Correction: An international randomised placebo-controlled trial of a four-component combination pill ("polypill") in people with raised cardiovascular risk.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: [This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019857.].
Correction: An international randomised placebo-controlled trial of a four-component combination pill ("polypill") in people with raised cardiovascular risk.
PloS one 20191125 11
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019857.]. ...[more]
Project description:BackgroundThere has been widespread interest in the potential of combination cardiovascular medications containing aspirin and agents to lower blood pressure and cholesterol ('polypills') to reduce cardiovascular disease. However, no reliable placebo-controlled data are available on both efficacy and tolerability.MethodsWe conducted a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial of a polypill (containing aspirin 75 mg, lisinopril 10 mg, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg and simvastatin 20 mg) in 378 individuals without an indication for any component of the polypill, but who had an estimated 5-year cardiovascular disease risk over 7.5%. The primary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), LDL-cholesterol and tolerability (proportion discontinued randomised therapy) at 12 weeks follow-up.FindingsAt baseline, mean BP was 134/81 mmHg and mean LDL-cholesterol was 3.7 mmol/L. Over 12 weeks, polypill treatment reduced SBP by 9.9 (95% CI: 7.7 to 12.1) mmHg and LDL-cholesterol by 0.8 (95% CI 0.6 to 0.9) mmol/L. The discontinuation rates in the polypill group compared to placebo were 23% vs 18% (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.00, p?=?0.2). There was an excess of side effects known to the component medicines (58% vs 42%, p?=?0.001), which was mostly apparent within a few weeks, and usually did not warrant cessation of trial treatment.ConclusionsThis polypill achieved sizeable reductions in SBP and LDL-cholesterol but caused side effects in about 1 in 6 people. The halving in predicted cardiovascular risk is moderately lower than previous estimates and the side effect rate is moderately higher. Nonetheless, substantial net benefits would be expected among patients at high risk.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12607000099426.
Project description:BackgroundA significant proportion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality could be prevented via the population-based and cost-effective interventions. A fixed-dose combination treatment is known as the polypill for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD has come up in recent years.PurposeIn order to provide recommendations for future economic evaluations, this systematic review aimed to review and assess the quality of published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of polypill in primary and secondary prevention of CVD, to identify the key drivers that impact the cost-effectiveness.MethodsA systematic review of literature, following the PRISMA guidelines, was undertaken in the electronic databases. Two researchers identified the relevant studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to quality assessment of included studies. ICERs value adjusted to 2020 United States Dollar using consumer price index (CPI) and purchasing power parity (PPP). Finally, data were summarized via a narrative synthesis.ResultsIn total, 24 articles were identified based on the determined inclusion criteria. All studies met more than 50% of the CHEERS criteria. Adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios varied from 24$ to 31000$(2020 US dollar) among the studies. The polypill resulted in the improved adherence and quality of life, at a price equal to or lower than multiple monotherapies. This price is typically below the commonly accepted thresholds or cost saving in both, primary and secondary prevention of CVD. The main identified cost-effectiveness drivers were the polypill price, adherence, age, CVD risk, and drug combination.ConclusionsThis systematic review found that the polypill seemed to be a cost-effective intervention in primary and secondary prevention of CVD. However, it is necessary to conduct more economic evaluation studies based on the long-term clinical trials with large populations. Also, studies should consider how the polypill interacts with other primary and secondary preventive strategies as a complementary health strategy.
Project description:BackgroundA Polypill is proposed for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people judged to be at risk on account of their age alone. Its efficacy in reducing cholesterol and blood pressure is uncertain.MethodsWe conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial of a Polypill among individuals aged 50+ without a history of cardiovascular disease and compared the reductions with those predicted from published estimates of the effects of the individual drugs. Participants took the Polypill (amlodipine 2.5 mg, losartan 25 mg, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg and simvastatin 40 mg) each evening for 12 weeks and a placebo each evening for 12 weeks in random sequence. The mean within-person differences in blood pressure and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol at the end of each 12 week period were determined.Results84 out of 86 participants completed both treatment periods. The mean systolic blood pressure was reduced by 17.9 mmHg (95% CI, 15.7-20.1) on the Polypill, diastolic blood pressure by 9.8 mmHg (8.1-11.5), and LDL cholesterol by 1.4 mmol/L (1.2-1.6), reductions of 12%, 11%, and 39% respectively. The results were almost identical to those predicted; 18.4 mmHg, 9.7 mmHg, and 1.4 mmol/L respectively.ConclusionThe Polypill resulted in the predicted reductions in blood pressure and LDL cholesterol. Long term reductions of this magnitude would have a substantial effect in preventing heart attacks and strokes.Trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN36672232.
