Duloxetine 60 mg once daily in the treatment of milder major depressive disorder

There is ongoing debate regarding the effectiveness of antidepressants in patients with milder major depressive disorder (MDD). This post-hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine in the subset of 159 (75 duloxetine and 84 placebo) patients with milder MDD (baseline HAMD17 total score > or = 15 and < or = 18) who were treated once daily with duloxetine 60 mg or placebo in two identical, 9-week, randomised, double-blind trials. At endpoint, change from baseline on HAMD17 was greater in the duloxetine group (-7.0) than in the placebo group (-4.1) (p = 0.005). Response and remission rates, and improvement on the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scale, the Patient Global Impressions-Improvement (PGI-I) scale, and measures of painful symptoms were also significantly better in the duloxetine group (p < 0.05). Tolerability was consistent with that seen in previous studies of duloxetine in patients with more severe depression. In conclusion, duloxetine 60 mg/day is effective and well tolerated in milder MDD.     

The combination of amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg produces less peripheral oedema than amlodipine 10 mg in hypertensive patients not adequately controlled with amlodipine 5 mg

Aims: To demonstrate the benefit of the combination amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg over amlodipine 10 mg, in producing a lower incidence of peripheral oedema for a comparable mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) reduction. Methods: After a 4‐week amlodipine 5 mg run‐in phase, inadequately controlled hypertension patients (aged ≥ 55 years, MSSBP ≥ 130 and ≤ 160 mmHg) were randomised to receive amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg or amlodipine 10 mg for 8 weeks, followed by amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg for 4 weeks for all patients. Primary variables were MSSBP change from baseline to week 8 and incidence of peripheral oedema reported as an AE. Resolution of peripheral oedema was assessed 4 weeks after switching patients from amlodipine 10 mg to amlodipine/ valsartan 5/160 mg. Results: At week 8, MSSBP showed greater reduction with amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg than amlodipine 10 mg (least square mean: ?8.01 vs.?5.95 mmHg, p < 0.001 for non‐inferiority and p = 0.002 for superiority). Systolic control, overall BP control and systolic response rate at week 8 were significantly higher with combination than amlodipine 10 mg (34 vs. 26%; 57 vs. 50%; 36.57 vs. 27.77%, respectively). Incidence of peripheral oedema was significantly lower with the combination than amlodipine 10 mg (6.6 vs. 31.1%, p < 0.001). Peripheral oedema resolved in 56% patients who switched from amlodipine 10 mg to the combination, without the loss of effect on BP reduction. Conclusion: In non‐responders to amlodipine 5 mg, treatment with amlodipine/valsartan 5/160 mg induced significantly less peripheral oedema than amlodipine 10 mg for similar BP reduction. Peripheral oedema resolved in > 50% patients switching from amlodipine 10 mg to the combination.     

27 years of croup: An update highlighting the effectiveness of 0.15 mg/kg of dexamethasone

Objective: To update an earlier observational study (1980–1995) documenting dramatic improvements in the management of croup with the mandatory use of a single oral dose of dexamethasone and to ascertain whether a reduction from a dose of 0.6 to 0.15 mg/kg in 1995 maintained these improved outcomes over the next 11 years. Methods: We evaluated retrospectively the experience of children with croup in Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, the only tertiary paediatric hospital in Western Australia, over the subsequent 11 year period from 1996 to 2006 inclusive. Data were updated from ED, general hospital and the intensive care unit records to show the numbers of children presenting to the hospital, admitted, transferred to intensive care and intubated. We also recorded the length of hospital stay and representation rate of all cases within 7 days. Results: The dramatic improvements in outcomes for croup, including reduced admission rates, length of stay, transfers to the intensive care unit, intensive care unit days and number of intubations as reported in our earlier paper, were maintained using 0.15 mg/kg dexamethasone. Admission rates for croup have fallen from 30% in the early 1990s to less than 15% in recent years, whereas the representation rate has risen slightly. Conclusion: The improved outcomes for children with croup presenting to our paediatric ED have been maintained with a reduced, single oral dose of 0.15 mg/kg of dexamethasone.     

