Blood pressure reduction with olmesartan in mild-to-moderate essential hypertension:a planned interim analysis of an open label sub-study in German patients

ABSTRACT

Objective: To present the baseline characteristics and open-label treatment phase results for German patients in OLMEBEST, a European, multinational, partially randomized, partially double-blind study in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension.

Research design and methods: After a 2‐week placebo run-in, patients received olmesartan 20?mg for 8 weeks. Controlled patients (mean sitting diastolic blood pressure [sDBP] < 90?mmHg) continued on olmesartan 20?mg/day for a further 4 weeks. Non-controlled patients (sDBP > 90?mmHg) were randomized to olmesartan 40?mg/day or olmesartan 20?mg/day plus 12.5?mg hydrochlorothiazide for 4 weeks. Of 823 patients included, 558 continued olmesartan 20?mg treatment and 228 patients were randomized to olmesartan 40?mg/day or combination therapy. Efficacy variables included the change from baseline in mean sitting DBP and systolic blood pressure [sSBP] at Week 8 (and Week 12 for controlled patients), and the proportion of controlled patients and responders (mean sDBP < 90?mmHg or improvement of > 10?mmHg from baseline at Week 8).

Results: After 8 weeks of olmesartan medoxomil 20?mg, mean reduction from baseline in sDBP was 11.8?mmHg and in sSBP was 17.1?mmHg. In controlled patients continuing open-label olmesartan medoxomil 20?mg, mean reduction from baseline at 12 weeks in sDBP was 14.9?mmHg and in sSBP was 20.1?mmHg. At Week 8, the response rate was 76% and the control rate was 70%. Olmesartan medoxomil 20?mg/day was well tolerated; 30.9% of patients experienced an adverse event, and the majority of these events were judged by the investigators to be mild.

Conclusion: Olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy at the recommended dosage of 20?mg once daily is effective and well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.     

奥美沙坦酯与缬沙坦治疗中度原发性高血压临床研究

目的比较奥美沙坦酯和缬沙坦治疗中度原发性高血压的疗效和安全性。方法入选482例中度原发性高血压患者,按照1∶1随机分组,分别接受奥美沙坦酯20～40 mg/d或缬沙坦80～160 mg/d治疗,共8周。观察并比较其降压效果。结果治疗4周后,奥美沙坦酯组SeDBP平均下降了(10.58±6.82)mmHg,缬沙坦组下降了(9.38±7.16)mmHg;两组比较,P=0.004。奥美沙坦组与缬沙坦组分别有60%、61.74%的患者剂量加倍,加量有效率分别为52.22%、51.85%;治疗8周后,两组SeDBP平均下降(15.72±6.03)mmHg及(14.12±6.79)mmHg;治疗4周后,两组的药物不良反应发生率分别为3.33%、7.5%(P>0.05)。结论口服奥美沙坦酯胶囊20～40 mg/d,1次/d,能保持24 h平稳降压,8周总有效率为79.65%;与缬沙坦80～160 mg/d的降压疗效相近。而两组药物不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义。     

Clinical and experimental aspects of olmesartan medoxomil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist

Olmesartan medoxomil is a new orally active angiotensin II (Ang II) type 1 receptor antagonist. It is a prodrug and is rapidly de-esterified during absorption to form olmesartan, the active metabolite. Olmesartan is a potent, competitive and selective Ang II type 1 receptor antagonist. Olmesartan is not metabolized by the cytochrome P-450 and has a dual route of elimination, by kidneys and liver. In patients with essential hypertension olmesartan medoxomil administered once daily at doses of 10-80 mg dose-dependently reduced diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Troughto-peak ratios for both DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were above 50%. At the recommended once-daily starting doses, olmesartan medoxomil (20 mg) was more effective than losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg) or irbesartan (150 mg) in reducing cuff DBP in patients with essential hypertension. The results of cuff SBP and mean 24-h DBP and SBP were similar to those of cuff DBP measurement. In mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients the recommended starting dose of olmesartan medoxomil was as effective as that of amlodipine besylate (5 mg/day) in reducing both cuff and 24-h blood pressure. In lowering DBP olmesartan medoxomil, at 10-20 mg/day, was as effective as atenolol at 50-100 mg/day. In mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients, olmesartan medoxomil, at 5-20 mg once daily, was more effective than captopril at 12.5-50 mg twice daily. At 20-40 mg once daily olmesartan medoxomil was as effective as felodipine, at 5-10 mg once daily. Olmesartan medoxomil has minimal adverse effects with no clinically important drug interactions. Animal studies have shown that olmesartan medoxomil provides a wide range of organ protection. Olmesartan medoxomil ameliorated atherosclerosis in hyperlipidemic animals and ameliorated cardiac remodeling and improved survival in rats with myocardial infarction. Olmesartan medoxomil has renoprotective effects in a remnant kidney model and type 2 diabetes models. Future investigation should reveal whether these beneficial effects of olmesartan medoxomil are applicable to human diseases.     

Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan Medoxomil and Hydrochlorothiazide Compared with Benazepril and Amlodipine Besylate

BACKGROUND: Most patients with stage 2 hypertension require two or more antihypertensive agents in order to achieve the BP goals recommended in current treatment guidelines. Accordingly, combinations of two drugs with different mechanisms of antihypertensive action are widely used. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized, double-blind, multicenter 12-week study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a combination of olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) with that of benazepril plus amlodipine besylate in patients with stage 2 hypertension. METHODS: Patients were eligible for randomization following a 3- to 4-week placebo run-in period if they had either (i) mean seated DBP>or=90 mm Hg but<115 mm Hg and mean seated SBP>or=160 mm Hg but <200 mm Hg, or (ii) mean seated DBP>or=100 mm Hg but<115 mm Hg. The difference in mean seated SBP measured on two separate visits during the run-in period was required to beor=95 mm Hg and<115 mm Hg or SBP>145 mm Hg and相似文献   

奥美沙坦酯与吲哒帕胺联合治疗原发性高血压的疗效及安全性研究

目的观察奥美沙坦酯与吲哒帕胺联合治疗原发性高血压的疗效及安全性。方法将160名原发性高血压患者随机分为奥美沙坦酯组与贝那普利组,每组各80例,患者每天早晨分别顿服奥美沙坦酯2．5mg和吲哒帕胺2．5mg,或贝那普利10mg和吲哒帕胺2．5mg,疗程为8周,观察治疗前后临床疗效及不良反应发生情况。结果治疗后两组患者血压有明显下降,奥美沙坦酯组收缩压与舒张压分别从治疗前（168．9±4．1）mmHg、（100．4±7．2）mmHg降至（125．9±8．9）mmHg、（80．9±6．6）mmHg（P〈0．05）,8周后有效率达92．5％;贝那普利组收缩压与舒张压分别从治疗前（170．4±15．1）mmHg、（102．9±7．7）mmHg降至（128．9±8．2）mmHg、（81．4±9．1）mmHg（P〈0．05）,8周后有效率达90．o％。两组患者均未发生严重不良事件,安全性指标无异常。结论联用奥美沙坦酯与吲哒帕胺治疗原发性高血压安全有效,副作用少,是高血压治疗联合用药的理想组合,可推荐临床应用。     