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare adherence to antihypertensive treatment between patients prescribed a three-drug single-pill combination (SPC) of perindopril/amlodipine/indapamide (P/A/I) vs. the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), a calcium-channel blocker (CCB), and a diuretic (D) as a two-drug SPC plus a third drug given separately.MethodsUsing the healthcare utilization database of the Lombardy Region (Italy), the 28 210 patients, aged at least 40 years, who were prescribed P/A/I SPC during 2015-2018 were identified and the date of the first prescription was defined as the index date. For each patient prescribed the SPC, a comparator who started ACEI/CCB/D treatment as a two-pill combination was considered. Adherence to the triple combination was assessed over the year after the index date as the proportion of the follow-up days covered by prescription (PDC). Patients who had a PDC >75% were defined as highly adherent to drug therapy. Log-binomial regression models were fitted to estimate the risk ratio of treatment adherence in relation to the drug treatment strategy.ResultsAbout 59 and 25% of SPC and two-pill combination users showed high adherence, respectively. Compared with patients under a three-drug two-pill combination, those who were treated with the three-drug SPC had a higher propensity to be highly adherent to the triple combination (2.38, 95% confidence interval: 2.32-2.44). This was the case regardless of the sex, age, comorbidities, and number of co-treatments.ConclusionsIn a real-life setting, patients under three-drug SPC exhibited more frequently a high adherence to antihypertensive treatment than those prescribed a three-drug two-pill combination.
Project description:Using a single-pill combination (SPC) for hypertension (HTN) treatment resulted in better adherence and persistence than a free-equivalent combination in previous observational studies. The aim of this study is to confirm superior adherence with a triple-component SPC compared with an equivalent two-pill regimen in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) using a medication event monitoring system (MEMS). This is a multicenter, open-label, RCT. Subjects were persons with HTN whose clinic blood pressure was not adequately controlled (systolic >140 mmHg or diastolic >90 mmHg) with a dual combination. Eligible patients were randomized to either the triple-component SPC (olmesartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide 20/5/12.5 mg) group or the equivalent two-pill (olmesartan/hydrochlorothiazide 20/12.5 mg + amlodipine 5 mg) group and maintained for 12 weeks. Primary outcomes were the difference in percentage of doses taken (PDT) and percentage of days with the prescribed dose taken correctly (PDTc) between the single- and two-pill therapy groups, calculated from MEMS data. From 8 hospitals, 145 patients with HTN were randomized. The single-pill group had significantly higher PDT and PDTc than the two-pill group: median (25-75 percentile) PDT 95.1 (86.7-100.0) versus 92.1 (73.0-97.3); and PDTc 91.0 (79.4-96.5) versus 88.6 (69.2-96.3%), P = 0.04 for both by the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The single-pill combination of the triple-component antihypertensive regimen showed better adherence than the equivalent two-pill therapy. Reducing pill burden by means of a single-pill combination is an effective strategy for enhancing adherence to multiple-agent antihypertensive therapy. Study Highlights WHAT IS THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE ON THE TOPIC? Previous studies suggested that the use of a single-pill combination (SPC) in hypertension (HTN) treatment produced better adherence and persistence than a free-equivalent combination. However, supportive data are confined to dual-component SPC and came from observational studies using medication possession ratio as an outcome. WHAT QUESTION DID THIS STUDY ADDRESS? The objective of this study is to investigate whether a triple-component SPC improved medication adherence over an equivalent two-pill combination therapy in a randomized controlled trial using medication event monitoring systems. WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD TO OUR KNOWLEDGE? Medication adherence in the SPC group was superior to that of two-pill group, confirming previous findings from observational studies. HOW MIGHT THIS CHANGE CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY OR TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE? This finding strongly supports the current HTN treatment guideline to prefer SPC with a higher level of evidence.
