Search

Aim: Although sodium glucose cotransporter2 inhibitor (SGLT-2I) is widely used in clinical practice, sufficient renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibition remains the cornerstone of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) treatment. The aim of this single-center study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dual RAS blockade compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy in non-elderly DKD patients with preserved eGFR (WHO Standard, < 60y)., Methods: This single-center study was registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900024752), and approved by the ethical committee (KY201994). In this study, we recruited non-elderly type 2 diabetes volunteers with initial diagnosis of DKD to receive dual RAS blockade or monotherapy. 150 non-elderly DKD patients with preserved eGFR were recruited. The patients were randomly divided into dual RAS blockade group and monotherapy group. The dual RAS blockade group treatment regimen was an 80 mg valsartan plus a 4 mg perindopril tert-butylamine per day. At the same time, monotherapy group patients who received the 8 mg perindopril tert-butylamine or 160 mg valsartan monotherapy. The clinical data of the three groups were compared at baseline and collected during the follow-up period of 12 months., Results: The baseline of patients who received dual RAS blockade was similar to that of monotherapy group. After 12 months of treatment, the median level of proteinuria in the dual RAS blockade group was significantly lower than that in the monotherapy group. There was no significant difference in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) level, potassium, blood pressure and no serious adverse reactions., Conclusions: In non-elderly DKD patients with preserved eGFR, dual RAS blockade is superior to control proteinuria, and does not increase the probability of adverse reactions such as hyperkalemia, hypotension and acute kidney injury in 12 months., Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Ethical approval: Our patients gave their written informed consent for inclusion and the study protocol was approved by the ethical committee (KY201994)., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)

Purpose: To study the effects of a perindopril-based regimen on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with vascular disease in relation to background statin therapy., Methods: A pooled analysis of the randomized ADVANCE, EUROPA, and PROGRESS trials was performed to evaluate CV outcomes in 29,463 patients with vascular disease treated with perindopril-based regimens versus placebo. The primary endpoint was a composite of CV mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to assess the effects of a perindopril-based regimen versus placebo in relation to statin use., Results: At randomization, 39.5% of the overall combined study population used statins. After a mean follow-up of 4.0 years (SD 1.0), the cumulative event-free survival was highest in the statin/perindopril group and lowest in the no statin/placebo group (91.2% vs. 85.6%, respectively, log-rank p < 0.001). In statin users (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.98) and non-statin users (aHR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.87), a perindopril-based regimen was associated with a significantly lower risk of the primary endpoint when compared to placebo. The additional treatment effect appeared numerically greater in non-statin users, but the observed difference was statistically nonsignificant., Conclusion: Our data suggest that the treatment benefits of a perindopril-based regimen in patients with vascular disease are independent of statin use., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Although a growing number of observational studies suggest that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) intake may be a risk factor for psoriasis, evidence is still insufficient to draw definitive conclusions., Research Design and Methods: Drug-targeted Mendelian randomization (DTMR) was used to analyze the causality between genetic proxied ACEIs and psoriasis. Furthermore, we performed a disproportionality analysis based on the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database to identify more suspicious subclasses of ACEIs., Results: Using two kinds of genetic proxy instruments, the present DTMR research identified genetic proxied ACEIs as risk factors for psoriasis. Furthermore, our disproportionality analysis revealed that ramipril, trandolapril, perindopril, lisinopril, and enalapril were associated with the risk of psoriasis, which validates and refines the findings of the DTMR., Conclusions: Our integrative study verified that ACEIs, especially ramipril, trandolapril, perindopril, lisinopril, and enalapril, tended to increase the risk of psoriasis statistically.

Objective: Cough caused by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) limits their clinical application and cardiovascular benefits. This randomized trial investigated whether genotype-guided perindopril use could reduce drug-related cough in 20 to 79-year-old individuals with hypertension., Methods: After screening 120 patients and randomization, 68 were assigned to genotyping ( n  = 41) and control ( n  = 27) groups. NELL1 p.Arg382Trp (rs8176786) and intron (rs10766756) genotype information was used to subdivide the genotyping group into high-risk and low-risk subgroups with at least one or no risk alleles for ACEI-related cough, respectively. The high-risk subgroup received candesartan (8 mg/day) for 6 weeks, whereas the low-risk subgroup received perindopril (4 mg/day). The control group, which was not genotyped, received perindopril (4 mg/day). The primary outcome variables were cough and moderate/severe cough; the secondary outcome variable was any adverse event., Results: During the 6-week period, the risk of cough was lower in the genotyping group than in the control group [five (12.2%) and nine (33.3%) participants, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.25; log-rank P  = 0.017]. The moderate/severe cough risk was also lower in the genotyping group [one (2.4%) and five (18.5%) participants, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.12; log-rank P  = 0.025]. Differences in cough (hazard ratio: 0.56; log-rank P  = 0.32) and moderate/severe cough risk (hazard ratio: 0.26; log-rank P  = 0.19) between the low-risk and control groups were not significant. The risk of total adverse events was similar between any two groups., Conclusion: Cough risk was lower during genotype-guided treatment than during conventional treatment. These results support the utility of NELL1 variant data in clinical decision making to personalize renin-angiotensin system blocker therapy use., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT05535595 (retrospectively registered at September 7, 2022)., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This study assessed the real-life effectiveness of a single-pill combination (SPC) of bisoprolol/perindopril for controlling blood pressure (BP) and symptoms of angina in patients with hypertension and a history of myocardial infarction (MI)., Methods: Eligible patients with arterial hypertension and a history of MI were aged 18-79 years and had initiated bisoprolol/perindopril SPC within 3 months of study enrollment as part of routine Russian clinical practice. The primary endpoint was mean change in systolic and diastolic BP (SBP/DBP) at week 12 compared with baseline (data collected retrospectively). Secondary endpoints were assessed at weeks 4 and 12 and included mean change in resting heart rate (HR), proportion of patients reaching target level of resting HR, antianginal effectiveness of the SPC, and proportion of patients reaching target BP levels., Results: A total of 504 patients were enrolled, of whom 481 comprised the full analysis set (mean age 61.4 ± 8.9 years, 68% men). Mean baseline SBP/DBP and HR values were 148.9 ± 16.8/87.7 ± 11.0 mmHg and 77.4 ± 10.5 bpm, respectively. Mean durations of hypertension and CAD were 12.8 ± 8.4 and 6.1 ± 6.3 years, respectively, and time since MI was 3.8 ± 5.3 years. At week 12, SBP/DBP had decreased by 24.9/12.2 mmHg (P < 0.001 vs baseline). Target BP (< 140/90 mmHg) was achieved by 69.8% and 95.9% of patients at weeks 4 and 12, respectively, and target HR (55-60 bpm) by 17.3% and 34.5% at weeks 4 and 12 versus 3.1% at baseline (P < 0.001). Reductions in angina attacks, nitrate consumption, and improvements in HR were statistically significant. Treatment was well tolerated., Conclusion: Treatment of symptomatic patients with CAD, hypertension, and a history of MI with a bisoprolol/perindopril SPC was associated with significant decreases in SBP/DBP and a high proportion of patients achieving BP treatment goals. This was accompanied by improvements in angina symptoms and reductions in HR in a broad patient population representative of those seen in everyday clinical practice., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04656847., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: We performed this meta-analysis determining the antihypertensive effect of telmisartan versus perindopril in patients with essential hypertension., Background: The comparison of antihypertensive effects between telmisartan and perindopril were controversial., Methods: Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched for all published studies., Results: The antihypertensive effects were assessed in 753 patients included in 7 trials with a mean follow-up of 20 ± 16 weeks. There was no significant difference between telmisartan and perindopril in reduction of systolic blood pressure (SBP, weighted mean differences (WMD) 0.02 (95% confidence interval (CI), ‒2.78, 2.81) mm Hg, p > 0.05). The reduction of diastolic BP (DBP) treated with telmisartan was greater than perindopril in these patients (WMD ‒2.05 (95% CI, ‒2.60, ‒1.49) mm Hg, p < 0.001). Considering the effects of different doses on BP reduction, a sub-analysis was performed. The reduction of DBP treated with 40 mg/day telmisartan was greater than 4‒5 mg/day perindopril (WMD ‒2.18 (95% CI, ‒2.83, ‒1.53) mm Hg, p 0.05)., Conclusion: The reduction of DBP is greater treated with telmisartan than perindopril in patients with essential hypertension (Tab. 2, Fig. 4, Ref. 34). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: essential hypertension, blood pressure, telmisartan, perindopril, meta-analysis.

