Blood pressure reduction and antihypertensive medication use in the losartan intervention for endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy
ABSTRACT To compare blood pressure response and antihypertensive medication use visit-by-visit from baseline in patients receiving losartan-based or atenolol-based therapy in the LIFE study.
LIFE was a randomized, double-blind trial comparing losartan-based and atenolol-based treatment regimens on the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in 9193 patients aged 55-80 years with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. Systolic and diastolic, pulse, and mean arterial pressures, blood pressure responder rates, distribution of open-label antihypertensive agents utilized, and the proportion of patients on randomized treatment were determined for each group at each clinic visit over a follow-up period of at least 4 years.
Overall blood pressure reductions were comparable in the losartan-based and atenolol-based treatment groups. The mean reductions in sitting trough systolic and diastolic blood pressures from baseline to the end of follow-up (or last visit before a primary endpoint event) were 30.2/16.6 mmHg in the losartan group and 29.1/16.8 mmHg in the atenolol group. The time-averaged difference in overall mean arterial pressure was similar between groups. The proportion of patients on individual dose combinations varied visit by visit but was generally comparable between groups. During the entire study, 56% (2579/4605) of losartan-treated patients received at least one dose of the combination of losartan 100 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg and 51% of atenolol-treated patients received 100 mg of atenolol plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg at some time during the study.
Differences in blood pressure or distribution of add-on medications between treatment groups were not evident in the LIFE trial and, thus, cannot account for the observed outcome difference in the primary endpoint of risk reduction of the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke and MI favoring losartan.
- SourceAvailable from: Michael Melino
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "It has been estimated that at least 75% of patients with hypertension require combination therapy to maintain BP control , and large clinical trials have reported that 23-54% of participants require 3 or more antihypertensive agents [21-24]. Thus, there is a growing emphasis on the need for practical strategies to consistently achieve and maintain BP goals with the use of multiple antihypertensive agents in clinical practice . "
ABSTRACT: Patients with hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, or chronic kidney disease (CKD) usually require two or more antihypertensive agents to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals. The efficacy/safety of olmesartan (OM) 40 mg, amlodipine besylate (AML) 10 mg, and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg versus the component dual-combinations (OM 40/AML 10 mg, OM 40/HCTZ 25 mg, and AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg) was evaluated in participants with diabetes, CKD, or chronic CVD in the Triple Therapy with Olmesartan Medoxomil, Amlodipine, and Hydrochlorothiazide in Hypertensive Patients Study (TRINITY). The primary efficacy end point was least squares (LS) mean reduction from baseline in seated diastolic BP (SeDBP) at week 12. Secondary end points included LS mean reduction in SeSBP and proportion of participants achieving BP goal (<130/80 mm Hg) at week 12 (double-blind randomized period), and LS mean reduction in SeBP and BP goal achievement at week 52/early termination (open-label period). At week 12, OM 40/AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg resulted in significantly greater SeBP reductions in participants with diabetes (−37.9/22.0 mm Hg vs −28.0/17.6 mm Hg for OM 40/AML 10 mg, −26.4/14.7 mm Hg for OM 40/HCTZ 25 mg, and −27.6/14.8 mm Hg for AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg), CKD (−44.3/25.5 mm Hg vs −39.5/23.8 mm Hg for OM 40/AML 10 mg, −25.3/17.0 mm Hg for OM 40/HCTZ 25 mg, and −33.4/20.6 mm Hg for AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg), and chronic CVD (−37.8/20.6 mm Hg vs −31.7/18.2 mm Hg for OM 40/AML 10 mg, −30.9/17.1 mm Hg for OM 40/HCTZ 25 mg, and −27.5/16.1 mm Hg for AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg) (P<0.05 for all subgroups vs dual-component treatments). BP goal achievement was greater for participants receiving triple-combination treatment