Philipp Thomas, Smith Timothy R, Glazer Robert, Wernsing Margaret, Yen Joseph, Jin James, Schneider Helmut, Pospiech Rainer
Department o f Nephrology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Clin Ther. 2007 Apr;29(4):563-80. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.03.018.
Patients with hypertension may require combination therapy to attain the blood pressure targets recommended by US and European treatment guidelines. Combination therapy with a calcium channel blocker and an angiotensin II-receptor blocker would be expected to provide enhanced efficacy.
Two studies were conducted to compare the efficacy of various combinations of amlodipine and valsartan administered once daily with their individual components and placebo in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (mean sitting diastolic blood pressure [MSDBP] >/=95 and < 110 mm Hg). A secondary objective was to evaluate safety and tolerability.
The 2 studies were multinational, multicenter, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials. In study 1, patients were randomized to receive amlodipine 2.5 or 5 mg once daily, valsartan 40 to 320 mg once daily, the combination of amlodipine 2.5 or 5 mg with valsartan 40 to 320 mg once daily, or placebo. In study 2, patients were randomized to receive amlodipine 10 mg once daily, valsartan 160 or 320 mg once daily, the combination of amlodipine 10 mg with valsartan 160 or 320 mg once daily, or placebo. The primary efficacy variable in both studies was change from baseline in MSDBP at the end of the study. Secondary variables included the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP), response rate (the proportion of patients achieving an MSDBP <90 mm Hg or a >/= 10-mm Hg decrease from baseline), and control rate (the proportion of patients achieving an MSDBP <90 mm Hg). Safety was assessed in terms of adverse events (spontaneously reported or elicited by questioning), vital signs, and laboratory values.
A total of 1911 patients were randomized to treatment in study 1 (1022 amlodipine + valsartan; 507 valsartan; 254 amlodipine; 128 placebo); 1250 were randomized to treatment in study 2 (419, 415, 207, and 209, respectively). In all treatment groups in both studies, the majority of patients were white (79.5% study 1, 79.4% study 2) and male (53.5% and 50.3%, respectively). The overall mean age was 54.4 years in study 1 and 56.9 years in study 2. The mean weight of patients in study 1 was higher than that in study 2 (88.8 vs 79.7 kg). The overall baseline mean sitting BP was 152.8/99.3 mm Hg in study 1 and 156.7/99.1 mm Hg in study 2. With the exception of a few combinations that included amlodipine 2.5 mg, the combination regimens in both studies were associated with significantly greater reductions in MSDBP and MSSBP compared with their individual components and placebo (P < 0.05). A positive dose response was observed for all combinations. The highest response rate in study 1 was associated with the highest dose of combination therapy (amlodipine 5 mg + valsartan 320 mg: 91.3%). Amlodipine 5 mg, valsartan 320 mg, and placebo were associated with response rates of 71.9%, 73.4%, and 40.9%, respectively. In study 2, the 2 doses of combination therapy were associated with similar response rates (amlodipine 10 mg + valsartan 160 mg: 88.5%; amlodipine 10 mg + valsartan 320 mg: 87.5%). Amlodipine 10 mg was associated with a response rate of 86.9%; valsartan 160 and 20 mg were associated with response rates of 74.9% and 72.0%, respectively; and placebo was associated with a response rate of 49.3%. Control rates followed a similar pattern. The incidence of peripheral edema with combination therapy was significantly lower compared with amlodipine monotherapy (5.4% vs 8.7%, respectively; P = 0.014), was significantly higher compared with valsartan monotherapy (2.1%; P < 0.001), and did not differ significantly from placebo (3.0%).
In these adult patients with mild to moderate hypertension, the combination of amlodipine + valsartan was associated with significantly greater blood pressure reductions from baseline compared with amlodipine or valsartan monotherapy or placebo. The incidence of peripheral edema was significantly lower with combination therapy than with amlodipine monotherapy.
高血压患者可能需要联合治疗以达到美国和欧洲治疗指南推荐的血压目标。钙通道阻滞剂与血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂联合治疗有望提高疗效。
进行了两项研究,比较每日一次服用氨氯地平和缬沙坦的各种组合与它们的单一成分及安慰剂相比,在轻度至中度原发性高血压患者(平均坐位舒张压[MSDBP]≥95且<110 mmHg)中的疗效。次要目的是评估安全性和耐受性。
这两项研究均为跨国、多中心、为期8周的随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、平行组试验。在研究1中,患者被随机分配接受每日一次2.5或5 mg氨氯地平、每日一次40至320 mg缬沙坦、每日一次2.5或5 mg氨氯地平与40至320 mg缬沙坦的组合,或安慰剂。在研究2中,患者被随机分配接受每日一次10 mg氨氯地平、每日一次160或320 mg缬沙坦、每日一次10 mg氨氯地平与160或320 mg缬沙坦的组合,或安慰剂。两项研究的主要疗效变量均为研究结束时MSDBP相对于基线的变化。次要变量包括平均坐位收缩压(MSSBP)的变化、有效率(达到MSDBP<90 mmHg或相对于基线降低≥10 mmHg的患者比例)和控制率(达到MSDBP<90 mmHg的患者比例)。通过不良事件(自发报告或询问引出)、生命体征和实验室值评估安全性。
共有1911例患者在研究1中被随机分配接受治疗(1022例氨氯地平 + 缬沙坦;507例缬沙坦;254例氨氯地平;128例安慰剂);1250例在研究2中被随机分配接受治疗(分别为419、415、207和209例)。在两项研究的所有治疗组中,大多数患者为白人(研究1中为79.5%,研究2中为79.4%)且为男性(分别为53.5%和50.3%)。研究1中患者的总体平均年龄为54.4岁,研究2中为56.9岁。研究1中患者的平均体重高于研究2(88.8 vs 79.7 kg)。研究1中总体基线平均坐位血压为152.8/99.3 mmHg,研究2中为156.7/99.1 mmHg。除了少数包含2.5 mg氨氯地平的组合外,两项研究中的联合治疗方案与单一成分及安慰剂相比,MSDBP和MSSBP的降低幅度均显著更大(P<0.05)。所有组合均观察到正性剂量反应。研究1中最高有效率与最高剂量的联合治疗相关(氨氯地平5 mg + 缬沙坦320 mg:91.3%)。氨氯地平5 mg、缬沙坦320 mg和安慰剂的有效率分别为71.9%、73.4%和40.9%。在研究2中,两种剂量的联合治疗有效率相似(氨氯地平10 mg + 缬沙坦160 mg:88.5%;氨氯地平10 mg + 缬沙坦320 mg:87.5%)。氨氯地平mg的有效率为86.9%;缬沙坦160和320 mg的有效率分别为74.9%和72.0%;安慰剂的有效率为49.3%。控制率遵循类似模式。联合治疗外周水肿的发生率显著低于氨氯地平单药治疗(分别为5.4% vs 8.7%;P = 0.014),显著高于缬沙坦单药治疗(2.1%;P<0.001),与安慰剂无显著差异(3.0%)。
在这些轻度至中度高血压成年患者中,与氨氯地平或缬沙坦单药治疗或安慰剂相比,氨氯地平 + 缬沙坦联合治疗使血压从基线的降低幅度显著更大。联合治疗外周水肿的发生率显著低于氨氯地平单药治疗。