Levofloxacin 750 mg QD for five days versus amoxicillin/clavulanate 875 mg/125 mg BID for ten days for treatment of acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis: a post hoc analysis of data from severely ill patients

This post hoc analysis of data from a previous randomized, blinded, multicenter, parallel, noninferiority study assessed the bacterial etiology, symptom resolution, and tolerability of severe acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (ABECB) patients treated with either levofloxacin 750 mg QD for 5 days or amoxicillin/clavulanate 875 mg/125 mg BID for 10 days. Severe ABECB was defined as ABECB and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) <50% of the predicted value, or (FEV(1)) of 50% to 65% of the predicted value plus comorbidities, or > or =4 exacerbations per year. A total of 369 patients were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (187 treated with levofloxacin and 182 treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate), and 175 patients were microbiologically assessable (MA) (86 treated with levofloxacin and 89 treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate). In the ITT population, the mean age was 58.7 years, 49.1 % were male, and 48.2% were current smokers. At the on-treatment visit, a significantly higher proportion of MA patients in the levofloxacin group resolved purulent sputum production (57.5% vs 35.6%; P < 0.006), sputum production (65.4% vs 45.3%; P < 0.013), and cough (60.0% vs 44.0%; P < 0.045), compared with the amoxicillin/clavulanate group. However, no significant between-group differences were observed at posttreatment. A total of 341 pathogens were isolated, of which 143 (41.9%) were traditional ABECB flora, 181 (53.1%) were other gram-negative organisms, and 17 (5.0%) were gram-positive organisms. Overall susceptibility of the pathogens was 97.1% for levofloxacin and 90.6% for amoxicillin/clavulanate (P < 0.001). The prevalence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 42.1 % in patients who received levofloxacin and 48.6 % in those who received amoxicillin/clavulanate (95% CI,-4.0 to 17.0).     

Topiramate 100 mg/day in migraine prevention: a pooled analysis of double-blind randomised controlled trials

Topiramate has been shown to be effective as a preventive treatment for migraine in three large placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trials. Because the protocols were similar in design using the same primary and secondary endpoints, data from these studies were pooled to evaluate the consistency of efficacy, efficacy by gender and tolerability of topiramate 100 mg/day (n = 386) versus placebo (n = 372). Topiramate was superior to placebo as measured by the reduction in mean monthly migraine frequency, monthly migraine days and monthly migraine duration. The responder rates, defined as at least 50% reduction for the respective parameters, were significantly in favour of topiramate (p < 0.001), for example 46.3% of patients on topiramate achieved at least 50% reduction in monthly migraine period frequency compared with 22.8% on placebo (p < 0.001). Use of medication to treat the acute migraine attack was significantly reduced by topiramate compared with placebo (p < 0.001). The therapeutic effect was consistent throughout the different studies and independent of gender. The most common adverse effect was paraesthesia, mostly of mild-to-moderate severity. The findings confirm that, at a dose of 100 mg/day, topiramate is an effective and well-tolerated drug for migraine prevention.     

Lipid‐altering efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg compared with rosuvastatin 10 mg in high‐risk hypercholesterolaemic patients inadequately controlled with prior statin monotherapy – The IN‐CROSS study

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of switching from a previous statin monotherapy to ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg vs. rosuvastatin (ROSUVA) 10 mg. Methods: In this randomised, double‐blind study, 618 patients with documented hypercholesterolaemia [low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) ≥ 2.59 and ≤ 4.92 mmol/l] and with high cardiovascular risk who were taking a stable daily dose of one of several statin medications for ≥ 6 weeks prior to the study randomisation visit entered a 6‐week open‐label stabilisation/screening period during which they continued to receive their prestudy statin dose. Following stratification by study site and statin dose/potency, patients were randomised to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (n = 314) or ROSUVA 10 mg (n = 304) for 6 weeks. Results: EZE/SIMVA produced greater reductions in LDL‐C (?27.7% vs. ?16.9%; p ≤ 0.001), total cholesterol (?17.5% vs. ?10.3%; p ≤ 0.001), non‐high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C) (?23.4% vs. ?14.0%; p ≤ 0.001) and apolipoprotein B (?17.9% vs. ?9.8%; p ≤ 0.001) compared with ROSUVA, while both treatments were equally effective at increasing HDL‐C (2.1% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.433). More patients achieved LDL‐C levels < 2.59 mmol/l (73% vs. 56%), < 2.00 mmol/l (38% vs. 19%) and < 1.81 mmol/l (25% vs. 11%) with EZE/SIMVA than ROSUVA (p ≤ 0.001). A borderline significantly greater reduction in triglycerides (p = 0.056) was observed for EZE/SIMVA (?11.0%) vs. ROSUVA (?5.3%). There were no between‐group differences in the incidences of adverse events or liver transaminase and creatine kinase elevations. Conclusion: EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg produced greater improvements in LDL‐C, total cholesterol, non‐HDL‐C and apoB with a similar safety profile as for ROSUVA 10 mg.     

