PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Joel M Neutel

Publications and source records attributed to Joel M Neutel.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Titration of HCTZ to 50 mg daily in individuals with stage 2 systolic hypertension pretreated with an angiotensin receptor blocker.

The authors studied the combination of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 50 mg/d plus olmesartan medoxomil (OM) 40 mg/d in stage 2 systolic hypertension during an extension phase of an open-label 12-week dose titration study. Subjects whose blood pressure remained above 120/80 mm Hg (n=105) on OM 40/HCTZ 25 mg/d subsequently received OM 40/HCTZ 50 mg/d for 4 weeks. Increasing HCTZ from 25 mg/d to 50 mg/d decreased systolic blood pressure by 3.6 mm Hg, increased BP control rates (<140/90 mm Hg) from 70.4% to 77.5%, and increased BP normalization rates (<120/80 mm Hg) from 15.4% to 27.8%. The combination was well tolerated. Compared with OM 40 mg/d monotherapy, neither dose of HCTZ affected serum potassium, but both increased serum glucose by about 5%. There was a dose-dependent increase in uric acid but no acute gout attacks. OM 40/HCTZ 50 mg/d is an effective strategy for managing stage 2 systolic hypertension.

Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers↗

Efficacy and safety of treating stage 2 systolic hypertension with olmesartan and olmesartan/HCTZ: results of an open-label titration study.

This study investigated an aggressive treatment program for stage 2 systolic hypertension (pretreatment systolic blood pressure [SBP] > or = 160 mm Hg) using the angiotensin receptor blocker olmesartan medoxomil (OM) and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). In this open-label, 16-week trial, 170 subjects received OM 20 mg/d for 3 weeks. If seated SBP/diastolic BP remained > or = 120/80 mm Hg, subjects were advanced to successive 3-week courses of OM 40 mg/d, OM/HCTZ 40/12.5 mg/d, and OM/HCTZ 40/25 mg/d. OM 20 mg/d reduced mean SBP by 16.9 mm Hg (P<.001), and there were further dose-dependent decreases in mean SBP to a maximum of 34.5 mm Hg with OM/HCTZ 40/25 mg/d. At study end, 75.1% of subjects achieved SBP goal (<140 mm Hg) and 16.0% achieved SBP normalization (<120 mm Hg). Treatment was well tolerated at all doses. The addition of HCTZ did not change serum potassium levels but resulted in a dose-independent but not symptomatic increase in serum glucose and uric acid. The authors conclude that an OM-based regimen, with or without HCTZ in conventional doses, is effective in controlling and normalizing BP in stage 2 systolic hypertension.

Aged↗

Measuring the efficacy of antihypertensive therapy by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Traditional clinical trials in hypertension measure the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs but may not fully assess their effectiveness in clinical practice. Community-based trials can provide this information but are limited because usually they are of open-label design and potentially subject to observer bias. Therefore, we used ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), an automated and objective measure of blood pressure (BP) to overcome these shortcomings in a large community-based trial. METHODS: Patients with hypertension, either untreated or currently on treatment, were started on, or switched to, the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan 40 mg daily; after 2 weeks, if office BP remained > or = 140/85 mm Hg, the dose was increased to 80 mg, and if necessary, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was added after a further 4 weeks and continued for the final 4-week period. Baseline and treatment ABPM measurements were completed in 940 previously untreated patients and 675 previously treated patients. RESULTS: The average reduction of the entire cohort was -10.7/-6.5 mm Hg (P < .0001; mean 24-hour BPs were reduced by 12/8 and 8/5 mm Hg in the untreated and previously treated patients, respectively). In contrast, the office BPs fell by an average of 23/12 and 17/10 mm Hg in previously untreated and treated patients. In 401 patients whose baseline 24-hour BP was > or = 130/85 mm Hg, the mean decrease in 24-hour BP was 16.8/11.4 mm Hg. Based on ABPM criteria, the BP was fully controlled (< 130/85 mm Hg) in 70% of patients, and based on office measurement criteria (< 140/90 mm Hg), in 79%. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory BP monitoring demonstrated excellent control rates by telmisartan monotherapy or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. Observer and measurement bias was substantial based on the changes from baseline by clinical measurements in contrast to ambulatory BP recordings. The successful use of this procedure in primary care research will create further opportunities to define the effectiveness of treatment in the environment in which it is customarily prescribed.

