Fagan T C, Haggert B E, Liss C
Department of Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson.
Clin Ther. 1994 Jul-Aug;16(4):634-46.
The efficacy and tolerability of extended-release felodipine (felodipine-ER) and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (nifedipine GITS) were compared in a multicenter, prospective, open-label clinical trial of 277 patients with mild-to-moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension (sitting diastolic blood pressure [SiDBP] > or = 95 and < or = 115 mm Hg). After a 3-week washout period, patients were randomized to receive felodipine-ER (5 mg once daily) or nifedipine GITS (30 mg once daily); during a subsequent 6-week titration phase, the once-daily felodipine-ER dose could be increased to 10 mg and the nifedipine GITS dose to 60 or 90 mg in an attempt to achieve adequate blood pressure response (SiDBP < or = 90 mm Hg, or < 100 mm Hg with a > 10-mm Hg reduction from baseline, as measured 24 hours after dosing [trough]). At the end of titration, the mean daily doses of felodipine-ER and nifedipine GITS were 8 and 50 mg, respectively. Mean changes in sitting systolic blood pressure (SiSBP)/SiDBP were -14/-12 and -16/-13 mm Hg, respectively. All reductions were significant when compared with baseline (P < 0.01), but there were no significant differences between treatment groups. Adequate blood pressure response occurred in 77% of the felodipine-ER group and 80% of the nifedipine GITS group; this difference was not significant. Blood pressure changes were similar among sex and race subgroups. A higher percentage of older patients (> 55 years of age) than younger patients (< or = 55 years of age) reached goal SiDBP with both drugs. Patients with adequate SiDBP response continued receiving their assigned medication for an additional 6-week maintenance period. Reductions in SiDBP and SiSBP from baseline continued to be significant in both treatment groups. No clinically important changes in heart rate were noted. A total of 28 patients (15 in the felodipine-ER group and 13 in the nifedipine GITS group) withdrew from the study because of inadequate blood pressure response. At least one adverse experience occurred in 55% of the felodipine-ER group and 63% of the nifedipine GITS group, prompting withdrawal of 14 patients (10%) and 16 patients (11%), respectively. Headache and edema were the most common adverse experiences. The incidence and pattern of adverse experiences did not differ significantly between treatments. The results of this study demonstrate that once-daily felodipine-ER and nifedipine GITS are similarly highly effective and generally well tolerated in patients with essential hypertension.
在一项针对277例轻度至中度单纯性原发性高血压(坐位舒张压[SiDBP]≥95且≤115 mmHg)患者的多中心、前瞻性、开放标签临床试验中,比较了缓释非洛地平(非洛地平缓释片)和硝苯地平胃肠道治疗系统(硝苯地平控释片)的疗效和耐受性。经过3周的洗脱期后,患者被随机分配接受非洛地平缓释片(每日1次,5 mg)或硝苯地平控释片(每日1次,30 mg);在随后的6周滴定阶段,非洛地平缓释片的每日剂量可增至10 mg,硝苯地平控释片的剂量可增至60或90 mg,以试图实现充分的血压反应(SiDBP≤90 mmHg,或较基线降低≥10 mmHg且<100 mmHg,于给药后24小时[谷值]测量)。滴定结束时,非洛地平缓释片和硝苯地平控释片的平均每日剂量分别为8 mg和50 mg。坐位收缩压(SiSBP)/SiDBP的平均变化分别为-14/-12 mmHg和-16/-13 mmHg。与基线相比,所有降低均具有显著性(P<0.01),但治疗组之间无显著差异。非洛地平缓释片组77%的患者和硝苯地平控释片组80%的患者出现了充分的血压反应;这一差异不显著。血压变化在性别和种族亚组中相似。与年轻患者(≤55岁)相比,老年患者(>55岁)使用两种药物均达到目标SiDBP的比例更高。SiDBP反应充分的患者继续接受其分配的药物治疗,为期6周的维持期。两个治疗组中,SiDBP和SiSBP较基线的降低仍具有显著性。未观察到心率有临床意义的变化。共有28例患者(非洛地平缓释片组15例,硝苯地平控释片组13例)因血压反应不足退出研究。非洛地平缓释片组55%的患者和硝苯地平控释片组63%的患者至少发生了一次不良事件,分别导致14例(10%)和16例(11%)患者退出。头痛和水肿是最常见的不良事件。治疗之间不良事件的发生率和模式无显著差异。本研究结果表明,对于原发性高血压患者,每日1次的非洛地平缓释片和硝苯地平控释片同样高效,且一般耐受性良好。