A Review of Duloxetine 60 mg Once‐Daily Dosing for the Management of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain,Fibromyalgia, and Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Due to Chronic Osteoarthritis Pain and Low Back Pain

Background: Duloxetine is a selective dual neuronal serotonin (5‐Hydroxytryptamine, 5‐HT) and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SSNRI). It is indicated in the United States for treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and several chronic pain conditions, including management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and chronic musculoskeletal pain due to chronic osteoarthritis (OA) pain and chronic low back pain (LBP). Its use for antidepressant and anxiolytic actions has been extensively reviewed previously. We here review the evidence for the efficacy of 60 mg once‐daily dosing of duloxetine for chronic pain conditions. Method: The literature was searched for clinical trials in humans conducted in the past 10 years involving duloxetine. Results: There were 199 results in the initial search. Studies not in the English language were excluded. We then included only studies of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and chronic musculoskeletal pain (OA and LBP). Studies of painful symptoms reported in mental health studies were excluded. This resulted in 32 studies. Articles that did not include a 60 mg/day daily dose as a study arm were excluded. This resulted in 30 studies, broken down as follows: 12 for diabetic peripheral neuropathy, 9 for fibromyalgia, 6 for LBP, and 3 for OA pain. Conclusions: The studies reviewed report that duloxetine 60 mg once‐daily dosing is an effective option for the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and chronic musculoskeletal pain due to chronic OA pain and chronic LBP. As these pains are often comorbid with MDD or GAD, duloxetine might possess the pharmacologic properties to be a versatile agent able to address several symptoms in these patients. With adequate attention to FDA prescribing guidance regarding safety and drug–drug interactions, duloxetine 60 mg once‐daily dosing appears to be an effective option in the appropriate pain patient population.     

Duloxetine hydrochloride: a new dual-acting medication for the treatment of major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine hydrochloride has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Duloxetine is a potent inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake, with weak effects on dopamine reuptake. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the literature on duloxetine with regard to its pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and tolerability. METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE was performed using the terms duloxetine, Cymbalta, and major depressive disorder, with no restriction on year. The Eli Lilly and Company clinical trial registry, and abstracts and posters from recent American Psychiatric Association meetings were also reviewed. RESULTS: Duloxetine exhibits linear, dose-dependent pharmacokinetics across the approved oral dosage range of 40 to 60 mg/d. No dose adjustment appears to be needed based on age. Duloxetine has shown efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms compared with placebo, and duloxetine recipients have shown significant improvements in global functioning compared with placebo (both, P < 0.05). Response and remission rates have been comparable to or greater than those seen with fluoxetine or paroxetine. Duloxetine is generally well tolerated, with nausea, dry mouth, and fatigue being the most common treatment-emergent adverse effects. Cardiovascular adverse effects do not appear to result in sustained blood pressure elevations, QTc-interval prolongation, or other electrocardiographic changes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, duloxetine is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for MDD in adults. Randomized head-to-head comparisons against established antidepressants are needed to determine the relative safety and efficacy of duloxetine.     