Aged↗

A multicenter, 14-week study of telmisartan and ramipril in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) has a circadian pattern with a morning surge that is associated with an increased risk of acute coronary and cerebrovascular events. In a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group, multicenter, forced-titration study of telmisartan and ramipril, the efficacy of both drugs on mean ambulatory diastolic BP (DBP) and systolic BP (SBP) during the last 6 h of a 24-h dosing interval was evaluated. METHODS: After screening and a single-blind run-in phase, 812 adults with mild-to-moderate hypertension (defined as a mean seated DBP > or =95 mm Hg and < or =109 mm Hg and a 24-h ABPM mean DBP 7 > or = 85 mm Hg) were randomized to the open-label, 14-week, forced-titration, active-treatment phase as follows: telmisartan 40 mg/80 mg/80 mg (n = 405) or ramipril 2.5 mg/5 mg/10 mg (n = 407), once daily in the morning. The primary efficacy variable was change from baseline in the last 6-h mean DBP and SBP at 8 and 14 weeks as assessed by ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Secondary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in BP control during each of the 24-h periods and in-clinic trough cuff BP. RESULTS: Telmisartan 80 mg was superior to ramipril 5 mg and 10 mg in change from baseline in the last 6-h ABPM mean DBP and SBP at both 8 and 14 weeks (both P < .0001), respectively. At 14 weeks, the adjusted mean change from baseline in DBP for telmisartan 80 mg was -8.8 mm Hg compared with that for ramipril 10 mg of -5.4 mm Hg (P < .0001). For SBP, the adjusted mean change from baseline for telmisartan 80 mg was -12.7 mm Hg compared with that for ramipril 10 mg of -7.9 mm Hg (P < .0001). At 14 weeks, telmisartan 80 mg also yielded superior reductions from baseline in trough cuff BP compared with ramipril 10 mg (DBP: -11.0 mm Hg v -7.8 mm Hg, respectively; SBP: -14.3 mm Hg v -9.1 mm Hg, respectively; both P < .0001). Measures of 24-h BP control favored telmisartan 80 mg versus ramipril 10 mg (P < .0001), as did other secondary ABPM endpoints during the daytime, night-time, and morning periods. Treatment-related adverse events were uncommon; patients treated with ramipril had a higher incidence of cough than those treated with telmisartan (10.1% v 1.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Telmisartan 80 mg was consistently more effective than ramipril 10 mg in reducing both DBP and SBP during the last 6 h of the dosing interval, a measure of the early morning period when patients are at greatest risk of life-threatening cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. Telmisartan 80 mg was also more effective than ramipril 10 mg in reducing BP throughout the entire 24-h dosing interval. Both drugs were well tolerated.

Adult↗

An effectiveness study comparing algorithm-based antihypertensive therapy with previous treatments using conventional and ambulatory blood pressure measurements.

Effectiveness trials in hypertension enable the efficacy and safety of new drugs to be compared with previous therapy. Since these open-label trials could inadvertently be influenced by observer bias, this study has used ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) to provide a rigorous blinded end point to validate the study conclusions. The study was performed in 675 patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension despite receiving single-agent or fixed-dose combination therapy. After baseline ABPM, the previous treatment was replaced by telmisartan 40 mg daily; if control (office blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg) was not achieved in 2 weeks, the dose was increased to 80 mg, and if necessary, a fixed combination with hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was used after a further 4 weeks. ABPM was repeated after 4 weeks on final therapy. Overall, 50% of patients finished on monotherapy and 50% on combination therapy. By office measurements, there was a decrease (mean +/- SEM) of 16.8+/-0.5/10.3+/-0.3 mm Hg (p<0.001) when telmisartan-based treatment replaced previous treatment; by ABPM, the decrease was 8.2+/-0.4/5.0+/-0.2 mm Hg (p<0.001). The decreases were significant for comparisons with each of the prior drug classes. A treatment algorithm based on the angiotensin receptor blocker, telmisartan, was confirmed by the blinded end point of ABPM as an efficacious alternative to other antihypertensive regimens in clinical practice.

Aged↗

Effects of the angiotensin II receptor blockers telmisartan vs valsartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg once daily for the treatment of hypertension.

