• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪40/12.5毫克和80/12.5毫克固定剂量组合与氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪50/12.5毫克固定剂量组合治疗轻度至中度原发性高血压的比较:两项多中心、前瞻性、随机、开放标签、盲终点(PROBE)试验的汇总分析

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.

作者信息

Lacourcière Yves, Neutel Joel M, Schumacher Helmut

机构信息

Unité d'hypertension, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval, Université Laval, 2705 Boulevard Laurier (S-120), Sainte-Foy, Québec G1V 4G2, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2005 Nov;27(11):1795-805. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.11.014.

DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.11.014
PMID:16368450
Abstract

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.

摘要

背景

心血管事件的高发生率与清晨觉醒时血压(BP)的急剧上升同时出现。因此,根据需要使用口服固定剂量复方制剂(FDC)在一天中的这个时段控制血压,对于降低高血压患者的心血管风险很重要。

目的

本分析的目的是比较替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪(HCTZ)口服FDC(40/12.5 mg [T40/H12.5]和80/12.5 mg [T80/H12.5])与低剂量氯沙坦50 mg/氢氯噻嗪12.5 mg(L50/H12.5)在清晨时段的降压疗效和耐受性。

方法

汇总并分析了2项设计相似的前瞻性、随机、开放标签、盲终点(PROBE)研究的数据。这些研究在美国的72个中心以及加拿大、欧洲(9个国家)和菲律宾的70个中心进行。纳入轻度至中度原发性高血压的成年男性和女性患者(24小时平均动态舒张压[DBP]≥85 mmHg;坐位袖带DBP为90 - 109 mmHg)。患者被随机分配接受T40/H12.5、L50/H12.5或T80/H12.5,每日一次(早晨),持续6周。使用24小时动态血压监测(ABPM)和在谷值时进行的袖带血压测量评估降压疗效,在基线和积极治疗结束时进行。主要终点是给药间隔最后6小时平均动态DBP相对于基线的降低值。次要终点包括其他ABPM和诊所测量的DBP和收缩压(SBP)变化,以及控制率和反应率(SBP反应定义为24小时平均SBP <130 mmHg和/或相对于基线降低≥10 mmHg;DBP反应定义为24小时平均DBP <85 mmHg或相对于基线降低≥10 mmHg;DBP控制定义为24小时平均DBP <85 mmHg)。使用患者访谈、自发报告和临床评估评估耐受性。

结果

共纳入1402例患者(876例男性,525例女性;平均[标准差]年龄,53.1 [9.9]岁)(T40/H12.5组,n = 517;L50/H12.5组,n = 518;T80/H12.5组,n = 367)。与L50/H12.5相比,T40/H12.5在给药间隔最后6小时平均动态DBP的平均降低值大1.8 mmHg(-11.3 [0.4] vs -9.4 [0.4] mmHg;P < 0.001),与L50/H12.5相比,T80/H12.5的平均降低值大2.6 mmHg(-12.0 [0.4] vs -9.4 [0.4] mmHg;P < 0.001)。次要终点分析发现,与L50/H12.5相比,T40/H12.5和T80/H12.5使血压降低幅度更大。3组间ABPM SBP控制率和反应率相似,但与L50/H12.5相比,T80/H12.5的ABPM DBP控制率和反应率显著更高(分别为46.6%对34.0% [P < 0.002]和69.4%对55.0% [P < 0.001])。与L50/H12.5相比,T40/H12.5和T80/H12.5的诊所SBP和DBP控制率及反应率更高(SBP反应率,80.4%和80.8%对68.5% [两者,P < 0.001];DBP反应率,66.1%和67.4%对54.4% [两者,P < 0.001];DBP控制率,56.5%和56.4%对44.1% [两者,P < 0.001])。2种最常记录的不良事件(AE)是头痛(T40/H12.5组为2.9%;L50/H12.5组为3.3%;T80/H12.5组为3.0%)和头晕(分别为1.2%、2.1%和3.0%)。大多数AE为轻度至中度。

结论

对2项针对轻度至中度原发性高血压成年患者的PROBE研究进行的汇总分析结果表明,与低剂量L50/H12.5相比,T40/H12.5和T80/H12.5在包括给药间隔最后6小时期间能更好地控制DBP和SBP。所有3种治疗的耐受性均良好。

