Medicine

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/12

This repository contains the published and unpublished research of the Faculty of Medicine by the staff members of the faculty

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Efficacy and safety of a novel low-dose triple single-pill combination of telmisartan, amlodipine and indapamide, compared with dual combinations for treatment of hypertension: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, international clinical trial
    (Elsevier, 2024-10) Rodgers, A.; Salam, A.; Schutte, A.E.; Cushman, W.C.; De Silva, H.A.; Tanna, G.L.D.; Grobbee, D.E.; Narkiewicz, K.; Ojji, D.B.; Poulter, N.R.; Schlaich, M.P.; Oparil, S.; Spiering, W.; Williams, B.; Jr, J.T.W.; Lakshman, P.; Uluwattage, W.; Hay, P.; Pereira, T.; Amarasena, N.; Ranasinghe, G.; Gianacas, C.; Shanthakumar, M.; Liu, X.; Wang, N.; Gnanenthiran, S.R.; Whelton, P.K.; GMRx2 Investigators
    BACKGROUND Single-pill combinations (SPCs) of three low-dose antihypertensive drugs can improve hypertension control but are not widely available. A key issue for any combination product is the contribution of each component to efficacy and tolerability. This trial compared a new triple SPC called GMRx2, containing telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide, with dual combinations of components for efficacy and safety.METHODS In this international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial, we enrolled adults with hypertension receiving between zero and three antihypertensive drugs, with a screening systolic blood pressure (SBP) ranging from 140-179 mm Hg (on no drugs) to 110-150 mm Hg (on three drugs). Participants were recruited from Australia, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Poland, Sri Lanka, the UK, and the USA. In a 4-week active run-in, existing medications were switched to GMRx2 half dose (telmisartan 20 mg, amlodipine 2·5 mg, and indapamide 1·25 mg). Participants were then randomly allocated (2:1:1:1) to continued GMRx2 half dose or to each possible dual combination of components at half doses (telmisartan 20 mg with amlodipine 2·5 mg, telmisartan 20 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg, or amlodipine 2·5 mg with indapamide 1·25 mg). At week 6, doses were doubled in all groups, unless there was a clinical contraindication. The primary efficacy outcome was mean change in home SBP from baseline to week 12, and the primary safety outcome was withdrawal of treatment due to an adverse event from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy outcomes included differences in clinic and home blood pressure levels and control rates. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04518293, and is completed.FINDINGS The trial was conducted between July 9, 2021 and Sept 1, 2023. We randomly allocated 1385 participants to four groups: 551 to GMRx2, 276 to telmisartan-indapamide, 282 to telmisartan-amlodipine, and 276 to amlodipine-indapamide groups. The mean age was 59 years (SD 11), 712 (51%) participants self-reported as female and 673 (48·6%) male, and the mean clinic blood pressure at the screening visit was 142/85 mm Hg when taking an average of 1·6 blood pressure medications. Following the run-in on GMRx2 half dose, the mean clinic blood pressure level at randomisation was 133/81 mm Hg and the mean home blood pressure level was 129/78 mm Hg. At week 12, the mean home SBP was 126 mm Hg in the GMRx2 group, which was lower than for each of the dual combinations: -2·5 (95% CI -3·7 to -1·3, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-indapamide, -5·4 (-6·8 to -4·1, p<0·0001) versus telmisartan-amlodipine, and -4·4 (-5·8 to -3·1, p<0·0001) versus amlodipine-indapamide. For the same comparisons, differences in clinic blood pressure at week 12 were 4·3/3·5 mm Hg, 5·6/3·7 mm Hg, and 6·3/4·5 mm Hg (all p<0·001). Clinic blood pressure control rate below 140/90 mm Hg at week 12 was superior with GMRx2 (74%) to with each dual combination (range 53-61%). Withdrawal of treatment due to adverse events occurred in 11 (2%) participants in the GMRx2 group, four (1%) in telmisartan-indapamide, three (1%) in telmisartan-amlodipine, and four (1%) in amlodipine-indapamide, with none of the differences being statistically significant.INTERPRETATION A novel low-dose SPC product of telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide provided clinically meaningful improvements in blood pressure reduction compared with dual combinations and was well tolerated. This SPC provides a new therapeutic option for the management of hypertension and its use could result in a substantial improvement in blood pressure control in clinical practice.
  • Item
    Efficacy and safety of a novel low-dose triple single-pill combination compared with placebo for initial treatment of hypertension
    (Elsevier Biomedical, 2024) Rodgers, A.; Salam, A.; Schutte, A.E.; Cushman, W.C.; De Silva, H.A.; Tanna, G.L.D.; Grobbee, D.; Narkiewicz, K.; Ojji, D.B.; Poulter, N.R.; Schlaich, M.P.; Oparil, S.; Spiering, W.; Williams, B.; Jr, J.T.W.; Gutierez, A.; Sanni, A.; Lakshman, P.; McMullen, D.; Ranasinghe, G.; Gianacas, C.; Shanthakumar, M.; Liu, X.; Wang, N.; Whelton, P.