Project description:The placebo response is universally observed in clinical trials of pain treatments, yet the individual characteristics rendering a patient a 'placebo responder' remain unclear. Here, in chronic back pain patients, we demonstrate using MRI and fMRI that the response to placebo 'analgesic' pills depends on brain structure and function. Subcortical limbic volume asymmetry, sensorimotor cortical thickness, and functional coupling of prefrontal regions, anterior cingulate, and periaqueductal gray were predictive of response. These neural traits were present before exposure to the pill and most remained stable across treatment and washout periods. Further, psychological traits, including interoceptive awareness and openness, were also predictive of the magnitude of response. These results shed light on psychological, neuroanatomical, and neurophysiological principles determining placebo response in RCTs in chronic pain patients, and they suggest that the long-term beneficial effects of placebo, as observed in clinical settings, are partially predictable.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:The use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in combination with metformin is increasing in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but no single-pill combination (SPC) is currently available in Japan. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin/metformin SPC in Japanese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with vildagliptin monotherapy. METHODS:This was a 14-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. 171 patients with T2DM inadequately controlled [HbA1c (glycosylated hemoglobin) 7.0-10.0%] with vildagliptin 50 mg twice daily (bid) were randomized (2:1) to receive either a vildagliptin/metformin SPC (n = 115) or matching vildagliptin/placebo SPC (n = 56). RESULTS:Baseline demographics and background characteristics were generally comparable between the treatment groups. The change in HbA1c [mean ± standard error (SE)] was -0.8 ± 0.1% in the vildagliptin/metformin SPC (baseline HbA1c, 7.9 ± 0.1%) group and 0.1 ± 0.1% in the vildagliptin/placebo SPC (baseline HbA1c, 8.0 ± 0.1%) group, with a between-treatment difference of -1.0 ± 0.1% (P <0.001) in favor of the vildagliptin/metformin SPC group. The proportion of patients achieving target HbA1c <7.0% was significantly higher with vildagliptin/metformin SPC compared with vildagliptin/placebo SPC (45.8% vs. 13.5%, P <0.001). The overall incidences of adverse events (AEs) were 43.5% in the vildagliptin/metformin SPC and 67.9% in the vildagliptin/placebo SPC group. The incidences of serious AEs were low in both the treatment groups (0.9% vs. 3.6%, respectively). Body weight remained constant throughout the study in both the treatment groups. There were no deaths or hypoglycemic events during the study. CONCLUSIONS:Switching Japanese patients with T2DM requiring treatment intensification, from vildagliptin monotherapy to a vildagliptin/metformin SPC (50/250 or 50/500 mg) was efficacious and safe, eliciting significant reduction in HbA1c without increased risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain.
Project description:Finally stereoselective: Enantioselective variations have been developed for many multicomponent reactions; however, it has been missing for the Ugi four-component reaction. This has now changed with the discovery of an efficient catalytic enantioselective variant for the four-component reaction of isocyanides, primary amines, aldehydes or ketones, and carboxylic acids.
Project description:Exciplex or excited complex emission is an excited state process, arising from considerable charge transfer of an excited energy donor to an acceptor, which can be identified by the occurrence of a redshifted emission band that is absent in the individual constituents. Particularly interesting are exciplexes that are formed by intramolecular excited state interaction, which are inherently concentration independent. Based upon our previous experience in the Ugi-4CR syntheses of donor-acceptor conjugates capable of photo-induced intramolecular electron transfer (PIET), that is, generation of light-induced charge separation, we now disclose the diversity-oriented approach on unimolecular exciplex emitters and their reference systems by Ugi-4CR. The photophysics is studied by absorption and emission spectroscopy and accompanied by density functional theory (DFT) and time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) calculations.
Project description:Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy is recommended for hypertension management in Nigeria based on randomized trials at the individual level. This cluster-randomized trial evaluates effectiveness and safety of a treatment protocol that used two-drug FDC therapy as the second and third steps for hypertension control compared with a protocol that used free pill combinations. From January 2021 to June 2021, 60 primary healthcare centers in the Federal Capital Territory of Nigeria were randomized to a protocol using FDC therapy as second and third steps compared with a protocol that used the same medications in free pill combination therapy for these steps. Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) with hypertension. The primary outcome was the odds of a patient being controlled at their last visit between baseline to 6-month follow-up in the FDC group compared to the free pill group. 4427 patients (mean [SD] age: 49.0 [12.4] years, 70.5% female) were registered with mean (SD) baseline systolic/diastolic blood pressure 155 (20.6)/96 (13.1) mm Hg. Baseline characteristics of groups were similar. After 6-months, hypertension control rate improved in the two treatment protocols, but there were no differences between the groups after adjustment (FDC = 53.9% versus free pill combination = 47.9%, cluster-adjusted p = .29). Adverse events were similarly low (<1%) in both groups. Both protocols improved hypertension control rates at 6-months in comparison to baseline, though no differences were observed between groups. Further work is needed to determine if upfront FDC therapy is more effective and efficient to improve hypertension control rates.