Dataset Information

A Prospective Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center, Phase III Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan/Amlodipine plus Rosuvastatin Combination Treatment in Patients with Concomitant Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: A LEISURE Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of an olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin combination treatment for patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Methods

Patients with both hypertension and dyslipidemia aged 20-80 were enrolled from 36 tertiary hospitals in Korea from January 2017 to April 2018. Patients were randomized to three groups in a 1:1:0.5 ratio, olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin (olme/amlo/rosu) or olmesartan plus rosuvastatin (olme/rosu) or olmesartan/amlodipine single pill (olme/amlo) combination. The primary endpoints were change of sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP) from baseline in the olme/amlo/rosu vs. olme/rosu groups and the percentage change of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline in the olme/amlo/rosu vs. olme/amlo groups after 8 weeks of treatment.

Results

A total of 265 patients were randomized, 106 to olme/amlo/rosu, 106 to olme/rosu and 53 to olme/amlo groups. Baseline characteristics among the three groups did not differ. The mean sitSBP change was significantly larger in the olme/amlo/rosu group with -24.30 ± 12.62 mmHg (from 153.58 ± 10.90 to 129.28 ± 13.58) as compared to the olme/rosu group, -9.72 ± 16.27 mmHg (from 153.71 ± 11.10 to 144.00 ± 18.44 mmHg). The difference in change of sitSBP between the two groups was -14.62± 1.98 mmHg with significance (95% CI -18.51 to -10.73, p < 0.0001). The mean LDL-C reduced significantly in the olme/amlo/rosu group, -52.31 ± 16.63% (from 154.52 ± 30.84 to 72.72 ± 26.08 mg/dL) as compared to the olme/amlo group with no change, -2.98 ± 16.16% (from 160.42 ± 32.05 to 153.81 ± 31.57 mg/dL). Significant difference in change was found in LDL-C between the two groups with -50.10 ± 2.73% (95% CI -55.49 to -44.71, p < 0.0001). Total adverse drug reaction rates were 10.48%, 5.66% and 3.7% in the olme/amlo/rosu, olme/rosu and olme/amlo groups, respectively with no statistical significance among the three groups. Serious adverse drug reactions did not occur.

Conclusions

Olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin combination treatment for patients with both hypertension and dyslipidemia is effective and safe as compared to either olmesartan plus rosuvastatin or olmesartan plus amlodipine treatment.

SUBMITTER: Jo SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8779537 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:A fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet formulation of amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin 5/100/20 mg was developed to improve medication compliance in patients with both hypertension and dyslipidemia. The comparative pharmacokinetic study was performed to compare the profile of an FDC tablet formulation of amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin with that of concomitant administration of a currently marketed FDC tablet of amlodipine/losartan with a rosuvastatin tablet. Subjects and Methods:A randomized, open-label, single oral dose, two-way crossover study was conducted in 60 healthy subjects. Subjects were orally administered the FDC tablet of amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin and a loose combination (LC) of two tablets comprising an FDC of amlodipine/losartan and rosuvastatin. Blood samples were collected for up to 144 h post dose for pharmacokinetic evaluations. Plasma concentrations of amlodipine, losartan, EXP3174 (an active metabolite of losartan), and rosuvastatin were measured by using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) and its 90% confidence interval (90% CI) in the FDC treatment to LC treatment for the area under the concentration-time curve from zero to the last quantifiable time point (AUClast) and the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were calculated. Safety was monitored throughout the study. Results:The GMR (90% CI) values of AUClast and Cmax were 0.9946 (0.9663-1.0238) and 0.9690 (0.9379-1.0011) for amlodipine, 0.9855 (0.9422-1.0308) and 0.9178 (0.8349-1.0089) for losartan, 0.9814 (0.9501-1.0136) and 0.9756 (0.9313-1.0219) for EXP3174, and 0.9448 (0.8995-0.9923) and 0.9609 (0.8799-1.0494) for rosuvastatin, respectively. No clinically significant changes were observed in any of the safety parameters, including clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, electrocardiograms, and physical examinations, between the FDC treatment and the LC treatment. Conclusion:We confirmed the pharmacokinetic equivalence of the FDC and LC treatments. This triple combination FDC formulation could be a clinically useful replacement for LC therapy.

Project description:The pill burden of patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia can result in poor medication compliance. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy with olmesartan medoxomil (40 mg) and rosuvastatin (20 mg) in Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension and dyslipidemia. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, factorial-design study included patients aged ?20 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension and dyslipidemia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive FDC therapy (40 mg olmesartan medoxomil, 20 mg rosuvastatin), 40 mg olmesartan medoxomil, 20 mg rosuvastatin, or a placebo. The percentage change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels was compared between FDC therapy and olmesartan medoxomil, and the change from baseline in diastolic blood pressure was compared between FDC therapy and rosuvastatin 8 weeks after treatment. A total of 162 patients were included. The least square mean percentage change (standard error) from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels 8 weeks after treatment was significantly greater in the FDC than in the olmesartan medoxomil group (-52.3% [2.8%] vs -0.6% [3.5%], P<0.0001), and the difference was -51.7% (4.1%) (95% confidence interval: -59.8% to -43.6%). The least square mean change (standard error) from baseline in diastolic blood pressure 8 weeks after treatment was significantly greater in the FDC group than in the rosuvastatin group (-10.4 [1.2] mmHg vs 0.1 [1.6] mmHg, P<0.0001), and the difference was -10.5 (1.8) mmHg (95% confidence interval: -14.1 to -6.9 mmHg). There were 50 adverse events in 41 patients (22.7%) and eight adverse drug reactions in five patients (2.8%). The study found that FDC therapy with olmesartan medoxomil and rosuvastatin is an effective, safe treatment for patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. This combination may improve medication compliance in patients with a large pill burden.

