Efficacy and safety of a therapeutic interchange from high-dose calcium channel blockers to a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/benazepril in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension

Citation
De. Hilleman et al., Efficacy and safety of a therapeutic interchange from high-dose calcium channel blockers to a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/benazepril in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension, J HUM HYPER, 15(8), 2001, pp. 559-565
Citations number
24
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems
Journal title
JOURNAL OF HUMAN HYPERTENSION
ISSN journal
09509240 → ACNP
Volume
15
Issue
8
Year of publication
2001
Pages
559 - 565
Database
ISI
SICI code
0950-9240(200108)15:8<559:EASOAT>2.0.ZU;2-A
Abstract
Background: Recent hypertension trials have demonstrated the importance of achieving goal blood pressures to reduce the risk of target organ damage. I n patients with moderate to severe hypertension, the use of high-dose monot herapy and/or combinations of drugs are necessary to achieve these goals. F ixed-dose combination products may be useful in these patients by reducing the number of daily doses required to control blood pressure. Objective: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a therapeutic interchange between high-dose calcium channel b locker therapy and a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/benazepril (Lotre l (R); Novartis Pharmaceuticals, USA) in patients with moderate to severe h ypertension. Methods: A total of 75 patients were switched from amlodipine (n = 25), fel odipine (n = 25), and nifedipine-GITS (n = 25) to amlodipine/benazepril. Tw enty-eight of the 75 patients (37%) were taking either a beta-blocker or a diuretic in addition to the high-dose calcium channel blocker prior to the switch. Blood pressure control, side effects and the cost of the therapeuti c interchange were evaluated in the year following the therapeutic intercha nge. Results: Sixty-six of the 75 (88%) patients were successfully switched with maintenance of blood pressure control and without the development of new d ose-limiting side effects. Reasons for treatment failure after the therapeu tic interchange included loss of blood pressure control in five patients an d the development of new dose-limiting side effects in four patients. These side effects included cough in three patients and rash in one patient. Aft er accounting for differences in drug acquisition cost and costs related to the switch (clinic and emergency room and laboratory tests), a cost saving s of $16030 for all 75 patients was realised in the first year. The per pat ient-per year cost savings was $214. Conclusions: Our data indicate that a therapeutic interchange from selected high-dose calcium channel blockers to a fixed-dose combination of amlodipi ne/benazepril can be successfully accomplished in the majority of patients.