To attain recent goals of blood pressure (BP) control, multiple drug therapy combinations are required, including higher doses of thiazide diuretics in combination with other classes of antihypertensive drug therapy. Thus, the authors evaluated the antihypertensive effects of telmisartan vs valsartan when combined with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg in a large (N=1066), placebo-controlled trial in patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension. The primary end points were the changes from baseline in seated diastolic and systolic BP at the end of the 8-week treatment period. Safety end points included adverse events, changes in laboratory parameters, and pulse rate. Changes from baseline in BP following telmisartan-HCTZ (-24.0/-17.6 mm Hg) were significantly greater than both placebo (-4.4/-6.8 mm Hg) and valsartan-HCTZ (-21.2/-16.1 mm Hg) (vs placebo, P<.001 for systolic and diastolic BP; vs valsartan-HCTZ, P=.004 for systolic BP and P=.019 for diastolic BP). The total number of patients with at least 1 adverse event reported were similar among the 3 treatment groups (placebo, 49%; telmisartan-HCTZ, 43%; and valsartan-HCTZ, 38%). In conclusion, telmisartan-HCTZ at doses of 80/25 mg lowered both systolic and diastolic BP to a greater extent than valsartan-HCTZ at doses of 160/25 mg. These data support using a higher dose of a thiazide diuretic (25 mg) with a long-acting angiotensin receptor blocker as a useful strategy for improving hypertension control.

Adult↗

Antihypertensive efficacy of Irbesartan/HCTZ in men and women with the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes.

This subgroup analysis of the Irbesartan/Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) Blood Pressure Reductions in Diverse Patient Populations (INCLUSIVE) trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of irbesartan/HCTZ fixed combinations in adults with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure (SBP) (140-159 mm Hg; 130-159 mm Hg for type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) after >or=4 weeks of antihypertensive monotherapy. Treatment was sequential: placebo (4-5 weeks), HCTZ 12.5 mg (2 weeks), irbesartan/HCTZ 150/12.5 mg (8 weeks), and irbesartan/HCTZ 300/25 mg (8 weeks). In the intent-to-treat analysis, mean change from baseline (end of placebo phase) off all previous therapy to Week 18 (study end) in T2DM patients (n=227) was -18.2+/-14.1 mm Hg for SBP (primary end point; p<0.001) and -8.7+/-8.2 mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure (p<0.001). Mean SBP/diastolic blood pressure changes in patients with the metabolic syndrome (n=345) were -21.0+/-14.3/-10.4+/-8.5 mm Hg (p<0.001). Overall, 56% (95% confidence interval, 49%-62%) of T2DM and 73% (95% confidence interval, 68%-77%) of metabolic syndrome patients achieved SBP goal (<140 mm Hg; <130 mm Hg for T2DM). Goal attainment rates were significantly higher among women with the metabolic syndrome than men. Treatments appeared to be well tolerated. Irbesartan/HCTZ fixed combinations achieved SBP goals in over half of the T2DM patients and nearly three quarters of patients with the metabolic syndrome, with SBP uncontrolled on antihypertensive monotherapy.

Adult↗

Efficacy and safety of coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia: results of the AVALON trial.

The AVALON study was a randomized, multicenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. Phase one was an 8-week, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled period whereby patients received amlodipine 5 mg, atorvastatin 10 mg, amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg, or placebo. Thereafter, all patients received single-blind amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg for 8-weeks, followed by 12 weeks of open-label treatment where doses could be titrated to improve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure control. A total of 847 patients entered the double-blind phase. At Week 8, 45% of the patients receiving amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg reached both their blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals, compared with 8.3% with amlodipine (p < 0.001), 28.6% with atorvastatin (p < 0.001), and 3.5% with placebo. At 28 weeks, 67.1% of patients coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin (mean doses, 7.6 mg and 28.4 mg, respectively) achieved both targets. Framingham estimated 10-year risk of coronary heart disease declined from baseline levels of 15.1% to 6.9% at Week 28. Following coadministered treatment, the adverse events reported were similar to either agent alone. Concomitant administration of amlodipine and atorvastatin is an effective and well tolerated treatment for coexisting hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Adolescent↗

Efficacy and safety of irbesartan/HCTZ combination therapy as initial treatment for rapid control of severe hypertension.