Introduction: Ventricular remodeling is a mal-adaptive process. Both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and sacubitril/valsartan have been shown to reverse remodeling in mostly uncontrolled observational studies. There is a lack of head-to-head studies. Methods: This cohort study compares the remodeling effects of angiotensin receptor blockers combined with a neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and perindopril in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients between January 2017 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria: (i) age > 18 years, (ii) recent diagnosis of de-novo HFrEF (EF < 40%), (iii) baseline echocardiography performed not more than 2 months prior to treatment onset, and (iv) follow-up echocardiography performed not earlier than 6 months and not later than 18 months posttreatment onset. No prior treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors was permitted in the ARNI group. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) were analyzed. A two-way repeated measure ANOVA (for normally distributed) and generalized estimating equation test for nonnormally distributed interval dependent variables. Mean comparison between and within groups was performed using the Bonferroni test. Results: Following an average treatment period of 9 months, LVEF improved from 24.9% to 36.4% for ARNI and from 28.7% to 40.5% for perindopril, increments of 11.5% and 11.8% resp. (Bonferroni test [ P  ≤ .05]). LVEDV was reduced by 8.4 mL and 3.2 mL, and LVESV by 17.9 mL and 10.8 mL for ARNI and perindopril resp. Only the reduction of LVESV for ARNI was statistically significant ( P  = .007). Conclusion: Both ARNI and perindopril yielded a significant improvement in the LVEF within 9 months. The remodeling effect of ARNI seems stronger because of the greater improvements in left ventricular volumes.

Objective: The objective of this non-interventional post-marketing clinical trial was to analyze the antihypertensive effect and safety of a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide in the treatment of unregulated essential hypertension., Patients and Methods: The prospective clinical trial included patients aged 20 to 75 years with essential hypertension and blood pressure values ≥ 140/90 mmHg at baseline. On the basis of the investigator's decision, patients received 2 mg perindopril + 0.625 mg indapamide (group 2+0.625) or 4 mg perindopril + 1.25 mg indapamide (group 4+1.25)., Results: The study included 1173 patients (426 patients in group 2+0.625 and 747 patients in group 4+1.25) at 27 investigational centers in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mean blood pressure values at baseline and visits after nine months were significantly higher in the 4+1.25 group compared to the 2+0.625 group. There was a significant drop in systolic and diastolic blood pressure in both groups. The target values of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, according to the European Society of Cardiology (2018), were reached after nine months of therapy by more than 80% of patients in the 2+0.625 group, and this number was significantly higher compared to the 4+1.25 group where more than 60% of patients reached target values. Newly diagnosed patients had a better response to therapy. The percentage of patients receiving additional antihypertensive therapy decreased by the end of the study. Age, gender and the existence of diabetes mellitus were identified as negative predictors of target blood pressure achievement. The therapy showed a good safety profile., Conclusion: A fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide was effective and safe in the treatment of unregulated essential hypertension., (Copyright © 2022 by Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina.)

Introduction: Hypertension represent the commonest cause of death in 2017. Hypertension is classified into two types which are primary or essential hypertension and secondary hypertension. The perindopril-amlodipine combination showed a significant effect in reduction of the elevated BP and the cardiovascular complications., Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose single-pill combination of perindopril-amlodipine in hypertensive patients., Methods: We searched PubMed, Medline, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for relevant clinical trials. Quality appraisal was evaluated according to GRADE and we assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We included the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, mean blood pressure, heart rate, cough, dizziness, headache, and peripheral edema. We performed the analysis of homogeneous data under the fixed-effects model, while analysis of heterogeneous data was analyzed under the random-effects model. We conducted a meta-regression according to the dose., Results: We included ten clinical trials. The pooled analysis showed that there was a significant reduction of the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse plessure, mean blood pressure, and heart rate after the the perindopril-amlodipine combination (MD = 18.96 [14.32, 23.60], P < 0.0001), (MD = 11.90 [8.45, 15.35], P < 0.0001), (MD = 8.44 [6.91, 9.97], P = 0.0001), (MD = 13.07 [5.86, 20.29], P = 0.0004), and (MD = 2.93 [0.89, 4.96], P = 0.005), respectively. The results of the meta-regression revealed that the efficacy is increased by increasing the dose (P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: The use of the perindopril-amlodipine combination had a significant effect on the reduction of SBP, DBP, mean blood pressure, pulse pressure, and HR., (© 2022. Italian Society of Hypertension.)