阿齐沙坦与奥美沙坦酯治疗轻中度原发性高血压的疗效比较

目的 比较阿齐沙坦与奥美沙坦酯治疗轻中度原发性高血压的临床疗效。方法 2015年9月—2017年2月从全国多家研究中心筛选轻、中度原发性高血压304例,随机分为奥美沙坦酯组和阿齐沙坦组。受试者从起始剂量开始,阿齐沙坦片20 mg/次和奥美沙坦酯片模拟剂,1次/d,或奥美沙坦酯片20 mg/次和阿齐沙坦片模拟剂,1次/d,开始治疗。用药后第8周末对受试者进行血压评价,如果服药前（药物浓度谷值时）坐位收缩压≥140 mmHg（1 mmHg=133 Pa）和/或舒张压≥90 mmHg则试验药物剂量加倍（阿齐沙坦片40 mg/次口服或奥美沙坦酯片40 mg/次,1次/d）继续治疗8周,如果服药前（药物浓度谷值时）坐位收缩压<140 mmHg且舒张压<90 mmHg则维持原剂量继续治疗8周。治疗总周期16周。观察两组的有效率和达标率。比较两组治疗前,治疗8、12、16周收缩压、舒张压,血压与治疗前差值的变化情况。结果 用药8、16周,奥美沙坦酯组有效率分别是66.89%、69.59%;阿齐沙坦组有效率分别是59.60%、58.94%,两组有效率比较差异没有统计学意义。用药8、16周,奥美沙坦酯组达标率分别是62.16%、61.49%;阿齐沙坦组达标率分别是56.95%、56.29%,两组达标率比较差异均没有统计学意义。治疗8、12、16周,两组受试者的坐位收缩压、舒张压逐渐降低,与同组治疗前比较差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）;治疗后,两组血压比较差异无统计学意义。用药后两组受试者的坐位收缩压和舒张压均逐渐降低,至16周末时,两组间坐位舒张压下降值比较差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）;16周末时两组收缩压下降值差异均没有统计学意义。结论 有效性方面,阿齐沙坦组疗效未达非劣效于奥美沙坦酯组,但阿齐沙坦自身的降压效果显著并具临床意义;安全性方面,阿齐沙坦组与奥美沙坦酯组不良事件、严重不良事件、不良反应发生率相当,安全性良好。     

Combination Therapy with Olmesartan Medoxomil and Hydrochlorothiazide

Background

The combination of olmesartan medoxomil and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) [olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ] has previously been shown to produce significantly greater SBP/DBP reductions than monotherapy with either agent alone in a randomized, double-blind, factorial study in patients with stage 2 hypertension. Compared with the evaluation of a single mean BP reduction in a patient population, determining the efficacy of an antihypertensive agent in achieving multiple BP targets provides additional information about the range of BP reductions attainable within this study population.

Objective

To conduct a secondary analysis of this study to evaluate the proportion of patients achieving combined SBP/DBP targets recommended in current hypertension treatment guidelines as well as individual SBP and DBP targets.

Methods

A total of 502 patients with DBP ≥100 and ≤115 mmHg were randomized to 8 weeks of treatment with placebo, HCTZ 12.5 or 25 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil 10, 20, or 40 mg/day, or olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ 10/12.5, 10/25, 20/12.5, 20/25, 40/12.5, or 40/25 mg/day. Mean baseline SBP ranged from 151.9 to 156.6 mmHg and mean baseline DBP ranged from 102.6 to 104.4 mmHg across the twelve treatment arms. The chi-squared test was used to compare the proportion of patients achieving each BP goal in each of the 11 active treatment regimens with that in the placebo group.

Results

The proportion of patients achieving an SBP <140 or <130 mmHg, DBP <90, <85, or <80 mmHg and combined SBP/DBP <140/90, <130/85, <130/80, or <120/80 mmHg typically increased with escalating dosages of olmesartan medoxomil and HCTZ when administered alone or in combination, but was always highest in those treated with the combination. As the BP goal became progressively more stringent, the proportion of patients achieving the BP goal decreased in each treatment group, although the trend toward greater reductions in patients treated with combination therapy remained intact. All combined SBP/DBP goals were achieved by a statistically significant proportion of patients (p<0.05) in the olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ 20/25, 40/12.5, and 40/25 treatment groups.

Conclusions

A majority of patients with uncomplicated stage 2 hypertension can achieve recommended BP goals when treated with the combination of olmesartan medoxomil and HCTZ.     