Severe hypertension is difficult to control. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial compared efficacy and safety of once-daily irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) combination therapy with irbesartan monotherapy in severe hypertension. Patients who were untreated or uncontrolled on monotherapy (seated diastolic blood pressure [BP] > or =110 mm Hg) received fixed-dose irbesartan 150 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg combination therapy for 7 weeks, force-titrated to irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 mg at week 1 (n=468); or irbesartan 150 mg monotherapy, force-titrated to 300 mg at week 1 (n=269). Significantly more patients on combination therapy achieved seated diastolic BP <90 mm Hg at week 5 (primary end point) compared with monotherapy recipients (47.2% vs 33.2%; P=.0005). Likewise, significantly more patients attained goals per the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) (<140/90 mm Hg) at week 5 (34.6% vs 19.2%, respectively; P<.0001), while the mean difference between combination and monotherapy in seated diastolic BP and seated systolic BP was 4.7 mm Hg and 9.7 mm Hg (P<.0001). Greater and more rapid BP reduction with irbesartan/HCTZ was achieved without additional side effects.

Adult↗

Irbesartan/HCTZ fixed combinations in patients of different racial/ethnic groups with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure on monotherapy.

The IrbesartaN/hydroChlorothiazide (HCTZ) bLood pressUre reductionS In diVErse patient populations (INCLUSIVE) trial was a multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-arm study evaluating the efficacy and safety of irbesartan/HCTZ fixed combinations in patients > or = 18 years old with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure (SBP, 140-159 mmHg; 130-159 mmHg for type-2 diabetes mellitus patients) after > or = 4 weeks of antihypertensive monotherapy. This analysis focused on different racial/ethnic subgroups. Treatment was sequential: placebo (4-5 weeks), HCTZ 12.5 mg (two weeks), irbesartan/HCTZ 150/12.5 mg (eight weeks) and irbesartan/HCTZ 300/25 mg (eight weeks). Overall, 515 Caucasians, 191 African Americans and 119 Hispanics/Latinos completing placebo treatment were enrolled. Mean SBP changes from baseline (placebo treatment end) to week 18 were -21.5 +/- 13.8 mmHg for Caucasians, -20.7 +/- 16.5 mmHg for African Americans and -22.9 +/- 13.2 mmHg for Hispanics/Latinos, respectively (p<0.001 for each). Mean diastolic BP (DBP) changes were statistically significant (p<0.001) and similar among racial/ethnic subgroups. By week 18, 70% (95% CI, 66%, 74%) of Caucasian, 66% (95% CI, 59%, 74%) of African-American and 65% (95% CI, 57%, 74%) of Hispanic/Latino patients achieved dual SBP/DBP goal. Treatments appeared to be well tolerated. In conclusion, irbesartan/HCTZ treatment provided SBP/DBP goal attainment in approximately two-thirds of Caucasian, African-American and Hispanic/Latino patients with SBP uncontrolled on antihypertensive monotherapy.

Antihypertensive Agents↗

Comparison of fixed-dose combinations of telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide 40/12.5 mg and 80/12.5 mg and a fixed-dose combination of losartan/hydrochlorothiazide 50/12.5 mg in mild to moderate essential hypertension: pooled analysis of two multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-end point (PROBE) trials.