Introduction: Most patients with hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa require two or more drugs to control their blood pressure. Triple fixed-dose combination therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine is more effective in lowering blood pressure, offers better target organ protection and has increased adherence compared to monotherapy and free combination therapy, and is safe to use. This observational study evaluates the effectiveness of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine in controlling blood pressure at least 1 month after treatment initiation and assesses patient- and physician- reported drug tolerance over a 3-month period in Madagascar and Mauritius., Methods: A total of 198 patients with hypertension in ambulatory care who had been on fixed-dose combination of perindopril arginine, indapamide, and amlodipine for at least 4 weeks were included. The main outcome measures were changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, attainment of blood pressure control under 140/90 mmHg and 130/80 mmHg, self-reported drug tolerance by the patient, and perceived drug tolerance by the treating physician. Data was collected at 1 month and 3 months., Results: Mean systolic blood pressure was significantly lower at the 1-month (- 3.4 mmHg, p = 0.002) and 3-month (- 8.5 mmHg, p < 0.0001) visits. Diastolic blood pressure also decreased significantly (- 2.4 mmHg at 1-month, p = 0.017 and - 5.4 mmHg at the 3-month visits, p < 0.0001). At 3 months, 80.4% of the patients attained blood pressure targets less than 140/90 mmHg and 42.7% attained targets less than 130/80 mmHg on the basis of their baseline blood pressure. Excellent drug tolerance was reported by more than 90% of patients and physicians at the 1-month visit and by more than 95% at the 3-month visit., Conclusion: Triple fixed-dose therapy of perindopril arginine/indapamide/amlodipine continues to show additional blood pressure-lowering capacity even months after initiating the treatment in patients with hypertension in Madagascar and Mauritius. It is also well tolerated by patients with hypertension and assessed as safe to use by physicians., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Adequate controlled blood pressure decreases the risk of cardiovascular events. However, the elderly are more vulnerable and thereby more prone to side effects of antihypertensive drugs. A lack of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) studies in older patients makes specific and tailored advices towards antihypertensive drug therapy difficult. The aim of our study, DiffErenCes In antihypertenSive drug levels In patients with hypertensiON (DECISION), is to fill in this PK/PD knowledge gap and move towards precision dosing. DECISION is a prospective observational PK/PD study set up to determine the difference in exposure to the antihypertensive drugs, losartan and perindopril, measured by drug levels in blood. The area under the curve (AUC; PK) and furthermore the association between the AUC and the effect on blood pressure (PD) will be compared between elderly and younger patients., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Systemic arterial hypertension is the most common preventable risk factor for all causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide with a prevalence of 35-40% of the adults. Despite the wide variety of effective antihypertensive medications, most hypertensive patients remain uncontrolled. However, the combination of ACE inhibitor, diuretics, and calcium antagonist for the triple therapy in a single Pill Combination (SPC) is an efficient regimen in hypertension management. It is recommended by the ESH 2018 guideline, which offers better efficacy and compliance to treatment., Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine single-pill combination in patients with uncontrolled hypertension., Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for relevant clinical trials. We conducted the risk of bias assessment using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We performed the analysis of continuous data using mean difference (MD) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous data were analyzed using risk ratio (RR) and relative 95% CI. We included the analysis of the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure (SBP), Diastolic blood pressure (DBP), Heart rate (HR), 24 h Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for SBP, and 24 h ABPM for DBP., Results: We included six clinical trials. We found that the triple therapy significantly reduces SBP by 24 mmHg (MD = - 24.65 [22.41, 26.89], (P < 0.01)), DBP by 12 mmHg (MD = 12.41 [11.53, 13.29], (P < 0.01)), 24-h ABPM for SBP by 14 mmHg (MD = 14.08 [9.10, 19.05], (P < 0.01)), and ABPM 24 h DBP by 7 mmHg (MD = 7.01 [5.37, 8.65], (P < 0.01)). We noted no significant difference of the single pill on heart rate (MD = 0.81 [- 0.04, 1.67], (P = 0.06)., Conclusion: perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine is effective in reducing systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 24 and 12 mmHg respectively. Over 24 h, the combination reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 14 and 7 mmHg respectively., (© 2022. Italian Society of Hypertension.)