    BACKGROUND Single-pill combinations of 3 or more low-dose blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs hold promise for initial or early treatment of hypertension.OBJECTIVES We conducted a placebo-controlled trial of a new single-pill combination containing low doses of telmisartan, amlodipine, and indapamide in 2 dose options to assess efficacy and safety.METHODS This international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial enrolled adults with hypertension receiving 0 to 1 BP-lowering drugs. After a 2-week placebo run-in during which any BP-lowering medication was stopped, participants were eligible if home systolic BP (SBP) was 130 to 154 mm Hg. Participants were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to GMRx2 ¼ dose (telmisartan 10 mg/amlodipine 1.25 mg/indapamide 0.625 mg), GMRx2 ½ dose (telmisartan 20 mg/amlodipine 2.5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg), or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was difference in change in home SBP from randomization to week 4, and primary safety outcome was treatment discontinuation due to an adverse event.RESULTS From June 14, 2021 to October 18, 2023, a total of 295 participants (mean age: 51 years; 56% female) were randomized and 96% completed the trial. Baseline mean home BP was 139/86 mm Hg and clinic BP was 138/86 mm Hg after placebo run-in. The placebo-corrected least square mean differences in home SBP at Week 4 were -7.3 mm Hg (95% CI: -4.5 to -10.2) for GMRx2 ¼ dose and -8.2 mm Hg (95% CI: -5.2 to -11.3) for GMRx2 ½ dose; reductions for clinic BP were 8.0/4.0 and 9.5/4.9 mm Hg. At Week 4, clinic BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) was 37%, 65%, and 70% for placebo, GMRx2 ¼ dose, and GMRx2 ½ dose, respectively (both doses P < 0.001 vs placebo). Placebo, GMRx2-triple ¼, and GMRx2 ½ treatment discontinuation due to an adverse event occurred in 1 (1.6%), 0, and 6 (5.1%), respectively; out of normal range serum sodium or potassium was observed in 4 (6.3%), 12 (10.6%), and 12 (10.1%), respectively, but no participant had a serum sodium <130/>150 mmol/L or potassium <3.0/>6.0 mmol/L. Serious adverse events were reported by 2 participants in the placebo and GMRx2 ½ groups and none in the GMRx2 ¼ group.CONCLUSIONS In a population with mild-to-moderate BP elevation, both dose versions of the novel low-dose triple single-pill combination showed good tolerability and clinically relevant BP reductions compared with placebo. (Efficacy and Safety of GRMx2 Compared to Placebo for the Treatment of Hypertension: NCT04518306).
  • Item
    Efficacy and safety of low-dose triple and quadruple combination pills vs monotherapy, usual care, or placebo for the initial management of hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    (American Medical Association, 2023) Wang, N.; Rueter, P.; Atkins, E.; Webster, R.; Huffman, M.; de Silva, A.; Chow, C.; Patel, A.; Rodgers, A.
    IMPORTANCE: Low-dose combination (LDC) antihypertensives consisting of 3 or 4 blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs have emerged as a potentially important therapy for the initial management of hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of LDC therapies for the management of hypertension. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Medline were searched from date of inception until September 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials comparing LDC consisting of 3 or 4 BP-lowering drugs compared to either monotherapy, usual care, or placebo. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted by 2 independent authors and synthesized using both random and fixed-effects models using risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was mean reduction in systolic BP (SBP) between LDC and monotherapy, usual care, or placebo. Other outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients achieving BP less than 140/90 mm Hg, rates of adverse effects, and treatment withdrawal. RESULTS: Seven trials with a total of 1918 patients (mean [mean range] age, 59 [50-70] years; 739 [38%] female) were included. Four trials involved triple-component LDC and 3 involved quadruple-component LDC. At 4 to 12 weeks follow-up, LDC was associated with a greater mean reduction in SBP than initial monotherapy or usual care (mean reduction, 7.4 mm Hg; 95% CI, 4.3-10.5) and placebo (mean reduction, 18.0 mm Hg; 95% CI, 15.1-20.8). LDC was associated with a higher proportion of participants achieving BP less than 140/90 mm Hg at 4 to 12 weeks compared to both monotherapy or usual care (66% vs 46%; RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.27-1.52) and placebo (54% vs 18%; RR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.93-4.77). There was no significant heterogeneity between trials enrolling patients with and without baseline BP-lowering therapy. Results from 2 trials indicated LDC remained superior to monotherapy or usual care at 6 to 12 months. LDC was associated with more dizziness (14% vs 11%; RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.00-1.63) but no other adverse effects nor treatment withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings in the study showed that LDCs with 3 or 4 antihypertensives were an effective and well-tolerated BP-lowering treatment option for the initial or early management of hypertension.