Efficacy of tamsulosin 0.4 mg/day in relieving double-J stent-related symptoms: a randomized controlled study

This study evaluated the efficacy of tamsulosin in improving stent-related symptoms and quality of life in patients with in-dwelling double-J ureteral stents. A total of 42 patients (15 males and 27 females) with ureteral stent placement following ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy or balloon dilatation, were prospectively randomized into two groups of 21 patients. Group I received 0.4 mg tamsulosin once daily for 4 weeks and group II was a non-placebo, non-treatment control. All patients completed the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and SF-36 questionnaires at 2 and 4 weeks post-operatively. The IPSS scores for irritative and obstructive symptoms were significantly lower in group I than group II at both 2 and 4 weeks. Among the eight domains of SF-36, role limitation due to physical health and bodily pain was significantly better in group I at 2 and 4 weeks. General health was also significantly better in group I at 2 weeks. Tamsulosin improved both urinary symptoms and quality of life without causing serious side-effects.     

Safety and efficacy of low‐dose fondaparinux (1.5 mg) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients with renal impairment: the FONDAIR study

Summary. Background: Renal impairment is common, affecting around 40% of acutely ill medical patients, and is associated with an increased risk of both venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. The clinical benefit of effective thromboprophylactic strategies may be outweighed in these patients by an excessive rate of hemorrhage. Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of lower prophylactic doses of fondaparinux in acutely ill medical patients with renal impairment. Patients/Methods: We carried out a multicenter, investigator‐initiated, prospective cohort study. Patients at risk of VTE with a creatinine clearance between 20 and 50 mL min^?1 were treated with fondaparinux 1.5 mg qd for a minimum of 6 to a maximum of 15 days. The primary outcome was the incidence of major bleeding; secondary outcomes were clinically relevant non‐major bleeding (CRNMB) and symptomatic VTE. Results: We enrolled 206 patients with a mean age of 82 years, mean creatinine clearance of 33 mL min^?1, and a mean Charlson co‐morbidity index of 8.2. One patient had major bleeding (0.49%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03–3.10), eight had CRNMB (3.88%, 95% CI 1.81–7.78) and three developed symptomatic VTE (1.46%, 0.38–4.55). Twenty‐three patients (11.17%, 7.36–16.48) died. No independent predictors of bleeding were found at univariate analysis. Conclusions: The addition of moderate to severe renal impairment to patients with traditional risk factors for VTE identified a population of very elderly acutely ill medical patients potentially at high risk of both VTE and bleeding complications. The recently approved lower prophylactic dose of fondaparinux appears to be a safe and relatively effective strategy in these patients.     

The effect of low-dose pravastatin in metabolic syndrome for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Japan: a post hoc analysis of the MEGA study

The Management of Elevated Cholesterol in the Primary Prevention Group of Adult Japanese (MEGA) Study demonstrated the beneficial effect of low-dose pravastatin treatment (10-20 mg/d) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) in Japanese patients with mild-to-moderate hypercholesterolemia. However, it is not known whether mild lipid modification is effective even for patients at high risk. In this study, we evaluated low-dose pravastatin treatment in patients with metabolic syndrome in the MEGA Study. Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) was defined according to the modified US National Cholesterol Education Program criteria. There were 72 coronary heart disease (CHD) events and 130 CVD events in 2636 patients with MetSyn, and 70 CHD events and 125 CVD events in 5196 patients without MetSyn (hazard ratios 1.85 and 1.90, respectively). No significant risk reduction in CHD was found in the diet plus pravastatin group compared with the diet group patients with MetSyn (hazard ratio .78, P = .29). On the other hand, there was a significant 36% CVD risk reduction (P = .01) in the diet plus pravastatin group compared with the diet group patients with MetSyn, with a small number needed to treat (45). These results indicate that low-dose pravastatin provides a substantial beneficial effect for the prevention of CVD in Japanese patients with MetSyn without known CVD, a population at proportionally high risk in primary prevention.     

Memantine for prevention of migraine: a retrospective study of 60 cases

The objective was to retrospectively characterise the efficacy of memantine as preventive therapy in a series of patients with frequent migraine. Patients in a university headache clinic completed a survey regarding their experience with memantine, and medical records were reviewed. All patients who received memantine as preventive therapy for migraine over a 15-month period were mailed surveys and consent forms for record review. Patients were treated with memantine beginning at a dose of 5 mg/day, increasing if needed by 5 mg/week up to 10 mg twice a day. The majority of patients (36 out of 54) treated with memantine for at least 2 months reported a significant reduction in estimated headache frequency, and improved function. Side effects were uncommon and generally mild. This limited retrospective case review suggests that memantine may be an effective preventive therapy for patients with frequent migraine. A prospective trial is warranted.     