Seated cuff blood pressure-lowering efficacy of an olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Background: Hypertension is a common co-morbidity in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and well tolerated, effective therapies are needed to achieve guideline-recommended blood pressure (BP) goals in these patients.Objective: The aim of this study was to present the results of a prespecified analysis of key secondary endpoints from a 12-week, open-label, single-arm study evaluating the efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil plus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes.Study Design and Methods: After a placebo run-in period, 192 patients received olmesartan medoxomil 20mg/day for 3 weeks. If BP remained ≥120/70mmHg, patients were uptitrated at 3-week intervals to olmesartanmedoxomil 40mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ 40/12.5mg/day, and olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ 40/25mg/day.Main Outcome Measure: Endpoints evaluated in this analysis were the change from baseline in mean seated cuff BP (SeBP), proportions of patients achieving SeBP goals, and distribution of SeBP reductions.Results: Mean SeBP was 158.1/90.0mmHg at baseline. The mean±standard error of BP reductions at 12 weeks for systolic and diastolic BP were 21.3±1.1mmHg and 9.8±0.6 mmHg, respectively (p<0.0001 for each). At the end of the study, the proportion of patients with diabetes achieving the recommended SeBP goal of <130/80 mmHg was 41.1%.Conclusions: An olmesartan medoxomil±HCTZ treatment regimen significantly reduced BP from baseline in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes.Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00403481","term_id":"NCT00403481"}}NCT00403481     

Effect of an Olmesartan Medoxomil-Based Treatment Algorithm on Systolic Blood Pressure in Patients with Stage 1 or 2 Hypertension

Background and Objective

Elevated systolic BP (SBP) is a major contributor to cardiovascular disease. SBP control reduces the occurrence of stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular and total mortality. The aim of this study was to analyze the magnitude of SBP reductions and the achievement of individual SBP targets in the original BENIFORCE study.

Methods

An olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment algorithm was evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled titration study in 276 patients with stage 1 (47.1%) or 2 (52.9%) hypertension. After placebo run-in, patients were randomized to placebo (12 weeks) or olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day (weeks 1–3). Olmesartan medoxomil was uptitrated to 40 mg/day (weeks 4–6), then olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 40/12.5 mg per day (weeks 7–9), and olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ 40/25 mg per day (weeks 10–12) if BP remained ≥120/80 mmHg at any time interval.

Setting

The BENIFORCE study was a multicenter (29 sites) study conducted between January and October 2007 in the US.

Results

In patients receiving olmesartan medoxomil-based therapy, 81.0%, 67.2%, and 46.6% of patients with stage 1 hypertension and 70.4%, 49.4%, and 23.5% of patients with stage 2 hypertension achieved SBP targets of <140, <130, and <120 mmHg, respectively (all p<0.01 vs placebo). The proportions of patients achieving SBP targets increased with escalating doses of olmesartan medoxomil and HCTZ, administered alone or in combination, and was highest for combination therapy. Similarly, escalating doses of olmesartan medoxomil or olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ increased the proportion of patients achieving SBP reductions of >15 but ≤30, >30 but ≤45, and >45 mmHg compared with placebo.

Conclusion

An olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment algorithm effectively reduced SBP and achieved SBP targets in patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension. This regimen resulted in >80% of patients achieving SBP reductions of ≥15 mmHg while 44% achieved SBP reductions of >30 mmHg.     

