An exploratory subgroup analysis of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, forced-titration study comparing the efficacy and safety of once-daily olmesartan medoxomil (OM) and losartan potassium (LOS) in patients with stage 1 or stage 2 hypertension is reported. After a 3- to 4-week placebo run-in period, eligible patients received once-daily OM (weeks 1-4, 20 mg; weeks 5-8, 40 mg), placebo plus OM (weeks 1-2, placebo; weeks 3-4, OM 20 mg; weeks 5-8, OM 40 mg), or LOS (weeks 1-4, 50 mg; weeks 5-8, 100 mg). A subset of patients underwent ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring. Efficacy endpoints by hypertension stage were mean change from baseline in seated cuff diastolic BP (SeDBP) at week 8 (primary); seated cuff systolic BP (SeSBP) at week 4 and week 8, and SeDBP at week 4 (secondary); and the change from baseline in mean 24-hour ambulatory BP at week 8, and BP target achievement (tertiary). At week 8, patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension had least-squares mean SeDBP reductions from baseline of 9.9 and 9.5 mm Hg, respectively, for OM treatment, and 6.9 and 7.3 mm Hg for LOS treatment (P = 0.0095 and P = 0.0035, respectively). Overall, 63.6% of patients with stage 1 hypertension treated with OM versus 47.3% treated with LOS (P = 0.0095) achieved an SeBP of, 140/90 mm Hg, while 36.1% of patients with stage 2 hypertension treated with OM versus 25.2% treated with LOS (P = 0.0022) achieved an SeBP of, 140/90 mm Hg. At week 8, OM-treated patients with stage 2 hypertension had a significantly greater reduction in least-squares mean 24-hour ambulatory BP versus LOS-treated patients. Olmesartan and LOS were well tolerated, and the most common treatment-emergent adverse event was headache. Once-daily, maximum doses of OM in patients with stage 1 or stage 2 hypertension achieved superior BP reductions versus LOS, with similar tolerability.

In the prospective, open-label, titrate-to-goal Blood Pressure Control in All Subgroups With Hypertension (BP-CRUSH) study, 999 patients with hypertension uncontrolled on monotherapy (mean age, 55.6 +/- 11.4 years; baseline blood pressure [BP], 153.7 +/- 9.2/91.9 +/- 8.6 mm Hg) were switched to fixed-dose amlodipine/olmesartan medoxomil (AML/OM) 5/20 mg. Patients were uptitrated every 4 weeks to AML/OM 5/40 mg and 10/40 mg to achieve BP < 120/70 mm Hg. Patients were subsequently uptitrated every 4 weeks to AML/OM+hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 10/40+12.5 mg and 10/40+25 mg to achieve BP < 125/75 mm Hg. The primary end point, the cumulative percentage of patients achieving seated systolic BP < 140 mm Hg (< 130 mm Hg for patients with diabetes) by week 12, was 75.8%. The mean (+/- standard error) BP changes from baseline during the titration periods ranged from -14.2 +/- 0.4 mm Hg/-7.7 +/- 0.3 mm Hg for AML/OM 5/20 mg to -25.1 +/- 0.7 mm Hg/-13.7 +/- 0.4 mm Hg for AML/OM+HCTZ 10/40+25 mg. By week 20, the cumulative BP threshold of < 140/90 mm Hg was achieved by 90.3% of patients. An ambulatory BP monitoring substudy (n=243) showed that 24-hour efficacy was maintained. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), mostly mild to moderate in severity, occurred in 529 patients (53.0%). Drug-related TEAEs occurred in 255 patients (25.5%). This well-tolerated, treat-to-goal algorithm enabled a large proportion of patients with uncontrolled hypertension on monotherapy to safely achieve BP control on single-pill AML/OM combination therapy or triple therapy with the addition of HCTZ. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011;13:404-412. (C)2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Poor control of hypertension or dyslipidemia may at least in part be due to these risk factors being treated in isolation. The Caduet in Untreated Subjects Population (CUSP) trial was an 8‐week, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial evaluating the efficacy/safety of the combination of a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate) and a statin (atorvastatin calcium) in a single‐pill form (5/20 mg) plus therapeutic lifestyle changes (TLC) compared with placebo plus TLC in patients with comorbid hypertension and dyslipidemia without evidence of cardiovascular disease. At week 4, additional antihypertensive/lipid‐lowering medication was permitted. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in whom the dual goal of blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg) and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol control (<100 mg/dL) was met at week 4. This dual goal attainment was significantly greater with amlodipine/atorvastatin plus TLC compared with placebo plus TLC at week 4 (47.6% vs 1.7%; P <.001), with further improvements at week 8. Most adverse events were mild to moderate. Therapy with single‐pill amlodipine/atorvastatin plus TLC in these patients significantly increased dual blood pressure/low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment compared with placebo plus TLC.

Background: One third of patients treated for hypertension attain adequate blood pressure (BP) control, and multidrug regimens are often required. Given the lifelong nature of hypertension, there is a need to evaluate the long-term efficacy and tolerability of higher doses of combination antihypertensive therapies. Objective: This study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of valsartan (VAL) or hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) monotherapy and higher-dose combinations in patients with essential hypertension.Methods: The first part of this study was an 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, parallel-group trial. Patients with essential hypertension (mean sitting diastolic BP [MSDBP], >= 95 mm Hg and < 110 mm Hg) were randomized to 1 of 8 treatment groups: VAL 160 or 320 mg; HCTZ 12.5 or 25 mg; VAL/HCTZ 160112.5, 320/12.5, or 320/25 mg; or placebo. Mean changes in MSDBP and mean sitting systolic BP (MSSBP) were analyzed at the 8-week core study end point. VAL/HCTZ 320/12.5 and 320/25 mg were further investigated in a 54-week, open-label extension. Response was defined as MSDBP < 90 mm Hg or a >= 10 mm Hg decrease compared to baseline. Control was defined as MSDBP < 90 mm Hg compared with baseline. Tolerability was assessed by monitoring adverse events at randomization and all subsequent study visits and regular evaluation of hematology and blood chemistry.Results: A total of 1346 patients were randomized into the 8-week core study (734 men, 612 women; 924 white, 291 black, 23 Asian, 108 other; mean age, 52.7 years; mean weight, 92.6 kg). All active treatments were associated with significantly reduced MSSBP and MSDBP during the core 8-week study, with each monotherapy significantly contributing to the overall effect of combination therapy (VAL and HCTZ, P < 0.001). Each combination was associated with significantly greater reductions in MSSBP and MSDBP compared with the monotherapies and placebo (all, P < 0.001). The mean reduction in MSSBP/MSDBP with VALJHCTZ 320/25 ing was 24.7/ 16.6 mm Hg, compared with 5.9/7.0 mm Hg with placebo. The reduction in MSSBP was significantly greater with VAL/HCTZ 320/25 mg compared with VAL/HCTZ 160112.5 mg (P < 0.002). Rates of response and BP control were significantly higher in the groups that received combination treatment compared with those that received monotherapy. The incidence of hypokalemia was lower with VAL/HCTZ combinations (1.8%-6.1%) than with HCTZ monotherapies (7.1%-13.3%). The majority of adverse events in the core study were of mild to moderate severity. The efficacy and tolerability of VAL/HCTZ combinations were maintained during the extension (797 patients).Conclusions: In this study population, combination therapies with VAL/HCTZ were associated with significantly greater BP reductions compared with either monotherapy, were well tolerated, and were associated with less hypokalemia than HCTZ alone.