The single-pill combination (SPC) of perindopril (PER)/indapamide (IND)/amlodipine (AML) is a valuable and convenient treatment option for patients with hypertension controlled with two-drug SPC of PER/IND + AML given as two separate pills at the same dose level. PER [an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor], IND (a thiazide-like diuretic) and AML (a calcium channel blocker) are well established antihypertensive agents, which have been available for a long time as monotherapies and dual SPCs and have complementary mechanisms of action. Once-daily PER/IND/AML provided effective BP control, with good tolerability, in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in clinical trials and in large observational prospective studies. The efficacy and tolerability of PER/IND/AML was similar to that of PER/IND + AML in a randomized clinical trial. The therapeutic effect of PER/IND/AML was associated with improved health-related quality of life. Thus, switching from the two-pill PER/IND + AML regimen to single-pill PER/IND/AML reduces pill burden and simplifies drug administration, which may improve adherence to treatment, leading to better BP control and clinical outcomes., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Introduction: The combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers is recommended in a wide range of patients with hypertension, including those with stable coronary artery disease and/or elevated heart rate. This post hoc analysis of three observational studies provides effectiveness and safety data on treatment with perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy, in routine clinical practice., Methods: Data were analyzed from three open-label, prospective, multicenter, observational studies of Canadian patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, which shared the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, treatment duration, and primary outcome. This post hoc analysis focused on the subpopulation of patients treated with perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy. All patients were followed for 16 weeks and underwent baseline, week 4, and week 16 visits. Primary outcomes were mean changes in blood pressure (BP) and proportion of patients achieving BP control (< 140/90 mmHg) in the full analysis set (FAS)., Results: A total of 845 patients (mean age 68.3 ± 11.3 years, mean baseline BP 151.5/86.0 mmHg) were analyzed in the FAS. After 16 weeks, mean SBP/DBP decreased by - 20.4/- 9.8 mmHg with statistically significant reductions observed at all visits in all three studies allowing 78% of patients to achieve the BP treatment goal. No statistically significant changes in heart rate were observed and no serious adverse events reported. The most frequent doses of bisoprolol and perindopril were 5 + 4 mg (34.9%), followed by 5 + 8 mg (16.9%), and 2.5 + 4 mg (12.5%)., Conclusion: The addition of perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension was associated with significant reductions in BP compared with baseline and with achievement of BP targets in the majority of patients. The results suggest this strategy is safe and effective for use in routine clinical practice., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The efficacy and tolerability of fimasartan in elderly patients have not been fully evaluated. This study was therefore conducted to determine the efficacy and tolerability of fimasartan compared with perindopril in elderly Korean patients aged >70 years with essential hypertension (defined by a mean sitting systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≥140 mm Hg)., Methods: This randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, 2 parallel-group, optional titration, multicenter, Phase IIIb trial (FITNESS [Fimasartan in the Senior Subjects]) enrolled 241 patients from 23 cardiac centers in the Republic of Korea between August 2017 and December 2019. After the placebo run-in period, treatment started with fimasartan 30 mg or perindopril arginine 2.5 mg once daily at a 1:1 ratio; if BP was not controlled at week 4, the dose was doubled. If BP was not controlled at week 8, a diuretic combination (fimasartan 60 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg or perindopril arginine 5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg) was administered. After 16 weeks of the double-blind treatment, the patients with controlled BP participated in an 8-week open-label extension study, with the 2 groups unified by fimasartan 60 mg with or without hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in SBP for 8 weeks. The secondary outcomes included a change in sitting diastolic BP (DBP) for 8 weeks and changes in SBP and DBP for 4, 16, and 24 weeks., Findings: At week 8, mean SBP significantly decreased from baseline in both groups: -14.2 (14.4) mm Hg in the fimasartan group and -9.0 (16.1) mm Hg in the perindopril group. The difference between the 2 groups was 5.4 (2.1) mm Hg, indicating the noninferiority of fimasartan to perindopril. Moreover, fimasartan exhibited a higher BP-lowering effect than perindopril (P = 0.0108). In addition, reductions in SBP and DBP from baseline to weeks 4, 8, and 16 were significantly greater in the fimasartan group than in the perindopril group, although the SBP reduction was comparable at week 16. Both groups reported an excellent mean compliance rate of 97.4% (4.7%) through week 16. During the study period, 82 adverse events were reported in 52 patients, 40 in the fimasartan group and 42 in the perindopril group (P = 0.4647). Dizziness was the most commonly reported adverse event (7 cases). Remarkably, only 1 case of orthostatic hypotension was reported during the study period., Implications: In elderly patients with essential hypertension, fimasartan 30 to 60 mg with a possible hydrochlorothiazide 12.5-mg combination was noninferior to perindopril 2.5 to 5 mg with a possible indapamide 1.25-mg combination. Furthermore, fimasartan exhibited higher BP-lowering efficacy than perindopril. There was no difference in tolerability between the 2 groups. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03246555., Competing Interests: DISCLOSURES The authors have indicated that they have no conflicts of interest regarding the content of this article. The sponsor supported the supply of the IPs, laboratory tests, and clinical research coordinator expenses. The sponsor also participated in the study design, data collection, and analysis. The sponsor was not involved in the interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: To evaluate the bioequivalence between test and reference formulations of perindopril tert-butylamine under fasting and fed conditions and to assess their pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles., Method: A randomized, open-label, single-dose, crossover trial was conducted in healthy Chinese subjects. Test or reference perindopril tert-butylamine tablets (4 mg) were randomly given to subjects under fasting (2-period crossover, with an administration sequence of test tablet (T), reference tablet (R) or RT) and fed (4-period crossover, with an administration sequence of TRTR or RTRT) conditions, while each single administration was followed by a 14-day washout period. The plasma concentrations and corresponding non-compartmental PK parameters of perindopril and perindoprilat were determined. The two formulations were considered to be bioequivalent if the 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean (GM) ratio (test/reference) for C max , AUC 0-t , and AUC 0-∞ (perindopril) was both within the range of 80-125 %. Safety assessments including vital signs, physical examination, laboratory examination, 12-lead ECG and reports of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were carefully documented., Results: A total of 64 subjects (32 in each trial) were randomized and all completed the trials. Regardless of fasting or fed trials, the PK characteristics of perindopril and perindoprilat for the test formulation were similar to those of the reference formulation (all P > 0.05). The 90 % CIs of the geometric mean (GM) ratio for C max , AUC 0-t, and AUC 0-∞ , respectively, were 92.86-106.81 %, 98.44-102.88 % and 98.48-103.02 % under the fasting condition and 90.64-110.04 %, 96.95-101.90 % and 96.83-101.78 % under the fed condition, which were both within the pre-specified range of 80-125 %. A total of 10 (31.3 %) fasted subjects and 11 (34.4 %) fed subjects experienced 11 and 24 TEAEs, respectively, all of which were within the severity of grade 1. The incidence of TEAEs and drug-related TEAEs were similar between test and reference formulations (all P > 0.05) and no serious TEAEs or deaths occurred during the trials., Conclusions: The test and reference formulations of perindopril tert-butylamine tablets (4 mg) were bioequivalent and well tolerated in healthy Chinese subjects under fasting and fed conditions., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hypertension is the biggest contributor to global burden of disease and mortality. Increasing compliance with antihypertensive treatment and achieving a wide BP control in the population represents a major challenge for clinical practice. The benefits of single pill combination versus free-equivalent combination has been demonstrated in several meta-analyses and is now strongly supported by the latest 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines. The RAAS blocker with CCB and thiazide like diuretic is proposed as the optimal combination in patients inadequately controlled by two drugs., Objective: To assess the blood pressure control rate, safety, tolerability and quality of life with triple-drug SPC in patients with grade II/ III hypertension., Methods: Hypertensive patients uncontrolled (BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg) on two-drug therapy were recruited in an open-label, phase III clinical trial conducted in outpatient setting in India with 6 months treatment period. No other antihypertensive medication except the study medication was received by the patients., Results: Out of 218 evaluable patients the observed average blood pressure reduction achieved from baseline to end of study at 6 months was Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) 28.5 mm Hg / Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) 13.8 mm Hg. The quality of life (QoL) questionnaire demonstrated improvement in QoL for all patients., Conclusion: This study showed the clinical efficacy, safety and acceptability of the perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine SPC in patients with grade 2/3 hypertension inadequately controlled with two-drug therapy. The clinical effectiveness was observed in more than 96 % patients. The benefit of single-pill combination (SPC) therapy in hypertension control was reconfirmed in this study., (© Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 2011.)