Olmesartan medoxomil

Olmesartan medoxomil is a nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonist which selectively and competitively inhibits the type 1 angiotensin II receptor without affecting other receptors regulating the cardiovascular system. In well designed randomised trials, olmesartan medoxomil was significantly more effective than placebo, and at dosages of 10 to 20 mg/day was at least as effective as atenolol 50 to 100 mg/day in reducing diastolic blood pressure (DBP). At dosages of 5 to 20 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil was more effective than captopril 12.5 to 50mg twice daily at lowering seated DBP in patients with mild to moderate hypertension in a dose titration study. Reductions in seated DBP were greater with olmesartan medoxomil 10 to 20 mg/day than losartan 50 to 100 mg/day. Olmesartan medoxomil at 20 mg/day was more effective in lowering seated DBP than losartan 50 mg/day, valsartan 80 mg/day or irbesartan 150 mg/day, and was more efficacious than losartan 50 mg/day or valsartan 80 mg/day at reducing 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure. Olmesartan medoxomil has shown no clinically important pharmacokinetic interactions with digoxin, warfarin or antacid (aluminium magnesium hydroxide). Adverse events were infrequent in clinical studies of olmesartan medoxomil and were similar to those attributed to placebo. With olmesartan medoxomil, the frequency of dizziness was higher than with placebo but similar to that occurring with losartan, valsartan and irbesartan.     

奥美沙坦酯治疗老年高血压的疗效及安全性观察

目的：评价奥美沙坦酯治疗老年高血压的疗效和安全性。方法：选取2009年1-8月我院42例老年高血压患者,随机分为两组。治疗组（21例）服用奥美沙坦酯每次20mg,每日1次;对照组（21例）服用氯沙坦每次50mg,每日1次。总疗程均为8周。结果：奥美沙坦酯组和氯沙坦组治疗前后血压下降幅度差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。奥美沙坦酯组和氯沙坦组降压显效率分别为69.0%和68.4%,总有效率分别为90.4%和89.7%,两组间差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。奥美沙坦酯组和氯沙坦组均未出现药品不良反应。结论：奥美沙坦酯治疗老年高血压效果明显,安全性好。     

Use of 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring to Assess Antihypertensive Efficacy

INTRODUCTION: Goal rates, the percentage of patients with hypertension achieving recommended SBP/DBP, are a clinically important assessment of an antihypertensive agent's efficacy. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) allows accurate assessment of a patient's hypertension and risk for cardiovascular events, and provides the most accurate measure of an antihypertensive agent's efficacy throughout a 24-hour dosing interval. METHODS: A 12-week (4-week single-blind placebo run-in phase followed by an 8-week double-blind active treatment phase) randomized, parallel-group study reported that the recommended starting dose of the angiotensin II receptor antagonist (angiotensin receptor blocker; ARB) olmesartan medoxomil (Benicar(trade mark)) 20 mg/day was more effective than starting doses of losartan potassium (Cozaar) 50 mg/day, valsartan (Diovan) 80 mg/day, or irbesartan (Avapro) 150 mg/day in reducing cuff DBP in patients with essential hypertension. The present report includes analyses of secondary efficacy variables from this 12-week trial. RESULTS: The mean reduction in blood pressure from baseline to week 8 (end of treatment) was significantly greater with olmesartan medoxomil than with valsartan for all ABPM times analyzed (24 hours, daytime, night-time, and last 2 and 4 hours of monitoring). Statistical significance was reached for comparisons of olmesartan medoxomil with losartan potassium for a majority of times analyzed and with irbesartan for SBP in the last 4 hours of monitoring. Goal rates for accepted critical ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) values of <130/80 mm Hg for mean 24-hour ABP, <135/85 mm Hg for mean daytime ABP, and <120/75 mm Hg for mean night-time ABP were significantly greater for patients receiving olmesartan medoxomil than for those receiving losartan potassium or valsartan. Goal rates were numerically superior, but not statistically significant, to those achieved with irbesartan. Compared with losartan potassium or valsartan recipients, a significantly higher percentage of patients treated with olmesartan medoxomil achieved the 24-hour ABP goal of <130/85 mm Hg. The last 2 and 4 hours of ABPM indicated that olmesartan medoxomil maintained larger mean decreases in blood pressure through the morning surge. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: ABP goal rates are a meaningful measure of antihypertensive efficacy. The effects on mean change from baseline in ABP and ABP goal rates after 8 weeks of treatment were numerically better, but not statistically significant, for olmesartan medoxomil than for irbesartan. However, olmesartan medoxomil was significantly more effective than losartan potassium or valsartan.     