  • Item
    Reduced efficacy of blood pressure lowering drugs in the presence of diabetes mellitus-results from the TRIUMPH randomised controlled trial
    (Nature Publishing Group, 2023) Gnanenthiran, S.R.; Webster, R.; de Silva, A.; Maulik, P.K.; Salam, A.; Selak, V.; Guggilla, R.K.; Schutte, A.E.; Patel, A.; Rodgers, A.; TRIUMPH Study Group
    We investigated whether diabetes mellitus (DM) affects the efficacy of a low-dose triple combination pill and usual care among people with mild-moderate hypertension. TRIUMPH (TRIple pill vs Usual care Management for Patients with mild-to-moderate Hypertension) was a randomised controlled open-label trial of patients requiring initiation or escalation of antihypertensive therapy. Patients were randomised to a once-daily low-dose triple combination polypill (telmisartan-20mg/amlodipine-2.5 mg/chlorthalidone-12.5 mg) or usual care. This analysis compared BP reduction in people with and without DM, both in the intervention and control groups over 24-week follow-up. Predicted efficacy of prescribed therapy was calculated (estimation methods of Law et al.). The trial randomised 700 patients (56 ± 11 yrs, 31% DM). There was no difference in the number of drugs prescribed or predicted efficacy of therapy between people with DM and without DM. However, the observed BP reduction from baseline to week 24 was lower in those with DM compared to non-diabetics in both the triple pill (25/11 vs 31/15 mmHg, p ≤ 0.01) and usual care (17/7 vs 22/11 mmHg, p ≤ 0.01) groups, and these differences remained after multivariable adjustment. DM was a negative predictor of change in BP (β-coefficient -0.08, p = 0.02). In conclusion, patients with DM experienced reduced efficacy of BP lowering therapies as compared to patients without DM, irrespective of the type of BP lowering therapy received.
  • Item
    Triple therapy prevention of recurrent intracerebral disease events trial: rationale, design and progress
    (Blackwell Publishing, 2022) Anderson, C.S.; Rodgers, A.; de Silva, H.A.; Martins, S.O.; Klijn, C.J.; Senanayake, B.; Freed, R.; Billot, L.; Arima, H.; Thang, N.H.; Zaidi, W.A.W.; Kherkheulidze, T.; Wahab, K.; Fisher, U.; Lee, T.H.; Chen, C.; Pontes-Neto, O.; Robinson, T.; Wang, J.; Naismith, S.; Song, L.; Schreuder, F.H.; Lindley, R.I.; Woodward, M.; MacMahon, S.; Salman, R.A.; Chow, C.K.; Chalmers, J.
    Background: Patients who suffer intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) are at very high risk of recurrent ICH and other serious cardiovascular events. A single-pill combination (SPC) of blood pressure (BP) lowering drugs offers a potentially powerful but simple strategy to optimize secondary prevention. Objectives: The Triple Therapy Prevention of Recurrent Intracerebral Disease Events Trial (TRIDENT) aims to determine the effects of a novel SPC "Triple Pill," three generic antihypertensive drugs with demonstrated efficacy and complementary mechanisms of action at half standard dose (telmisartan 20 mg, amlodipine 2.5 mg, and indapamide 1.25 mg), with placebo for the prevention of recurrent stroke, cardiovascular events, and cognitive impairment after ICH. Design: An international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial in adults with ICH and mild-moderate hypertension (systolic BP: 130-160 mmHg), who are not taking any Triple Pill component drug at greater than half-dose. A total of 1500 randomized patients provide 90% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.5, over an average follow-up of 3 years, according to a total primary event rate (any stroke) of 12% in the control arm and other assumptions. Secondary outcomes include recurrent ICH, cardiovascular events, and safety. Results: Recruitment started 28 September 2017. Up to 31 October 2021, 821 patients were randomized at 54 active sites in 10 countries. Triple Pill adherence after 30 months is 86%. The required sample size should be achieved by 2024.
