Miranda Roberto Dischinger, Mion Décio, Rocha Joăo Carlos, Kohlmann Oswaldo, Gomes Marco Antonio Mota, Saraiva José Francisco Kerr, Amodeo Celso, Filho Bráulio Luna
Federal University of Săo Paulo, Săo Paulo, Brazil.
Clin Ther. 2008 Sep;30(9):1618-28. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.09.008.
A combination of antihypertensive agents of different drug classes in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) may offer advantages in terms of efficacy, tolerability, and treatment compliance. Combination of a calcium channel blocker with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor may act synergistically to reduce blood pressure (BP).
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of an amlodipine/ramipril FDC with those of amlodipine monotherapy.
This 18-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 8 centers across Brazil. Patients with stage 1 or 2 essential hypertension were enrolled. After a 2-week placebo run-in phase, patients received amlodipine/ramipril 2.5/2.5 mg or amlodipine 2.5 mg, after which the doses were titrated, based on BP, to 5/5 then 10/10 mg (amlodipine/ramipril) and 5 then 10 mg (amlodipine). The primary end point was BP measured in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Hematology and serum biochemistry were assessed at baseline and study end. Tolerability was assessed using patient interview, laboratory analysis, and physical examination, including measurement of ankle circumference to assess peripheral edema.
A total of 222 patients completed the study (age range, 40-79 years; FDC group, 117 patients [mean dose, 7.60/7.60 mg]; monotherapy, 105 patients [mean dose, 7.97 mg]). The mean (SD) changes in systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), as measured using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and in the physician's office, were significantly greater with combination therapy than monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP (ABPM, -20.76 [1.25] vs -15.80 [1.18] mm Hg and -11.71 [0.78] vs -8.61 [0.74] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.004]; office, -27.51 [1.40] vs -22.84 [1.33] mm Hg [P = 0.012] and -16.41 [0.79] vs -14.64 [0.75] mm Hg [P = NS], respectively). In the ITT analysis, the mean changes in ambulatory, but not office-based, BP were statistically significant (ABPM: SBP, -20.21 [1.14] vs -15.31 [1.12] mm Hg and DBP, -11.61 [0.72] vs -8.42 [0.70] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.002]; office: SBP, -26.60 [1.34] vs -22.97 [1.30] mm Hg and DBP, -16.48 [0.78] vs -14.48 [0.75] mm Hg [both, P = NS]). Twenty-nine patients (22.1%) treated with combination therapy and 41 patients (30.6%) treated with monotherapy experienced > or =1 adverse event considered possibly related to study drug. The combination-therapy group had lower prevalence of edema (7.6% vs 18.7%; P = 0.011) and a similar prevalence of dry cough (3.8% vs 0.8%; P = NS). No clinically significant changes in laboratory values were found in either group.
In this population of patients with essential hypertension, the amlodipine/ramipril FDC was associated with significantly reduced ambulatory and office-measured BP compared with amlodipine monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP. Both treatments were well tolerated.
不同药物类别的抗高血压药物固定剂量复方制剂(FDC)在疗效、耐受性和治疗依从性方面可能具有优势。钙通道阻滞剂与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂联合使用可能具有协同作用以降低血压(BP)。
本研究旨在比较氨氯地平/雷米普利FDC与氨氯地平单药治疗的疗效和耐受性。
这项为期18周的前瞻性、随机、双盲研究在巴西的8个中心进行。纳入1或2期原发性高血压患者。经过2周的安慰剂导入期后,患者接受氨氯地平/雷米普利2.5/2.5mg或氨氯地平2.5mg治疗,之后根据血压将剂量滴定至5/5mg然后10/10mg(氨氯地平/雷米普利)以及5mg然后10mg(氨氯地平)。主要终点是在意向性治疗(ITT)人群中测量的血压。在基线和研究结束时评估血液学和血清生物化学指标。使用患者访谈、实验室分析和体格检查评估耐受性,包括测量脚踝周长以评估外周水肿。
共有222例患者完成研究(年龄范围40 - 79岁;FDC组117例患者[平均剂量7.60/7.60mg];单药治疗组105例患者[平均剂量7.97mg])。使用24小时动态血压监测(ABPM)和在医生办公室测量的收缩压(SBP)和舒张压(DBP)的平均(标准差)变化,联合治疗组均显著大于单药治疗组,但办公室测量的DBP除外(ABPM:分别为-20.76[1.25] vs -15.80[1.18]mmHg和-11.71[0.78] vs -8.61[0.74]mmHg[两者,P = 0.004];办公室:分别为-27.51[1.40] vs -22.84[1.33]mmHg[P = 0.012]和-16.41[0.79] vs -14.64[0.75]mmHg[P = 无统计学意义])。在ITT分析中,动态血压(而非基于办公室测量的血压)的平均变化具有统计学意义(ABPM:SBP分别为-20.21[1.14] vs -15.31[1.12]mmHg和DBP分别为-11.61[0.72] vs -8.42[0.70]mmHg[两者,P = 0.002];办公室:SBP分别为-26.60[1.34] vs -22.97[1.30]mmHg和DBP分别为-16.48[0.78] vs -14.48[0.75]mmHg[两者,P = 无统计学意义])。联合治疗组29例患者(22.1%)和单药治疗组41例患者(30.6%)发生≥1次被认为可能与研究药物相关的不良事件。联合治疗组水肿发生率较低(7.6% vs 18.7%;P = 0.011),干咳发生率相似(3.8% vs 0.8%;P = 无统计学意义)。两组实验室值均未发现有临床意义的变化。
在这群原发性高血压患者中,与氨氯地平单药治疗相比,氨氯地平/雷米普利FDC可使动态血压和办公室测量的血压显著降低,但办公室测量的DBP除外。两种治疗耐受性均良好。