compared with the dual-combination treatments, and was achieved in 41.1%, 55.0%, and 38.9% of participants with diabetes, CKD, and chronic CVD on OM 40/AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg, respectively. At week 52, there was sustained BP lowering with the OM/AML/HCTZ regimen. Overall, the triple combination was well tolerated. In patients with diabetes, CKD, or chronic CVD, short-term (12 weeks) and long-term treatment with OM 40/AML 10/HCTZ 25 mg was well tolerated, lowered BP more effectively, and enabled more participants to reach BP goal than the corresponding 2-component regimens. Trial Identification NumberCardiovascular Diabetology 10/2012; 11(1):134. DOI:10.1186/1475-2840-11-134 · 3.71 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Despite the availability of numerous dual drug combinations, BP largely remains uncontrolled, more so in the elderly, black, diabetic, obese, and severely hypertensive patients.9–11 Clinical trials including ALLHAT, ACCOMPLISH, INVEST, and LIFE have reported that 23%–52% patients require three or more antihypertensive agents for BP control and target-level maintenance (<140/90 or <130/80 mmHg depending on cardiovascular risk).5,12–16 Thus, a triple drug combination therapy would be a desirable treatment option for hypertension. "
ABSTRACT: This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of triple therapy with amlodipine/valsartan+hydrochlorothiazide (Aml/Val+HCTZ) vs dual therapy with Aml+HCTZ in stage 2 hypertensive patients. The analysis included patients from an eight-week, multicenter, double-blind study, randomized to Aml/Val 10/160 mg or Aml 10 mg groups, who received add-on HCTZ 12.5 mg at week 4 if mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) was >130 mmHg. Of the patients receiving Aml/Val+HCTZ and Aml+HCTZ, 98% (N = 133/136) and 96% (N = 200/208) completed the study, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar across groups (Caucasians, 80.2%; diabetics, 14.8%; age, 58.6 years [28.2% ≥ 65 years]; body mass index, 31 kg/m(2); mean sitting blood pressure (msBP), 171.5/95.5 mmHg [18% msSBP ≥ 180 mmHg]). Aml/Val+HCTZ provided significantly greater msBP reductions from baseline to week 8 than Aml+HCTZ (30.5/13.8 vs 24.3/8.3 mmHg, P < 0.0001). The incremental msBP reduction (week 4 to 8) with HCTZ added to Aml/Val was greater than when added to Aml (6.9/3.5 vs 3.1/1.0 mmHg, P < 0.01). Treatments were well tolerated with similar overall incidence of adverse events (Aml/Val+HCTZ: 33.8%, Aml+HCTZ: 33.2%). Aml/Val+HCTZ provided significantly greater BP reductions than Aml+HCTZ in patients with stage 2 hypertension. Aml/Val+HCTZ triple therapy may be a suitable option for patients requiring more than two agents to reach target BP.Vascular Health and Risk Management 09/2010; 6:821-7.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objective Losartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), has been reported to promote sodium excretion and show an enhanced antihypertensive effect when used in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). We investigated the effects of losartan monotherapy and combination therapy together with HCTZ on cardiac function in hypertensive rats using echocardiography. Methods Spontaneously hypertensive rats (n = 21) fed on high-salt diet (8 % NaCl) for 13 weeks were randomly assigned to rats without medication (HS, n = 7), those medicated with ARB (ARB, losartan 30 mg/kg/day, n = 8), and those with ARB and HCTZ (ARB + HCTZ, losartan 30 mg/kg/day + HCTZ 10 mg/kg/day, n = 6). Blood pressure measurements and echocardiography were performed at 13, 17, and 29 weeks of age. After the end of the protocol, the proportion of cardiac muscle fibrosis was measured histologically. Results In the HS group, blood pressure and left ventricular mass/body weight (LV mass/BW) increased, and % fractional shortening (%FS) and early diastolic mitral annular velocity (e′) decreased significantly with age. In the ARB group, although blood pressure and %FS were maintained, LV mass/BW increased with age as in the HS group, and e′ decreased. In the ARB + HCTZ group, blood pressure decreased and LV mass/BW, %FS, and e′ were maintained. The progression of myocardial fibrosis was clearly prevented in rats treated with ARB. Conclusion ARB was shown to inhibit systolic disorder and myocardial fibrosis in hypertensive rats. Combination therapy proved to be more effective than monotherapy and is also effective in inhibiting diastolic disorders.Journal of Echocardiography 12/2012; 10(4). DOI:10.1007/s12574-012-0141-1