Olmesartan medoxomil/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide: fixed-dose combination in hypertension

The antihypertensive agents olmesartan medoxomil, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) are now available as a fixed-dose combination tablet (olmesartan medoxomil/amlodipine/HCTZ). In a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial (TRINITY) in adults with moderate to severe hypertension, olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine?+?HCTZ triple combination therapy produced significantly greater least squares mean reductions from baseline in seated diastolic blood pressure (BP) [primary endpoint] and seated systolic BP than olmesartan medoxomil/amlodipine, olmesartan medoxomil/HCTZ or amlodipine?+?HCTZ. Furthermore, significantly more patients achieved BP goals and targets with the triple combination regimen than with any of the dual combination regimens at week 12, with olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine?+?HCTZ also demonstrating benefit over the dual regimens in terms of ambulatory BP control. According to subgroup analyses of the TRINITY trial, olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine?+?HCTZ was more effective in reducing BP and achieving BP goals than each of the dual therapies, irrespective of hypertension severity, age, sex, race or diabetes mellitus status. Data from a number of smaller clinical studies indicated that olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine?+?HCTZ triple combination therapy provides antihypertensive efficacy in patients whose BP is not adequately controlled with olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine. Olmesartan medoxomil?+?amlodipine?+?HCTZ was generally well tolerated in the TRINITY study, with adverse events usually being mild or moderate in severity.     

奥美沙坦酯片治疗轻、中度原发性高血压的疗效和安全性

目的观察奥美沙坦酯片治疗轻、中度原发性高血压的疗效和安全性。方法61例轻、中度原发性高血压患者随机分为奥美沙坦酯组(n=30)和氯沙坦组(n=31),治疗8wk,观察2组治疗前后的血压、心率、心电图和血、尿实验室检查的变化。结果奥美沙坦酯组与氯沙坦组比较,坐位收缩压和舒张压降低程度都有显著差异,分别为(132±13 vs 139±13)mmHg(P<0.01)和(85±9 vs 87±9)mmHg(P<0.05)。奥美沙坦酯组降压有效率为83%;每日1次服用奥美沙坦酯作用可持续24h,药物降低收缩压和舒张压的谷峰比值均>50%。2组药物不良反应发生分别为1例和3例,2组比较无显著差别。结论奥美沙坦酯治疗轻、中度原发性高血压患者,能24h平稳降压,谷峰比满意,且耐受性较好。     

Comparison of doxazosin GITS and standard doxazosin in the treatment of high blood pressure

OBJECTIVE: To examine (1) the relative therapeutic equivalence of 4 mg doxazosin gastrointestinal therapeutic system (DOX GITS) and 4 mg doxazosin standard (DOX-S4) and (2) the efficacy and safety of 4 mg DOX GITS versus 2 mg doxazosin standard (DOX-S2). PATIENTS: Male or female patients aged 18-80 diagnosed with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95-110 mmHg and systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 180 mmHg) were randomized into the study. METHODS: This double-blind, parallel, 9-week trial compared DOX-GITS with doxazosin standard (DOX-S) in 310 hypertensive patients. Following a 2-week placebo run-in phase, patients were randomized to receive DOX-GITS at 4 mg/d or DOX-S at 2 or 4 mg/d. DOX GITS dosage remained unchanged at 4 mg throughout the study. Titration in the DOX-S groups was initiated at Week 0 with 1 mg DOX-S and increased to 2 mg DOX-S at Week 1. Dosage in the DOX-S4 group was increased to 4 mg DOX-S at Week 3. Therapeutic equivalence was measured by the change from baseline in sitting diastolic BP (DBP). Efficacy was assessed using the change from baseline for all blood pressure measures. Safety analysis included evaluation of laboratory tests at clinic visits and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Therapeutic equivalences between DOX GITS and DOX-S4 and DOX-S2 were established at all study visits except for a significant difference in favor of DOX GITS at Week 1 (p = 0.019) when the dose of DOX-S was 1 mg. All groups had a significant decrease in BP at all study visits compared with baseline. The proportion of patients who reached goal sitting DBP (< 90 mmHg) was similar among the three treatment groups, except at Week 1, when more patients in the DOX GITS group had obtained the goal compared with those in the DOX-S2 group (40.6% vs. 22.3%; p = 0.005). The proportion of patients who reached sitting SBP (< 140 mmHg) goal was similar among groups. AE profiles among the groups were similar. CONCLUSION: DOX GITS was as effective as DOX-S in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. The improved pharmacokinetic profile of the GITS formulation compared with the standard formulation allows a therapeutic dose to be delivered earlier and without dose titration. Both formulations of doxazosin were well tolerated.     