Measuring dose-related efficacy of eptinezumab for migraine prevention: post hoc analysis of PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2

BackgroundEptinezumab 100 mg and 300 mg met the primary efficacy endpoint in both PROMISE clinical trials, significantly reducing frequency of monthly migraine days over Weeks 1‒12. The objective of this analysis was to assess the clinical response to eptinezumab 100 mg and 300 mg within the pivotal phase 3 PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 studies to potentially identify subsets of patients with meaningful differences between doses.MethodsPatients from PROMISE-1 ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02559895","term_id":"NCT02559895"}}NCT02559895) and PROMISE-2 ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02974153","term_id":"NCT02974153"}}NCT02974153) trials were divided into subgroups based on demographic and migraine characteristics, and baseline questionnaire responses. For each subgroup, the overall likelihood of achieving ≥ 50% migraine responder rate (MRR) over Weeks 1–12 and Weeks 13–24 with either eptinezumab 100 mg or 300 mg was calculated using odds ratios (with associated confidence intervals) and compared.ResultsIn PROMISE-1 (episodic migraine) and PROMISE-2 (chronic migraine), the likelihood of achieving ≥ 50% MRR over Weeks 1–12 and Weeks 13–24 was roughly equivalent for patients receiving either dose level of eptinezumab. Given the number of comparisons performed, sporadic apparent differences were seen but no replicated patterns between studies emerged. In PROMISE-1, no differences were observed in any subgroup over Weeks 1–12. In PROMISE-2, patients reporting < 15 monthly migraine days at baseline, any problems with mobility per the EQ-5D-5L, or a social functioning score > 45.0 per the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), appeared more likely to achieve ≥ 50% MRR with 300 mg over Weeks 1–12, with none of these being apparent in PROMISE-1.ConclusionsOverall, these data suggest that across PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2, there were no meaningful differences in the likelihood of achieving ≥ 50% MRR between the eptinezumab dose levels in the majority of patient subgroups. In the few subgroups that displayed small, but potentially meaningful differences, patients were more likely to achieve ≥ 50% MRR with eptinezumab 300 mg; however, minimal consistency across both studies and time periods was noted.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov.PROMISE-1: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02559895","term_id":"NCT02559895"}}NCT02559895.PROMISE-2: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02974153","term_id":"NCT02974153"}}NCT02974153.     

Bleeding and risk of death with hydroxyethyl starch in severe sepsis: post hoc analyses of a randomized clinical trial

Purpose

We aimed to characterize the degree and clinical importance of bleeding in patients treated with hydroxyethyl starch (HES).

Methods

In post hoc analyses, we examined the associations between fluid assignment, hemostatic variables, bleeding events, transfusions, and death among 798 patients with severe sepsis randomized to fluid resuscitation with HES 130/0.42 versus Ringer’s acetate. We used Cox regression analysis adjusted for fluid assignment and baseline characteristics.

Results

Overall, 93 (23 %) patients assigned to HES versus 60 (15 %) patients assigned to Ringer’s acetate bled in the ICU (relative risk (RR) 1.55; 95 % CI 1.16–2.08; P = 0.003). Of these, 38 and 25 (RR 1.52; 95 % CI 0.94–2.48; P = 0.09), respectively, had severe bleeding (intracranial or concomitant transfusion with three units of red blood cells). Most patients bled in the first days after randomization when most trial fluid was given. The hazards ratios for occurrence of any bleeding and severe bleeding in patients treated with HES versus Ringer’s acetate were 1.70 (95 % CI 1.23–2.36; P = 0.001) and 1.55 (95 % CI 0.93–2.56; P = 0.09), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios for death among patients with any bleeding and severe bleeding compared to those without bleeding were 1.36 (95 % CI 1.04–1.79; P = 0.03) and 1.74 (95 % CI 1.20–2.53; P = 0.004), respectively.