BACKGROUND: High incidences of cardiovascular events coincide with a surge in blood pressure (BP) that occurs in the early morning hours at the time of arousal. Thus, control of BP at this time of day, using oral fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) as required, is important in reducing cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy in the early morning hours and tolerability of oral FDCs of telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) (40/12.5 mg [T40/H12.5] and 80/12.5 mg [T80/H12.5]) versus a low-dose FDC of losartan 50 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg (L50/H12.5). METHODS: Data from 2 similarly designed prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-end point (PROBE) studies were pooled and analyzed. The studies were conducted at 72 centers across the United States, and 70 centers in Canada, Europe (9 countries), and the Philippines. Adult male and female patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (24-hour mean ambulatory diastolic BP [DBP], > or =85 mm Hg; seated cuff DBP, 90-109 mm Hg) were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive T40/H12.5, L50/H12.5, or T80/H12.5, QD (morning) for 6 weeks. Antihypertensive efficacy was assessed using 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and cuff sphygmomanometry at trough, performed at baseline and on completion of active treatment. The primary end point was the reduction from baseline in mean ambulatory DBP over the last 6 hours of the dosing interval. Secondary end points included other ABPM- and clinic-derived changes in DBP and systolic BP (SBP), and control and response rates (SBP response defined as 24-hour mean SBP <130 mm Hg and/or reduction from baseline > or =10 mm Hg; DBP response defined as 24-hour mean DBP <85 mm Hg or reduction from baseline > or =10 mm Hg; DBP control defined as 24-hour mean DBP <85 mm Hg). Tolerability was assessed using patient interview, spontaneous reporting, and clinical evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 1402 patients were enrolled(876 men, 525 women; mean [SD] age, 53.1 [9.9] years) (T40/H12.5, n = 517; L50/H12.5, n = 518; and T80/H12.5, n = 367). With T40/H12.5, the mean reduction in last-6-hour mean ambulatory DBP was 1.8 mm Hg greater compared with that achieved with L50/H12.5 (-11.3 [0.4] vs -9.4 [0.4] mm Hg; P < 0.001), and with T80/H12.5, the mean reduction was 2.6 mm Hg greater compared with that achieved with L50/H12.5 (-12.0 [0.4] vs -9.4 [0.4] mm Hg; P < 0.001). Analysis of secondary end points found that greater BP reduction occurred with T40/H12.5 and T80/H12.5 compared with L50/H12.5. ABPM SBP control and response rates were similar between the 3 groups, but the ABPM DBP control and response rates were significantly higher with T80/H12.5 compared with L50/H12.5 (46.6% vs 34.0% [P < 0.002] and 69.4% vs 55.0% [P < 0.001], respectively). Clinic SBP and DBP control and response rates were higher with T40/H12.5 and T80/H12.5 compared with L50/H12.5 (SBP response, 80.4% and 80.8% vs 68.5% [both, P < 0.001]; DBP response, 66.1% and 67.4% vs 54.4% [both, P < 0.001]; DBP control, 56.5% and 56.4% vs 44.1% [both, P < 0.001] ). The 2 most commonly recorded adverse events (AEs) were headache (T40/H12.5, 2.9%; L50/H12.5, 3.3%; and T80/H12.5, 3.0%) and dizziness (1.2%, 2.1%, and 3.0%, respectively). Most AEs were mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pooled analysis of2 PROBE studies in adult patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension suggest that T40/H12.5 and T80/H12.5 conferred greater DBP and SBP control compared with low-dose L50/H12.5, including during the last 6 hours of the dosing interval. All 3 treatments were well tolerated.

Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers↗

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the primary care setting: assessment of therapy on the circadian variation of blood pressure from the MICCAT-2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a large-scale, practice-based trial (MICCAT-2) to evaluate the effects of telmisartan alone and in combination with a diuretic on 24-h blood pressure (BP) profiles, including the early morning period, a time when cardiovascular risk is excessive. METHODS: Patients with hypertension, either untreated or currently on treatment, were started on, or switched to, the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan 40 mg daily; after 2 weeks, if office blood pressure (BP) remained > or =140/85 mmHg, the dose was increased to 80 mg; and if necessary, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was added after a further 4 weeks and continued for a final 4-week period. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at baseline and at the end of the treatment period. Baseline and treatment ABPM measurements were completed in 1619 patients. RESULTS: There were highly significant reductions in both the daytime (-11.8/-7.2 mmHg) and night-time (-9.6/-5.7 mmHg) mean BP following telmisartan alone or in combination with the diuretic. Evaluation of the 24-h profiles showed evidence for sustained pharmacodynamic effects of telmisartan over the entire dosing period. Ninety-five (6%) patients had a marked surge in early morning BP defined as >30 mmHg post-awakening change in systolic BP. The average reduction of in the early morning (post-awakening) BP in the entire cohort was -11.5/-7.0 mmHg (P<0.001; reductions were similar for monotherapy and combination therapy groups. The early morning post-awakening BPs fell by an average of -17.2/-10.1 mmHg in patients with large morning BP surges (P<0.05 versus non-surge patients). CONCLUSIONS: In a community based study using ambulatory BP monitoring, telmisartan-based therapy induced highly significant reductions in systolic and diastolic BP over 24 h and was particularly effective in reducing BP during the early morning period.