相似文献

1
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.替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪40/12.5毫克和80/12.5毫克固定剂量组合与氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪50/12.5毫克固定剂量组合治疗轻度至中度原发性高血压的比较:两项多中心、前瞻性、随机、开放标签、盲终点(PROBE)试验的汇总分析
Clin Ther. 2005 Nov;27(11):1795-805. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.11.014.
2
Telmisartan/Hydrochlorothiazide in comparison with losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in managing patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪与氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪治疗轻至中度高血压患者的比较。
Hypertens Res. 2005 Jul;28(7):555-63. doi: 10.1291/hypres.28.555.
3
Efficacy and tolerability of initial therapy with single-pill combination telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide 80/25 mg in patients with grade 2 or 3 hypertension: a multinational, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial.初治 2 或 3 级高血压患者应用替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪复方单片制剂 80/25mg 的疗效和耐受性:一项多中心、随机、双盲、阳性药物对照试验。
Clin Ther. 2012 Jul;34(7):1613-24. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.05.007. Epub 2012 Jun 19.
4
Telmisartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg for the management of patients with hypertension.替米沙坦与12.5毫克氢氯噻嗪联合用于高血压患者的治疗。
Curr Med Res Opin. 2014 Sep;30(9):1715-24. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2014.924912. Epub 2014 Jun 13.
5
Long-term, open-label evaluation of the safety and efficacy of telmisartan 80 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg fixed-dose combination alone or with other antihypertensive medication.对单独使用或与其他抗高血压药物联用的80毫克替米沙坦/25毫克氢氯噻嗪固定剂量复方制剂的安全性和疗效进行长期开放标签评估。
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2009 Feb;10(3):345-52. doi: 10.1517/14656560802707937.
6
Telmisartan 80 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg provides clinically relevant blood pressure reductions across baseline blood pressures.替米沙坦 80 毫克/氢氯噻嗪 25 毫克在整个基础血压范围内提供具有临床相关性的血压降低。
Adv Ther. 2012 Apr;29(4):327-38. doi: 10.1007/s12325-012-0013-0. Epub 2012 Apr 3.
7
The efficacy and long-term safety of a triple combination of 80 mg telmisartan, 5 mg amlodipine and 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide in Japanese patients with essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind study with open-label extension.80毫克替米沙坦、5毫克氨氯地平和12.5毫克氢氯噻嗪三联组合用于日本原发性高血压患者的疗效和长期安全性:一项随机、双盲并开放标签延长期的研究
Hypertens Res. 2017 Jan;40(1):51-60. doi: 10.1038/hr.2016.100. Epub 2016 Sep 1.
8
Telmisartan plus hydrochlorothiazide versus telmisartan or hydrochlorothiazide monotherapy in patients with mild to moderate hypertension: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial.替米沙坦联合氢氯噻嗪与替米沙坦或氢氯噻嗪单药治疗轻至中度高血压患者:一项多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、平行组试验。
Clin Ther. 2001 Jun;23(6):833-50. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(01)80072-2.
9
Telmisartan vs losartan plus hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension--a randomised ABPM study.替米沙坦与氯沙坦加氢氯噻嗪治疗轻至中度原发性高血压——一项随机动态血压监测研究
J Hum Hypertens. 2003 Aug;17(8):569-75. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001592.
10
A multicenter, 14-week study of telmisartan and ramipril in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.一项使用动态血压监测对轻度至中度高血压患者进行的替米沙坦和雷米普利的多中心、为期14周的研究。
Am J Hypertens. 2006 Jan;19(1):104-12. doi: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.10.001.

引用本文的文献

1
Interaction and Compatibility Studies in the Development of Olmesartan Medoxomil and Hydrochlorothiazide Formulations under a Real Manufacturing Process.在实际生产过程中奥美沙坦酯与氢氯噻嗪制剂开发中的相互作用及相容性研究
Pharmaceutics. 2022 Feb 16;14(2):424. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14020424.
2
Effect of Switching to Azilsartan From Fixed-Dose Combination of an Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker and Calcium Channel Blocker or a Thiazide in Patients With Hypertension.从血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂与钙通道阻滞剂或噻嗪类药物的固定剂量联合用药转换为阿齐沙坦对高血压患者的影响。
J Clin Med Res. 2019 Mar;11(3):202-207. doi: 10.14740/jocmr3723. Epub 2019 Feb 13.
3
A review of the benefits of early treatment initiation with single-pill combinations of telmisartan with amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide.
对替米沙坦与氨氯地平或氢氯噻嗪单片复方制剂早期起始治疗的益处的综述。
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2013;9:521-8. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S48291. Epub 2013 Sep 16.
4
What is a preferred angiotensin II receptor blocker-based combination therapy for blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with diabetic and non-diabetic renal impairment?对于合并糖尿病和非糖尿病肾损害的高血压患者,哪种血管紧张素 II 受体阻滞剂为基础的联合治疗方案更有利于血压控制?
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2012 Apr 10;11:32. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-11-32.
5
24-Hour ambulatory blood pressure control with triple-therapy amlodipine, valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide in patients with moderate to severe hypertension.在中重度高血压患者中,采用氨氯地平、缬沙坦和氢氯噻嗪三联疗法进行 24 小时动态血压控制。
J Hum Hypertens. 2011 Oct;25(10):615-22. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2010.115. Epub 2011 Jan 20.
6
New standards in hypertension and cardiovascular risk management: focus on telmisartan.高血压与心血管风险管理的新标准:聚焦替米沙坦
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2010 Mar 24;6:113-33. doi: 10.2147/vhrm.s7857.
7
Losartan/Hydrochlorothiazide: a review of its use in the treatment of hypertension and for stroke risk reduction in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy.氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪:关于其用于治疗高血压及降低高血压合并左心室肥厚患者中风风险的综述
Drugs. 2009 Jun 18;69(9):1239-65. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200969090-00008.
8
Using fixed-dose combination therapies to achieve blood pressure goals.使用固定剂量联合疗法来实现血压目标。
Clin Drug Investig. 2008;28(11):713-34. doi: 10.2165/00044011-200828110-00005.
9
Results of increasing doses of hydrochlorothiazide in combination with an angiotensin receptor blocker in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.氢氯噻嗪递增剂量联合血管紧张素受体阻滞剂用于血压控制不佳患者的疗效
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008 Aug;10(8):612-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2008.08187.x.
10
Telmisartan/Hydrochlorothiazide: a review of its use as fixed-dose combinations in essential hypertension.替米沙坦/氢氯噻嗪:其在原发性高血压中作为固定剂量复方制剂应用的综述
Drugs. 2008;68(13):1877-99. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200868130-00010.