Introduction: Growing evidence has demonstrated that diastolic heart failure occurs in about half of heart failure (HF) patients. We investigated the effects of perindopril on echocardiographic parameters, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and serum N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels in patients with diastolic heart failure., Methods: In total, 108 diastolic heart failure patients aged ≥ 50 years, who had diastolic dysfunction with an ejection fraction ≥ 50%, were enrolled and randomised to one of the two study groups. Perindopril was initiated in the study group and the control group was given standard therapy. Echocardiographic parameters, NT-proBNP levels and NYHA classes were recorded. The patients were followed for 11 (three to 16) months. Eighty-eight patients completed the study., Results: Although diastolic parameters were not changed, A' (septal) velocity (10.8 vs 9.9 cm/s) and Sm (septal) velocity (8.5 vs 7.6 cm/s) were significantly increased in the perindopril compared to the control group. A significant increase in A' (septal) velocity (+0.61 vs -0.28 cm/s, p = 0.04) and a slight increase in Sm (septal) velocity (+0.99 vs 0.36 cm/s, p = 0.054) were noted in the perindopril group., Conclusions: Tissue Doppler septal late diastolic velocities and septal systolic myocardial velocities increased in the perindopril group but NT-proBNP levels, and NYHA class was not changed in this study population.

Poor blood pressure (BP) control contributes to complications in sub-Saharan African (SSA) type 2 diabetic individuals. Experts have advocated the use of combination therapies for effective BP control in these patients. The suggested combinations should include a RAAS antagonist and either a CCB or a thiazide diuretic; however, their efficacy is yet to be established in SSA. We investigated the short-term effects of two combination therapies on BP control in SSA type 2 diabetic individuals. This was a double-blinded randomized controlled trial conducted at the Yaoundé Central Hospital (Cameroon) from October 2016 to May 2017. We included type 2 diabetic patients, newly diagnosed for hypertension. After baseline assessment and 24-hour ABPM, participants were allocated to receive either a fixed combination of perindopril + amlodipine or perindopril + indapamide for 42 days. Data analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. We included fifteen participants (8 being females) in each group. Both combinations provided good circadian BP control after 6 weeks with similar efficacy. Twenty-four-hour SBP dropped from 144 to 145 mm Hg vs 128 to 126 mm Hg with perindopril-amlodipine and perindopril-indapamide, respectively (P = 0.003 for both groups). Twenty-four-hour DBP dropped from 85 to 78 mm Hg (P = 0.013) vs 89 to 79 mm Hg (P = 0.006) in the same respective groups. No significant adverse effect was reported. A fixed initial combination of perindopril-amlodipine or perindopril-indapamide achieved similar effective BP control after 6 weeks in SSA type 2 diabetic individuals with newly diagnosed hypertension. Therefore, these combinations can be used interchangeably in this indication., (©2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Hypertension is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease, even in the elderly. Fimasartan is a new non-peptide angiotensin II receptor blocker with a selective type I receptor blocking effect. The objective of this study is to confirm the safety and the non-inferiority of the blood pressure-lowering effect of fimasartan compared with those of perindopril, which has been proven safe and effective in elderly patients with hypertension., Methods: This is a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, two-parallel group, optional-titration, multicenter, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of fimasartan and perindopril arginine. The study population consists of individuals 70 years old or older with essential hypertension. The primary outcome will be a change in sitting systolic blood pressure from baseline after the administration of the investigational product for 8 weeks. The secondary outcomes will be a change in sitting diastolic blood pressure from baseline and changes in sitting systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure from baseline after the administration of the investigational product for 4, 16, and 24 weeks. The sample size will be 119 subjects for each group to confer enough power to test for the primary outcome., Discussion: Research to confirm the efficacy and safety of a new medicine compared with those of previously proven anti-hypertensive drugs is beneficial to guide physicians in the selection of therapeutic agents. If it is confirmed that the new drug is not inferior to the existing drug, the drug will be considered as an option in the treatment of hypertension in elderly patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03246555 , registered on July 25, 2017.

Background: The prevalence of hypertension among black African patients is high, and these patients usually need two or more medications for blood-pressure control. However, the most effective two-drug combination that is currently available for blood-pressure control in these patients has not been established., Methods: In this randomized, single-blind, three-group trial conducted in six countries in sub-Saharan Africa, we randomly assigned 728 black patients with uncontrolled hypertension (≥140/90 mm Hg while the patient was not being treated or was taking only one antihypertensive drug) to receive a daily regimen of 5 mg of amlodipine plus 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide, 5 mg of amlodipine plus 4 mg of perindopril, or 4 mg of perindopril plus 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide for 2 months. Doses were then doubled (10 and 25 mg, 10 and 8 mg, and 8 and 25 mg, respectively) for an additional 4 months. The primary end point was the change in the 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure between baseline and 6 months., Results: The mean age of the patients was 51 years, and 63% were women. Among the 621 patients who underwent 24-hour blood-pressure monitoring at baseline and at 6 months, those receiving amlodipine plus hydrochlorothiazide and those receiving amlodipine plus perindopril had a lower 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure than those receiving perindopril plus hydrochlorothiazide (between-group difference in the change from baseline, -3.14 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.90 to -0.38; P = 0.03; and -3.00 mm Hg; 95% CI, -5.8 to -0.20; P = 0.04, respectively). The difference between the group receiving amlodipine plus hydrochlorothiazide and the group receiving amlodipine plus perindopril was -0.14 mm Hg (95% CI, -2.90 to 2.61; P=0.92). Similar differential effects on office and ambulatory diastolic blood pressures, along with blood-pressure control and response rates, were apparent among the three groups., Conclusions: These findings suggest that in black patients in sub-Saharan Africa, amlodipine plus either hydrochlorothiazide or perindopril was more effective than perindopril plus hydrochlorothiazide at lowering blood pressure at 6 months. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Africa Noncommunicable Disease Open Lab; CREOLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02742467.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers in combination are widely recommended in hypertension guidelines. The advantages of single-pill combinations (SPCs) are increasingly recognized, so a dosage-adapted combination of perindopril and amlodipine was developed for the initial management of hypertension., Objective: This randomized trial evaluated the blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy of four incremental doses of perindopril/amlodipine SPC in adults with mild-to-severe hypertension., Methods: Eligible patients (N = 1617) were randomized to SPC perindopril 3.5 mg/amlodipine 2.5 mg (i.e., 3.5/2.5 mg) daily, uptitrating as required on a monthly basis up to 14/10 mg until BP < 140/90 mmHg (< 130/80 mmHg in patients with diabetes). The primary endpoint (proportion with controlled BP at each uptitrated dose) was evaluated at 6 months, and safety was evaluated at 9 months; 24-h ambulatory BP measurement and BP variability were also investigated. Control-arm participants (n = 1653) were randomized to irbesartan 150 mg daily, uptitrating over 3 months to irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide 300/25 mg., Results: Significant increases in BP control were observed with each dosage increment of perindopril/amlodipine, which was well tolerated, rising from 21% (3.5/2.5 mg) to 30% (7/5 mg), 37% (14/5 mg), and 42% (14/10 mg) after 1, 2, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Reductions in mean systolic and diastolic BP occurred with each incremental dose of perindopril/amlodipine. After 6 months, mean BP had fallen by 24.8/10.8 mmHg. Irbesartan-based therapy reduced clinic and 24-h BP similarly to perindopril/amlodipine, but perindopril/amlodipine reduced BP variability more in comparison., Conclusions: Incremental uptitration with dosage-adapted perindopril/amlodipine SPC is a safe and effective strategy for managing hypertension., Trial Registration: EudraCT (No. 2006-005799-42).

Discontinuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor is recommended if patients experience ≥30% acute increase in serum creatinine after starting this therapy. However, the long-term effects of its continuation or discontinuation on major clinical outcomes after increases in serum creatinine are unclear. In the ADVANCE trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation), 11 140 diabetes mellitus patients were randomly assigned to perindopril-indapamide or placebo after a 6-week active run-in period. The current study included 11 066 participants with 2 serum creatinine measurements recorded before and during the active run-in period (3 weeks apart). Acute increase in creatinine was determined using these 2 measurements and classified into 4 groups: increases in serum creatinine of <10%, 10% to 19%, 20% to 29%, and ≥30%. The primary study outcome was the composite of major macrovascular events, new or worsening nephropathy, and all-cause mortality. An acute increase in serum creatinine was associated with an elevated risk of the primary outcome ( P for trend <0.001). The hazard ratios were 1.11 (95% CI, 0.97-1.28) for those with an increase of 10% to 19%, 1.34 (1.07-1.66) for 20% to 29%, and 1.44 (1.15-1.81) for ≥30%, compared with <10%. However, there was no evidence of heterogeneity in the benefit of randomized treatment effects on the outcome across subgroups defined by acute serum creatinine increase ( P for heterogeneity=0.94). Acute increases in serum creatinine after starting perindopril-indapamide were associated with greater risks of subsequent major clinical outcomes. However, the continuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-based therapy reduced the long-term risk of major clinical outcomes, irrespective of acute increase in creatinine. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00145925.

Background: Ace inhibitor-induced angioedema, characterized by sudden-onset swelling of the mucous membrane, skin, or both, is a rare occurrence in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Because of its safety and efficacy, perindopril is a commonly prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. Here we describe the clinical manifestations, management, and outcome of perindopril-induced angioedema of the lips and tongue in a 65-year-old Saudi man., Case Presentation: A 65-year-old Saudi Arab man presented to an emergency department with lip and tongue swelling and dysphagia. There were no systemic symptoms and no past history of a similar event. He had been consuming perindopril 5 mg and amlodipine 5 mg for the last 3 weeks: brand name, Coveram, from the company Servier (Ireland) Industries Ltd.; one tablet of Coveram contains 3.395 mg perindopril corresponding to 5 mg perindopril arginine and 6.935 mg amlodipine besilate corresponding to 5 mg amlodipine. A physical examination revealed considerable swelling of his lips and tongue. Examinations of other systems, including his cardiovascular and respiratory systems, revealed unremarkable findings. All laboratory parameters were also normal. Electrocardiography demonstrated sinus rhythm, a normal P axis, and V-rate of 50-99. A clinical diagnosis of perindopril-induced angioedema was made, and perindopril was discontinued. The angioedema resolved completely after the administration of antihistamines and corticosteroids., Conclusions: Angioedema caused by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors is an uncommon occurrence in Saudi Arabia. The findings from this case are expected to raise awareness about this condition among clinicians in this country.

Background: The EPHES trial (Evaluation of influence of fixed dose combination Perindo-pril/amlodipine on target organ damage in patients with arterial HypErtension with or without iSchemic heart disease) compared the dynamics of target organ damage (TOD) in hypertensive patients with and without ischemic heart disease (IHD) treated with the fixed-dose combination (FDC) perindopril + amlodipine., Methods: The analysis included 60 hypertensive patients (aged >30 years): 30 without IHD and 30 with IHD. At randomization, FDC was administered at a daily baseline dose of 5/5 mg with uptitration to 10/10 mg every two weeks. If target blood pressure (BP<140/90 mmHg) was not achieved after six weeks, indapamide 1.5 mg was added to the regimen. All patients underwent body mass index measurements, office and ambulatory BP measurements, pulse wave velocity (PWVe) and central systolic BP evaluation, augmentation index adjusted to heart rate 75 (Aix@75) evaluation, biochemical analysis, ECG, echocardiography with Doppler, ankle-brachial index measurement, and intima-media thickness measurement. The follow-up period was 12 months., Results: Therapy based on FDC perindopril/amlodipine was effective in lowering BP (office, ambulatory, central) in both groups. We noted significant decrease in Aix@75 with the therapy in both groups, but ΔAix@75 was lesser in the group with IHD than the group without IHD. FDC provided significant improvement in PWVe and left ventricular diastolic function, and decrease in albuminuria, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), and left atrium size. ΔPWVe was significantly ( P <0.005) less in patients without IHD than those with IHD (2.5±0.2 vs 4.4±0.5 m/s, respectively). In spite of almost equal LVH regression, the positive dynamics of ΔE/A and ΔE/E´ were more in patients with IHD than those without IHD (64.4% and 54.1% vs 39.8 and 23.2%, respectively; P <0.05 for both comparisons). Adverse reactions were in 2 (6.5%) patients without IHD and 3 (10%) with IHD ( P =NS). In the group with IHD, we noted significant decrease in angina episode rate - from 2.5±0.4 to 1.2±0.2 ( P <0.01) per week., Conclusion: Thus, treatment based on FDC was effective in decreasing BP and TOD regression in both patients with and without IHD. However, the dynamics of changes in TOD were different between the two groups, which should be taken into consideration during management of patients with and without IHD., Competing Interests: Disclosure GD Radchenko and YM Sirenko had honorariums from Servier for educational lectures. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: The development of proteinuria and reduced glomerular filtration rate is associated with higher mortality among patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). AA amyloidosis, also associated with increased mortality, in SCD is rare. We present a case of a woman with homozygous sickle cell disease with nephrotic syndrome and antibodies to double stranded DNA without clinical features of systemic lupus erythematosus. Kidney biopsy reveals AA amyloidosis and is the first report of concomitant AA amyloidosis with antibodies to double stranded DNA in SCD., Case Presentation: A 40-year-old Central African woman with homozygous sickle cell disease and history of vaso-occlusive pain crises undergoes kidney biopsy for nephrotic-range proteinuria. Kidney biopsy reveals AA type amyloidosis, which is a rare manifestation of SCD in the kidney. Her anemia worsens with an ACE inhibitor, initiated to reduce proteinuria and limit GFR decline, so it was discontinued. Hydroxyurea, shown to decrease the frequency of vaso-occlusive crises and lower proteinuria, was subsequently initiated but then discontinued due to worsening anemia. Unfortunately, her glomerular filtration rate worsens., Conclusions: AA amyloidosis and antibodies to double stranded DNA can occur in sickle cell disease. ACE inhibition and hydroxyurea decrease proteinuria so they may limit progression of chronic kidney disease. Hydroxyurea also decreases frequency of vaso-occlusive pain crises so it might be helpful in limiting progression of renal AA amyloidosis. However, further studies are needed to determine optimal treatment strategies for AA amyloidosis in sickle cell disease.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the changes in adherence to treatment, in patients who switched from perindopril and/or amlodipine as a monotherapy (single-pill therapy, SPT) or two-pill combinations to fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy., Methods: A large retrospective cohort study, in three Italian Local Health Units, was performed. All adult subjects who received at least one prescription of anti-hypertensive drugs between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014 were selected. The date of the first anti-hypertensive prescription was defined as the index-date (ID). For each patient, we evaluated the anti-hypertensive therapy and the adherence to treatment during the two 12-month periods preceding and following the ID. Changes in the level of adherence have been compared in patients who switched to the FDC of perindopril/amlodipine after the ID, as well as in patients who did not., Results: A total of 24,020 subjects were initially included in the study. Subjects treated with the free dose combination switched more frequently to FDC of perindopril/amlodipine than subjects treated with SPT (p < .001). Adherence to treatment was found to be higher in the 3,597 subjects who switched to the perindopril/amlodipine FDC therapy, than in the 20,423 subjects who did not. A significant decrease in the number of concomitant anti-hypertensive drugs has been observed in patients treated with the same FDC., Conclusions: The results show that perindopril/amlodipine FDC increases the rate of stay-on-therapy and reduces the number of concomitant anti-hypertensive drugs in subjects previously treated with the same drugs as a two-pill combination or as SPT.