Aged↗

The efficacy and safety of low- and high-dose fixed combinations of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide in patients with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure on monotherapy: the INCLUSIVE trial.

This multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-arm study determined the efficacy and safety of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) fixed combinations in patients (n=1005), aged 18 years and older, with uncontrolled systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 140-159 mm Hg (130-159 mm Hg for type 2 diabetes mellitus) after at least 4 weeks of antihypertensive monotherapy. Treatment was sequential: placebo (4-5 weeks), HCTZ 12.5 mg (2 weeks), irbesartan/HCTZ 150/12.5 mg (8 weeks), and irbesartan/HCTZ 300/25 mg (8 weeks). Enrolled patients (n=844) were aged 57.3+/-11.2 years; 52% were women, 23% were African American, and 14% were Hispanic. Thirty percent had type 2 diabetes mellitus, 46% had metabolic syndrome, and baseline blood pressure was 154.0+/-10.3/91.3+/-8.8 mm Hg. The mean change in SBP from placebo end to the primary end point, Week 18 (intent-to-treat population, n=736) was -21.5+/-14.3 mm Hg (p<0.001). The mean change in diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was -10.4+/-8.7 mm Hg (p<0.001). The mean Week 18 SBP/DBP was 132.9+/-13.8/81.1+/-9.7 mm Hg. Overall, 77% (95% confidence interval, 74%-80%) of patients achieved SBP goal (<140 mm Hg; <130 mm Hg for type 2 diabetes mellitus); 83% (95% confidence interval, 80%-86%) achieved DBP goal (<90 mm Hg; <80 mm Hg for type 2 diabetes mellitus); and 69% (95% confidence interval, 66%-72%) achieved dual SBP/DBP goal. Treatments were well tolerated. This irbesartan/HCTZ treatment regimen achieved SBP goals in more than 75% of patients uncontrolled on monotherapy.

Adult↗

Comparison of a chronotherapeutically administered beta blocker vs. a traditionally administered beta blocker in patients with hypertension.

Increasing systolic blood pressure and heart rate during the early morning results in increased myocardial oxygen demand. The use of beta blockers during this period may decrease cardiac workload, particularly in beta-blocker sensitive patients. The impact of a new chronotherapeutic beta blocker was assessed in 44 hypertensive patients. Patients were randomized to delayed-release propranolol (INP) dosed at 10 p.m. or to traditionally dosed propranolol (ILA) dosed at 8 a.m. for 4 weeks, following which they were switched to the alternative formulation for 4 weeks. Thirty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and pharmacokinetic measurements were obtained. INP and ILA resulted in significant reductions in mean 24-hour blood pressure (-9.0/-6.9 mm Hg and -10.4/-7.7 mm Hg, respectively). The top 25% of responders to high-dose propranolol (sensitive patients) were compared on each formulation. Mean trough reductions were -8.0/-6.7 mm Hg and -7.6/-5.8 mm Hg, respectively. Mean blood pressure reductions in the beta-blocker sensitive patients (n = 11) between 6 a.m. and noon were -15.2/-11.9 mm Hg on INP and -8.0/-4.6 mm Hg on ILA. Heart rate reduction was -14.1 bpm and double product reduction was -3319 in the INP patients between 6 a.m. and 12 noon compared with -10.5 and -2209 in the ILA patients. This study suggests that INP and ILA are effective once-a-day beta blockers, but the use of delayed-release propanolol results in a greater reduction in double product between 6 a.m. and noon in beta-blocker sensitive patients than does traditionally dosed propranolol.

Adolescent↗

Efficacy of combination therapy for systolic blood pressure in patients with severe systolic hypertension: the Systolic Evaluation of Lotrel Efficacy and Comparative Therapies (SELECT) study.