Olmesartan medoxomil-based therapy for the management of hypertension

Contemporary practice guidelines for hypertension recommend a goal systolic/diastolic blood pressure (BP) of less than 140/90 mmHg for patients with hypertension and less than 130/80 mmHg for patients with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease. Current guidelines recognize that most patients will require combination therapy to achieve these BP goals and recommend that the agents used in such therapy should have complementary mechanisms of action. Olmesartan medoxomil is an angiotensin receptor blocker approved for the treatment of hypertension as monotherapy or in combination with antihypertensive agents. It is also approved in a fixed-dose combination with hydrochlorothiazide or amlodipine. Olmesartan medoxomil-based therapy can manage hypertension across a range of patient types and has demonstrated good BP-lowering efficacy and goal attainment in individuals with stage 1 or stage 2 hypertension. The comparative antihypertensive efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil, as monotherapy and as part of combination therapy, has been established in several large, randomized clinical trials. This review evaluates the chemistry, efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil-based therapy and its expanding role in hypertension management.     

奥美沙坦酯对老年高血压患者肌酐清除率的影响

目的：评价奥美沙坦酯对老年高血压患者肌酐清除率的影响。方法：42例老年高血压患者随机接受奥美沙坦酯20mg或氯沙坦50mg,qd治疗,总疗程8周。结果：奥美沙坦酯组和氯沙坦组治疗前后肌酐清除率均有不同程度上升,但与治疗前相比无统计学差异,两组间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。奥美沙坦酯组和氯沙坦组均未出现不良反应。结论：老年高血压患者应用奥美沙坦酯后肌酐清除率有轻度上升,提升对肾脏有保护作用。     

奥美沙坦酯改善单纯收缩期高血压患者血管内皮舒张功能的效果评价

目的观察与评价奥美沙坦酯对单纯收缩期高血压(ISH)患者血管内皮舒张功能的影响。方法随机选择ISH 40例为治疗组,采用奥美沙坦酯治疗。另选择40名年龄与性别相匹配的健康人作为对照组。奥美沙坦酯剂量20~40mg.d-1,患者均连续用药12周,治疗前后对相关指标进行检测与对比观察,并采用高频超声测定患者用药前后的反应性充血和含服硝酸甘油后肱动脉内径的变化。结论用药4周后,与治疗前比较,收缩压(SBP)显著下降(P<0.01),舒张压(DBP)亦有下降(P<0.05),脉压(PP)缩小(P<0.01)。用药12周后,SBP、PP仍明显下降,与治疗4周比较差异有显著性(P<0.01);DBP水平稍降低,与治疗4周比较,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。血管内皮依赖性舒张功能指标(FMD)值在奥美沙坦治疗组用药前与对照组比较明显降低(P<0.01)。用药后FMD值明显增大,治疗前后比较差异非常显著(P<0.01)。治疗组的非依赖性血管内皮舒张功能(NMD)用药前后均正常,差异无显著性(均P>0.05)。治疗期间未见奥美沙坦酯严重不良反应。结论奥美沙坦酯治疗单纯收缩期高血压有效、安全,且有改善其血管内皮依赖性舒张功能作用。     