Aim: to assess antihypertensive efficacy of the fixed-dose amlodipine/indapamide/perindopril arginine combination in hypertensive patients in real clinical setting., Methods: We included in the 3‑month clinical program 1 599 patients with arterial hypertension (AH) (38.8 % men, mean age 61.6±10 years). Primary outcomes were change of office and ambulatory (home blood pressure monitoring) systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) from baseline to 3 months and rate of achievement of target BP.

Introduction: In everyday medical practice, physicians often need to manage patients whose blood pressure is not well controlled. Those with a history of cerebrovascular disease are a high-risk group in need of rapid blood pressure control., Methods: The PICASSO study was a real-life, observational trial involving 9257 inadequately treated hypertensive patients who were switched from previous therapy to the fixed-dose combination of perindopril 10 mg/indapamide 2.5 mg (PI) for 3 months. A subanalysis of data of 1117 hypertensive patients who met the clinical criteria of previous stroke or transient ischemic attack was performed. Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPMs) were also done in a small group of patients (n:38)., Results: At baseline, mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) was 161.5 ± 15.2/93.1 ± 9.9 mmHg. After 1 month with the fixed dose of PI, average office SBP/DBP decreased to 140.0 ± 11.9/83.5 ± 7.7 mmHg. After 3 months, SBP/DBP had dropped to 132.9 ± 9.8/80.0 ± 6.2 mmHg, by 28.6 ± 15.5/13.1 ± 10.0 mmHg (p < 0.001). Blood pressure control rate (< 140/90 mmHg) was 67.3% after 3 months. When data were stratified by baseline blood pressure, decreases in SBP/DBP were statistically significant in patients with all grades (1-3) of hypertension. In patients previously treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ± hydrochlorothiazide (n = 677), blood pressure decreased by 29.8 ± 15.5/13.3 ± 10.2 mmHg (p < 0.001). Decreases in 24-h ABPM values were also significant (n = 38). Treatment was well tolerated; only a few adverse events were recorded., Conclusion: This study suggests that fixed combination perindopril 10 mg/indapamide 2.5 mg is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack., Funding: EGIS Pharmaceuticals Plc.

Introduction: We conducted a prospective, non-interventional, multicenter study to examine the effect of a fixed-dose combination of perindopril/amlodipine in patients with arterial hypertension., Methods: Patients who were previously untreated or required a change in medication were treated with a fixed combination of perindopril/amlodipine (3.5/2.5 or 7.0/5.0 mg) for 12 weeks. Changes in office, home and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) were recorded. Adherence was assessed by the Hill-Bone medication adherence scale., Results: Overall, 1814 patients (mean age 60.0 ± 13.4 years) were included in 614 German practices, and data of 1770 patients were analyzed. At study entry, 97.7% of patients received perindopril/amlodipine at a daily dose of 3.5 mg/2.5 mg, and 47.9% of patients remained on this dose during the study period. Treatment with perindopril/amlodipine decreased mean office BP from 163.7/95.4 to 133.6/80.3 mmHg (p < 0.0001), resulting in a hypertension control rate of 69.1%. Blood pressure control was comparable in previously untreated and treated patients (70.3 vs. 68.1%), and in younger and older patients (70.6 < 65 vs. 66.3% ≥ 65 years). Ambulatory BP measurements were available in a subgroup of patients (n = 167), and mean 24 h ambulatory BP decreased from 150.6 ± 12.6/88.9 ± 8.8 to 132.4 ± 11.9/79.4 ± 8.5 mmHg (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the proportion of patients with severe hypertension European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC) grade II or III decreased from 64.4 to 3.9%, and patients with pre-existing isolated systolic hypertension (n = 284) converted to normal BP in 67.6% of cases. Nearly half of the patients (47.2%) were perfectly adherent during the study. In previously treated patients, the percentage of patients with perfect adherence increased from 20.6% prior to study to 43.5% at final visit (p < 0.0001). Adverse drug reactions were documented for 4.9% of patients., Conclusion: A fixed-dose combination of perindopril/amlodipine shows significant blood pressure reduction and improvement in medication adherence in a primary care setting., Trial Registration: ISRCTN26323538., Funding: Servier Deutschland GmbH.