Conclusions

In post hoc analyses of patient with severe sepsis, treatment with HES increased the risk of bleeding which was associated with increased risk of death. HES-induced bleeding complications may negatively affect outcome in patients with severe sepsis.     

Effectiveness of 1‐day trauma‐informed care training programme on attitudes in psychiatric hospitals: A pre–post study

Many patients in mental health settings are likely to have histories of interpersonal traumatic experiences. Mental health providers are recommended to adopt trauma‐informed care (TIC) to ensure sensitivity and responsiveness to the impact of trauma on patients. However, few studies have examined the effectiveness of a TIC training programme using standardized measures with follow‐up assessments. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of a TIC training programme on attitudes towards TIC in mental health professionals. The study involved a pre–post design with 3‐month follow‐up assessments conducted between March and June 2018. In total, 65 mental health professionals from 29 psychiatric hospitals in Tokyo and its suburban prefectures participated in the study. Mental health professionals participated in a 1‐day programme consisting of a 3.5‐hour lecture and 1‐hour group discussion. Development of favourable attitudes towards TIC was the primary outcome, as assessed by using the Attitude Related Trauma‐Informed Care scale. The majority of participants were women (86%), and the mean age was 42.2 years. The mean score of the Attitude Related Trauma‐Informed Care scale scores increased significantly from 5.1 during pre‐training to 5.5 immediately after training (mean difference: 0.4; 95% confidence interval: 0.3–0.5) and 5.4 after 3 months (mean difference: 0.3; 95% confidence interval: 0.2–0.4). Furthermore, half of the participants claimed to have implemented TIC practice in daily clinical settings at the 3‐month follow‐up. These results suggested that this brief TIC training programme improved attitudes towards TIC practice significantly.     

The effects of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily vs. ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily on the blood pressure profiles of hypertensive osteoarthritis patients taking different classes of antihypertensive agents

Aims: To examine whether the blood pressure (BP) profiles of lumiracoxib and high‐dose ibuprofen differed in patients treated with different classes of antihypertensive medications. Methods: A 4‐week, multicentre, randomised, double‐blind study has compared the effects of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily (od) (n = 394) and ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily (tid) (n = 393) on ambulatory BP in osteoarthritis (OA) patients with controlled hypertension. Here, we present subgroup analyses for patients receiving different antihypertensive classes. The primary outcome was a comparison of the change in 24‐h mean systolic ambulatory BP (MSABP) from baseline to week 4. Patients receiving angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) represented the largest subgroups receiving antihypertensive monotherapy. Results: For patients receiving an ARB monotherapy, the least squares mean (LSM) 24‐h MSABP at week 4 fell with lumiracoxib 100 mg od and increased with ibuprofen 600 mg tid, creating an estimated treatment difference of 8.1 mmHg in favour of lumiracoxib (p < 0.001). For patients receiving an ACEI and a beta‐blocker monotherapy, the estimated treatment difference was 8.2 mmHg (p < 0.001) and 5.8 mmHg (p = 0.002) in favour of lumiracoxib respectively. These treatment differences were greater than observed in the overall population (5.0 mmHg in favour of lumiracoxib). In patients receiving diuretics or calcium channel blockers, treatment differences in MSABP were smaller and not statistically significant, although they remained in favour of lumiracoxib. Conclusion: Lumiracoxib 100 mg od resulted in less destabilisation of BP than high‐dose ibuprofen 600 mg tid, and this effect was the greatest in subgroups treated with drugs blocking the renin‐angiotensin system.     

Lipid-altering efficacy of switching from atorvastatin 10 mg/day to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg/day compared to doubling the dose of atorvastatin in hypercholesterolaemic patients with atherosclerosis or coronary heart disease

This randomised, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg tablet compared to doubling the atorvastatin (ATV) dose in hypercholesterolaemic patients with atherosclerotic or coronary heart disease (CHD). The study group included 435 male and female CHD patients (aged >or=18 years) who had not achieved their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal of <2.50 mmol/l while on a stable dose of ATV 10 mg for >or=6 weeks. After a 1-week diet/stabilisation period, patients with LDL-C >or=2.50 mmol/l and 相似文献