An eight-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-dose amlodipine/benazepril combination in comparison with amlodipine as first-line therapy in chinese patients with mild to moderate hypertension.
{"title":"An eight-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-dose amlodipine/benazepril combination in comparison with amlodipine as first-line therapy in chinese patients with mild to moderate hypertension.","authors":"Kwo-Chang Ueng, Lung-Chun Lin, Wen-Chol Voon, Ming-Cheng Lin, Yen-Bin Liu, Ho-Ming Su, Po-Yuan Chang, Tsung-Hsien Lin, Wei-Liang Chen, Chau-Chung Wu, Wen-Ter Lai, Chung-Sheng Lin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study sought to compare the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of a fixed-dose combination with amlodipine/benazepril with that of amlodipine monotherapy in Chinese hypertensive subjects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This multicenter, double-blind, 8-week study randomized 111 patients to fixed-dose amlodipine besylate/benazepril HCl (2.5/5 mg/day titrated to 5/10 mg/day as needed at week 4 to reach goal blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mmHg) or amlodipine besylate monotherapy (5 mg/day titrated to 10 mg/day as needed). At week 8, patients randomized to combination therapy compared with monotherapy had a comparable BP control rate (56.0% vs. 46.2%; p = 0.32). Fixed-dose combination resulted in similar reductions in sitting systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) compared with monotherapy (SBP: -19.3 +/- 12.5 vs. -20.9 +/- 13.3 mmHg; DBP: -9.2 +/- 10.4 vs. -11.3 +/-9.3 mmHg; both p=NS). Safety profiles did not differ between groups, but cough was more common in the combination group (11.0% vs. 0%; p = 0.013).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this group of patients, comparable antihypertensive effects were seen with the fixed-dose combination therapy, compared with amlodipine monotherapy. Both treatments appeared well tolerated in the studied population, but cough was more common in the fixed-dose combination group.</p>","PeriodicalId":8974,"journal":{"name":"Blood pressure. Supplement","volume":"1 ","pages":"24-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood pressure. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: This study sought to compare the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of a fixed-dose combination with amlodipine/benazepril with that of amlodipine monotherapy in Chinese hypertensive subjects.
Results: This multicenter, double-blind, 8-week study randomized 111 patients to fixed-dose amlodipine besylate/benazepril HCl (2.5/5 mg/day titrated to 5/10 mg/day as needed at week 4 to reach goal blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mmHg) or amlodipine besylate monotherapy (5 mg/day titrated to 10 mg/day as needed). At week 8, patients randomized to combination therapy compared with monotherapy had a comparable BP control rate (56.0% vs. 46.2%; p = 0.32). Fixed-dose combination resulted in similar reductions in sitting systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) compared with monotherapy (SBP: -19.3 +/- 12.5 vs. -20.9 +/- 13.3 mmHg; DBP: -9.2 +/- 10.4 vs. -11.3 +/-9.3 mmHg; both p=NS). Safety profiles did not differ between groups, but cough was more common in the combination group (11.0% vs. 0%; p = 0.013).
Conclusions: In this group of patients, comparable antihypertensive effects were seen with the fixed-dose combination therapy, compared with amlodipine monotherapy. Both treatments appeared well tolerated in the studied population, but cough was more common in the fixed-dose combination group.