  • Item
    Association of low-dose triple combination therapy with therapeutic inertia and prescribing patterns in patients with hypertension: A Secondary analysis of the TRIUMPH trial
    (American Medical Association., 2020) Wang, N.; Salam, A.; Webster, R.; de Silva, A.; Guggilla, R.; Stepien, S.; Mysore, J.; Billot, L.; Jan, S.; Maulik, P. K.; Naik, N.; Selak, V.; Thom, S.; Prabhakaran, D.; Patel, A.; Rodgers, A.; TRIUMPH Study Group
    IMPORTANCE: Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies are being increasingly recommended for initial or early management of patients with hypertension, as they reduce treatment complexity and potentially reduce therapeutic inertia. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of antihypertensive triple drug FDC therapy with therapeutic inertia and prescribing patterns compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A post hoc analysis of the Triple Pill vs Usual Care Management for Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension (TRIUMPH) study, a randomized clinical trial of 700 patients with hypertension, was conducted. Patients were enrolled from 11 urban hospital clinics in Sri Lanka from February 2016 to May 2017; follow-up ended in October 2017. Data were analyzed from September to November 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Once-daily FDC antihypertensive pill (telmisartan, 20 mg; amlodipine, 2.5 mg; and chlorthalidone, 12.5 mg) or usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Therapeutic inertia, defined as not intensifying therapy in those with blood pressure (BP) above target, was assessed at baseline and during follow-up visits. Prescribing patterns were characterized by BP-lowering drug class and treatment regimen potency. Predictors of therapeutic inertia were assessed with binomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 700 included patients, 403 (57.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 56 (11) years. Among patients who did not reach the BP target, therapeutic inertia was more common in the triple pill group compared with the usual care group at the week 6 visit (92 of 106 [86.8%] vs 124 of 194 [63.9%]; P < .001) and week 12 visit (81 of 90 [90%] vs 116 of 179 [64.8%]; P < .001). At the end of the study, 221 of 318 patients in the triple pill group (69.5%) and 182 of 329 patients in the usual care group (55.3%) reached BP targets. Among those who received treatment intensification, the increase in estimated regimen potency was greater in the triple pill group compared with the usual care group at baseline (predicted mean [SD] increase in regimen potency: triple pill, 15 [6] mm Hg; usual care, 10 [5] mm Hg; P < .001), whereas there were no significant differences at the week 6 or at week 12 visit. Clinic systolic BP level was the only consistent predictor of treatment intensification during follow-up. During follow-up, there were 23 vs 54 unique treatment regimens per 100 treated patients in the triple pill vs usual care groups, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Triple pill FDC therapy was associated with greater rates of therapeutic inertia compared with usual care. Despite this, triple pill FDC therapy substantially simplified prescribing patterns and improved 6-month BP control rates compared with usual care. Further improvements in hypertension control could be achieved by addressing therapeutic inertia among the minority of patients who do not achieve BP control after initial FDC therapy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Fixed-combination, low-dose, triple-pill antihypertensive medication versus usual care in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension in Sri Lanka: a within-trial and modelled economic evaluation of the TRIUMPH trial.
    (The Lancet. Global health., 2019) Lung, T.; Jan, S.; de Silva, H.A.; Guggilla, R.; Maulik, P.K.; Naik, N.; Patel, A.; de Silva, A.P.; Rajapakse, S.; Ranasinghe, G.; Prabhakaran, D.; Rodgers, A.; Salam, A.; Selak, V.; Stepien, S.; Thom, S.; Webster, R.; Lea-Laba, T.; TRIUMPH Study Group.
    BACKGROUND: Elevated blood pressure incurs a major health and economic burden, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. The Triple Pill versus Usual Care Management for Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension (TRIUMPH) trial showed a greater reduction in blood pressure in patients using fixed-combination, low-dose, triple-pill antihypertensive therapy (consisting of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone) than in those receiving usual care in Sri Lanka. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the triple-pill strategy. METHODS: We did a within-trial (6-month) and modelled (10-year) economic evaluation of the TRIUMPH trial, using the health system perspective. Health-care costs, reported in 2017 US dollars, were determined from trial records and published literature. A discrete-time simulation model was developed, extrapolating trial findings of reduced systolic blood pressure to 10-year health-care costs, cardiovascular disease events, and mortality. The primary outcomes were the proportion of people reaching blood pressure targets (at 6 months from baseline) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted (at 10 years from baseline). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated to estimate the cost per additional participant achieving target blood pressure at 6 months and cost per DALY averted over 10 years. FINDINGS: The triple-pill strategy, compared with usual care, cost an additional US$9·63 (95% CI 5·29 to 13·97) per person in the within-trial analysis and $347·75 (285·55 to 412·54) per person in the modelled analysis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated at $7·93 (95% CI 6·59 to 11·84) per participant reaching blood pressure targets at 6 months and $2842·79 (-28·67 to 5714·24) per DALY averted over a 10-year period. INTERPRETATION: Compared with usual care, the triple-pill strategy is cost-effective for patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Scaled up investment in the triple pill for hypertension management in Sri Lanka should be supported to address the high population burden of cardiovascular disease.
All items in this Institutional Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. No item in the repository may be reproduced for commercial or resale purposes.