.
Lawlor, B, Segurado, R, Kennelly, S, Olde Rikkert, MGM, Howard, R, Pasquier, F, Börjesson-Hanson, A, Tsolaki, M, Lucca, U, Molloy, DW, et al
PLoS medicine. 2018;(9):e1002660
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study reports the findings of the first large-scale Phase III investigator-driven clinical trial to slow the rate of cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease with a dihydropyridine (DHP) calcium channel blocker, nilvadipine. Nilvadipine, licensed to treat hypertension, reduces amyloid production, increases regional cerebral blood flow, and has demonstrated anti-inflammatory and anti-tau activity in preclinical studies, properties that could have disease-modifying effects for Alzheimer disease. We aimed to determine if nilvadipine was effective in slowing cognitive decline in subjects with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. METHODS AND FINDINGS NILVAD was an 18-month, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that randomised participants between 15 May 2013 and 13 April 2015. The study was conducted at 23 academic centres in nine European countries. Of 577 participants screened, 511 were eligible and were randomised (258 to placebo, 253 to nilvadipine). Participants took a trial treatment capsule once a day after breakfast for 78 weeks. Participants were aged >50 years, meeting National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke/Alzheimer's disease Criteria (NINCDS-ADRDA) for diagnosis of probable Alzheimer disease, with a Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE) score of ≥12 and <27. Participants were randomly assigned to 8 mg sustained-release nilvadipine or matched placebo. The a priori defined primary outcome was progression on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale Cognitive Subscale-12 (ADAS-Cog 12) in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (n = 498), with the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (CDR-sb) as a gated co-primary outcome, eligible to be promoted to primary end point conditional on a significant effect on the ADAS-Cog 12. The analysis set had a mean age of 73 years and was 62% female. Baseline demographic and Alzheimer disease-specific characteristics were similar between treatment groups, with reported mean of 1.7 years since diagnosis and mean SMMSE of 20.4. The prespecified primary analyses failed to show any treatment benefit for nilvadipine on the co-primary outcome (p = 0.465). Decline from baseline in ADAS-Cog 12 on placebo was 0.79 (95% CI, -0.07-1.64) at 13 weeks, 6.41 (5.33-7.49) at 52 weeks, and 9.63 (8.33-10.93) at 78 weeks and on nilvadipine was 0.88 (0.02-1.74) at 13 weeks, 5.75 (4.66-6.85) at 52 weeks, and 9.41 (8.09-10.73) at 78 weeks. Exploratory analyses of the planned secondary outcomes showed no substantial effects, including on the CDR-sb or the Disability Assessment for Dementia. Nilvadipine appeared to be safe and well tolerated. Mortality was similar between groups (3 on nilvadipine, 4 on placebo); higher counts of adverse events (AEs) on nilvadipine (1,129 versus 1,030), and serious adverse events (SAEs; 146 versus 101), were observed. There were 14 withdrawals because of AEs. Major limitations of this study were that subjects had established dementia and the likelihood that non-Alzheimer subjects were included because of the lack of biomarker confirmation of the presence of brain amyloid. CONCLUSIONS The results do not suggest benefit of nilvadipine as a treatment in a population spanning mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02017340, EudraCT number 2012-002764-27.