Efficacy and safety of triple antihypertensive therapy with the olmesartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide combination

Background: European hypertension guidelines estimate that up to 15-20% of hypertensive patients are not controlled on a dual antihypertensive combination and require three or more different antihypertensive drug classes to achieve blood pressure (BP) control. Objective: This study in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension assessed the efficacy and safety of adding hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5?mg and 25?mg to a range of olmesartan medoxomil (OLM)/amlodipine (AML) doses. Study Design: This phase III, multicentre study had a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group design that included a double-blind safety run-in and a double-blind treatment period. Intervention: Enrolled patients were screened and previous therapy was discontinued if required. During a 2-week, double-blind, safety run-in period (Weeks 0-2), patients were randomized to receive placebo, OLM/AML 20?mg/5?mg, OLM/AML 40?mg/5?mg or OLM/AML 40?mg/10?mg. During an 8-week, double-blind treatment period (Weeks 3-10), patients were allocated to eight groups depending on their initial treatment. They were either randomized to continue with the same dose of OLM/AML, or have HCTZ 12.5?mg or 25?mg added to treatment. Main Outcome Measure: The primary endpoint was formulated before data collection began. It was the change in mean diastolic BP (DBP) from baseline to Week 10 in groups with HCTZ added to OLM/AML, compared with the corresponding dual OLM/AML therapy. Results: Of 3195 patients who were screened, 2690 were randomized. Patients in every triple OLM/AML/HCTZ group had significantly greater mean reductions in DBP (p?≤?0.032 for each comparison) and systolic BP (SBP) by Week 10 (p?≤?0.0034 for each comparison), compared with patients on the corresponding OLM/AML therapy dose. The significant improvements in DBP and SBP reduction with triple OLM/AML/HCTZ therapy, compared with dual OLM/AML therapy, were observed after 4 and 6 weeks of therapy. Patients in each triple therapy group also had a significantly higher rate of BP <140/90?mmHg threshold achievement (p?≤?0.05 for each treatment comparison), compared with the dual OLM/AML groups. In three of the OLM/AML/HCTZ groups (40?mg/5?mg/25?mg, 40?mg/10?mg/12.5?mg and 40?mg/10?mg/25?mg), BP <140/90?mmHg threshold achievement by Week 10 was over 70%. Across the triple and dual combination therapy groups, treatment was well tolerated and no safety concerns for either treatment were identified. Conclusion: Adding HCTZ to a range of OLM/AML dose combinations is well tolerated and improved BP control by significantly lowering DBP and SBP and significantly increasing BP threshold achievement in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension. Clinical Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier as NCT00923091.     

Olmesartan medoxomil: in children and adolescents with hypertension

Olmesartan medoxomil is an orally administered angiotensin II receptor antagonist, selective for the angiotensin II type 1 receptor, which has established antihypertensive efficacy in adults. In children and adolescents with hypertension (n?=?302), oral olmesartan medoxomil significantly and dose-dependently reduced seated systolic blood pressure (BP) and seated dystolic BP from baseline (the primary endpoint) in a 3-week, dose-response period in a well designed phase II/III clinical trial. Patients received olmesartan medoxomil high dose (20 or 40?mg once daily depending on bodyweight) or low dose (2.5 or 5.0?mg once daily depending on bodyweight). The response was significant for both cohorts, which were stratified by race (cohort A was mixed race [62% White] and cohort B was 100% Black). In addition, BP control was maintained in olmesartan recipients relative to placebo recipients in cohort A and the combined cohort A?+?B, but not for patients in cohort B, during a placebo-controlled withdrawal period of this trial. Oral olmesartan medoxomil was generally well tolerated in children and adolescents with hypertension. The majority of adverse events were of mild to moderate intensity.