Systolic hypertension is predominant among patients over 50 years of age, is a more important cardiovascular risk factor than diastolic blood pressure, and is more difficult to control than diastolic blood pressure. Consequently, the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) recommends combination therapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage 2 hypertension. In the Systolic Evaluation of Lotrel Efficacy and Comparative Therapies (SELECT) study, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was used to identify patients with systolic hypertension and to determine the impact of 8 weeks of treatment with either amlodipine besylate/benazepril HCl 5/20 mg combination therapy (n=149), amlodipine besylate 5 mg (n=146), or benazepril HCl 20 mg (n=148). Combination therapy was significantly more effective in reducing systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure than either monotherapy (p<0.0001). Significantly greater percentages of patients in the combination group compared with either monotherapy achieved blood pressure control (p<0.0001). Adverse events were low in all three treatment arms, with less peripheral edema in the combination group than in the amlodipine-treated group. The combination of amlodipine besylate/benazepril HCl given to patients with stage 2 systolic hypertension resulted in significantly greater reductions in blood pressure and pulse pressure than those seen with monotherapy and was at least as well tolerated as the separate components. This data supports the recommendation of the JNC 7 for the use of combination therapy in patients with stage 2 hypertension.

Aged↗

Telmisartan/Hydrochlorothiazide in comparison with losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in managing patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Hypertension is risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and stroke. A critical surge in blood pressure occurs during the early morning hours coincident with increased incidences of myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stroke and sudden cardiac death. This suggests that, in patients with hypertension, it may be important to maintain the efficacy of antihypertensive medication over the 24-h dosing interval, especially in the risky early morning hours. In order to evaluate the antihypertensive efficacies of fixed-dose combinations of angiotensin II receptor blockers with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg, a multicenter, randomized, prospective, open-label, blinded-endpoint study was performed in 805 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension randomized to once-daily treatment with telmisartan 40 mg plus HCTZ (T40/H12.5), losartan 50 mg plus HCTZ (L50/H12.5), or telmisartan 80 mg plus HCTZ (T80/H12.5), with the primary objective of comparing T40/H12.5 with L50/H12.5 and evaluating the additional response of T80/H12.5. Efficacy was assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), clinic seated cuff sphygmomanometry and calculated responder rates after 6 weeks' active treatment. The primary endpoint was reduction from baseline in the last 6-h mean (relative to dosing) diastolic blood pressure (DBP) measured using 24-h ABPM. Compared with the L50/H12.5 group, the mean reductions in the last 6-h mean DBP for the T40/H12.5 and T80/H12.5 groups were significantly greater: -2.0 mmHg (p=0.0031) and -2.8 mmHg (p=0.0003), respectively. We conclude that T40/H12.5 provided clinically and statistically significantly superior blood pressure reductions compared with L50/H12.5 during the last 6 h of the 24-h dosing interval, which corresponds to the high-risk early-morning hours, and that T80/H12.5 provided additional blood pressure reductions.

Aged↗

Comparison of monotherapy with irbesartan 150 mg or amlodipine 5 mg for treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of the angiotensin II receptor blocker irbesartan 150 mg and the calcium channel blocker amlodipine 5 mg in the treatment of patients with seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95-110 mmHg. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, comparative pilot study. METHODS: Subjects were 18-65 years of age, with DBP 95-110 mmHg, and of non-African American origin. Following a three week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period, 181 subjects were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-daily irbesartan 150 mg (n=89) or amlodipine 5 mg (n=92) for four weeks. Trough (24+/-3 hours post-dosing) BP measurements were obtained at baseline and at Weeks 2 and 4 under standardised, controlled conditions. Response was defined as DBP <90 mmHg or a reduction from baseline of 10 mmHg. RESULTS: After four weeks of treatment, the mean (+/-SE) decrease from baseline in DBP was 9.4+/-0.6 mmHg in the irbesartan group vs. 9.6+/-0.6 mmHg in the amlodipine group (p=0.806). The mean decrease from baseline in seated systolic BP was 12.2+/-1.0 mmHg in the irbesartan group vs. 12.0+/-1.0 mmHg in the amlodipine group (p=0.885). Overall, 62% of subjects in the irbesartan group and 63% in the amlodipine group had a response (p=0.609), and 54% and 56% of patients (p=0.596), respectively, had their DBP normalised (<90 mmHg). Adverse events were reported by 21.3% of patients receiving irbesartan and 20.7% receiving amlodipine. Conclusions. Irbesartan 150 mg demonstrated comparable efficacy to amlodipine 5 mg, thereby confirming its value as an antihypertensive treatment option in non-African American patients with DBP 95-110 mmHg.

Adolescent↗