Project description:Single risk factors, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia, can combine to exacerbate the development and severity of cardiovascular disease. Treatment goals may be more effectively achieved if multiple disease factors are targeted with combination treatment. We enrolled 202 patients who were randomly divided into the following three groups: telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg. The primary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg at 8 weeks, and the percent changes from baseline in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg at 8 weeks. The secondary efficacy variables were changes in MSSBP, mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP), LDL cholesterol and other lipid levels at 4 weeks and 8 weeks, as well as observed adverse events during follow-up. There were no significant differences between the three groups in demographic characteristics and no significant difference among the three groups in terms of baseline characteristics for the validity evaluation variables. The mean overall treatment compliance in the three groups was, respectively, 98.42%, 96.68%, and 98.12%, indicating strong compliance for all patients. The Least-Square (LS) mean (SE) for changes in MSSBP in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg) groups were -19.3 (2.68) mm Hg and -6.69 (2.76) mm Hg. The difference between the two groups was significant (-12.60 (2.77) mm Hg, 95% CI -18.06 to -7.14, P < .0001). The LS Mean for the percent changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg) groups were -52.45 (3.23) % and 2.68 (3.15) %. The difference between the two groups was significant (-55.13 (3.20) %, 95% CI -61.45 to -48.81, P < .0001). There were no adverse events leading to discontinuation or death. Combined administration of telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg and rosuvastatin 20 mg for the treatment of hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia significantly reduces blood pressure and improves lipid control. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03067688.

Project description:IntroductionCentral blood pressure (BP), an important measure of cardiovascular risk, has been shown to be effectively reduced by calcium channel blockade with amlodipine (AML) plus renin-angiotensin system blockade by the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, perindopril (PER). The aim of the SEVITENSION study was to compare the central effects of PER/AML against renin-angiotensin system blockade with the angiotensin II receptor blocker olmesartan (OLM) plus AML.MethodsIn this multicenter, parallel group, non-inferiority study, patients received AML 10 mg during a 2- to 4-week run-in before randomization to 24 weeks of double-blind treatment with the fixed-dose combination of OLM/AML 40/10 mg or PER/AML 8/10 mg. Hydrochlorothiazide was added at Weeks 4, 8, or 12 in patients with inadequate BP control. The primary efficacy variable was the absolute change in central systolic BP (CSBP) from baseline to the final examination, measured by radial artery applanation tonometry and analyzed by parametric analysis of covariance. Secondary variables included 24-h ambulatory and seated BP measurements as well as BP normalization.ResultsOf 600 patients enrolled, 486 were randomized (244 to OLM/AML 40/10 mg, 242 to PER/AML 8/10 mg). The reduction in CSBP was larger with OLM/AML (14.5 ± 0.83 mmHg) than with PER/AML (10.4 ± 0.84 mmHg). The between-group difference was -4.2 ± 1.18 mmHg with 95% confidence intervals (-6.48 to -1.83 mmHg) within the predefined non-inferiority margin (2 mmHg). An integrated superiority test confirmed that OLM/AML was superior to PER/AML (p < 0.0001) in reducing CSBP. The superiority of OLM/AML over PER/AML was also established for the majority of secondary efficacy variables; at the final examination, 75.6% of OLM/AML recipients achieved BP normalization (mean seated systolic BP/diastolic BP <140/90 mmHg) compared with 57.5% of PER/AML recipients (p < 0.0001).ConclusionThe combination of OLM/AML was superior to PER/AML in reducing CSBP and other efficacy measures, including a significantly higher rate of BP normalization.

Project description:Objective:The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety profiles of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) formulation of fimasartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin with the co-administration of the two products by using a replicated crossover study design in healthy male subjects. Results:This was an open-label, randomized, three-sequence, three-period replicated crossover study in healthy male subjects. The replicated crossover design was done because of high coefficient of variation of PK parameter for fimasartan, that is, >30%. With a 14 days washout period, an FDC tablet containing 60 mg fimasartan, 10 mg amlodipine, and 20 mg rosuvastatin was administered only once, and separate formulations of fimasartan/amlodipine 60 mg/10 mg FDC tablet and 20 mg rosuvastatin tablet administered twice. Blood samples were collected up to 72 hours following drug administration. The plasma concentrations of fimasartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin were measured by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Safety was assessed by evaluating vital signs, clinical laboratory parameters, physical examinations, and medical interviews. Results:The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the curve from time zero to the last measurable sampling time (AUCt) were 1.0776 (0.9201-1.2622) and 0.9978 (0.9538-1.0439) for fimasartan, 1.0038 (0.9782-1.0301) and 1.0055 (0.9828-1.0288) for amlodipine, and 1.0006 (0.9290-1.0776) and 0.9986 (0.9532-1.0461) for rosuvastatin, respectively. A total of 22 adverse events (AEs) were reported by 60 subjects; there were no significant differences in the incidence of AEs between the two groups. Conclusion:The 90% CI of the Cmax of fimasartan was within the widened acceptance limit, ln(0.6984)-ln(1.4319). The 90% CIs of the other PK parameters for drugs were between ln(0.8) and ln(1.25). These results suggest that the FDC formulation is pharmacokinetically bioequivalent and has a similar safety profile, to the co-administration of its three constituent drugs.