Introduction: Controlling blood pressure is a global health priority; single-pill antihypertensive combinations may improve adherence, persistence, and outcomes. Areas covered: A novel combination of perindopril arginine and amlodipine besylate was recently approved. A systematic review of the literature revealed its most common adverse effects as: peripheral edema (depending on the dose of amlodipine, but attenuated by perindopril), cough, dizziness and hypotension. Dose-dependent hyperkalemia, impairment of renal function (especially in renovascular hypertension), angioedema, and teratogenicity were derived from experience with other ACE-inhibitors. Expert opinion: Substantial clinical trial experience with amlodipine or perindopril suggests that these two agents effectively lower blood pressure, and can reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, as in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial. The incidence of adverse effects reported in clinical trials is lower than expected, likely due to exclusion of subjects previously exposed to its components; the nature of open-label, uncontrolled observational studies; and difficulty in recognizing and measuring cough and pedal edema. This new formulation of perindopril arginine protects its ethyl ester, without requiring physical separation from amlodipine in a single tablet, and is less hygroscopic than perindopril erbumine. These and other attributes may make this combination an attractive addition to the antihypertensive armamentarium.

Background: Sarcopenia (the age-related loss of muscle mass and function) is a major contributor to loss of mobility, falls, loss of independence, morbidity and mortality in older people. Although resistance training is effective in preventing and reversing sarcopenia, many older people are sedentary and either cannot or do not want to exercise. This trial examines the efficacy of supplementation with the amino acid leucine and/or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition to potentially improve muscle mass and function in people with sarcopenia. Promising preliminary data exist from small studies for both interventions, but neither has yet been tested in adequately powered randomised trials in patients with sarcopenia., Methods: Leucine and ACE inhibitors in sarcopenia (LACE) is a multicentre, masked, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial randomised trial evaluating the efficacy of leucine and perindopril (angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)) in patients with sarcopenia. The trial will recruit 440 patients from primary and secondary care services across the UK. Male and female patients aged 70 years and over with sarcopenia as defined by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia (based on low total skeletal muscle mass on bioimpedance analysis and either low gait speed or low handgrip strength) will be eligible for participation. Participants will be excluded if they have a contraindication to, or are already taking, an ACEi, angiotensin receptor blocker or leucine. The primary clinical outcome for the trial is the between-group difference in the Short Physical Performance Battery score at all points between baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes include appendicular muscle mass measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, muscle strength, activities of daily living, quality of life, activity using pedometer step counts and falls. Participants, clinical teams, outcomes assessors and trial analysts are masked to treatment allocation. A panel of biomarkers including microRNAs, neurohormones, genetic polymorphisms and markers of inflammation relevant to muscle pathophysiology will be measured to explore predictors of response and further elucidate mechanisms underlying sarcopenia. Participants will receive a total of 12 months of either perindopril or placebo and either leucine or placebo., Discussion: The results will provide the first robust test of the overall clinical and cost-effectiveness of these novel therapies for older patients with sarcopenia., Trial Registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN90094835 . Registered on 18 February 2015.

Design: double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled randomised trial., Methods: we recruited people aged >65 years with at least one fall in the previous year. Participants received 4 mg perindopril or placebo daily for 15 weeks. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in force-plate measured anteroposterior (AP) sway at 15 weeks. Secondary outcomes included other measures of postural sway, limits of stability during maximal forward, right and left leaning, blood pressure, muscle strength, 6-min walk distance and falls. The primary outcome was assessed using two-way ANOVA, adjusted for baseline factors., Results: we randomised 80 participants. Mean age was 78.0 (SD 7.4) years; 60 (75%) were female. About 77/80 (96%) completed the trial. At 15 weeks there were no significant between-group differences in AP sway with eyes open (mean difference 0 mm, 95% CI -8 to 7 mm, P = 0.91) or eyes closed (mean difference 2 mm, 95% CI -7 to 12 mm, P = 0.59); no differences in other measures of postural stability, muscle strength or function. About 16/40 (42%) of patients in each group had orthostatic hypotension at follow-up. The median number (IQR) of falls was 1 (0,4) in the perindopril versus 1 (0,2) in the placebo group (P = 0.24)., Conclusions: perindopril did not improve postural sway in older people at risk of falls., Clinical Trials Registration: ISRCTN58995463., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Initiation of antihypertensive therapy with a two-drug fixed-dose combination (FDC) in a single tablet may be recommended in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events to improve adherence and effectiveness. Preferred combinations include an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor with a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist., Objective: This study assessed adherence to and the safety, tolerance, and effectiveness of the perindopril/amlodipine FDC in Greek patients with hypertension and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) over a 4-month period., Methods: A total of 1907 patients with hypertension and CAD (59.1% males) who had recently (≤2 weeks) commenced treatment with the perindopril/amlodipine FDC (5/5, 5/10, 10/5, or 10/10 mg) were studied at baseline and at 1 and 4 months. Adherence to treatment was assessed with the Morisky Medication-taking Adherence Scale (MMAS)., Results: Seven patients (0.4%) did not attend the scheduled visits. In total, 1607 (84.6%) patients received a constant treatment dose throughout the study. High adherence (MMAS score = 0) was reported by 1592 (83.6%), 1628 (85.7%), and 1477 (77.7%) patients at the second and the third visit and at both visits, respectively. Adverse reactions were reported by only 13 (0.7%) patients, were all minor, and did not result in treatment discontinuation. Office blood pressure (BP) was significantly decreased at the third visit (130.8 ± 8.4/78.2 ± 6.4 mmHg) compared with baseline (156.5 ± 15.0/89.9 ± 9.6 mmHg; p < 0.001), regardless of previous antihypertensive treatment. Patients with grade 1, 2, and 3 hypertension at baseline showed a reduction in BP of 19.3/9.4, 31.5/13.5, and 47.8/22.2 mmHg, respectively (p < 0.001). Uncontrolled hypertension (≥140/90 mmHg) was notably reduced from 90.3% at baseline to 18.5% at the third visit., Conclusions: The perindopril/amlodipine FDC is characterized by high adherence and effectiveness, regardless of previous treatment. Degree of BP reduction was related to baseline BP levels. Clinical trials registration number (Protocol Number): IC4 - 05985 - 011 - GRC.

Background: To evaluate cardiovascular function in boys with Duchenne (DMD) and Becker (BMD) muscular dystrophy, using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)., Methods: This is a single point cross sectional study of twenty-four boys with genetically ascertained DMD, and 10 with BMD, aged 10.5 ± 1.5 years (range 9-13), were prospectively evaluated by a 1.5 T system and compared with those of age-sex matched controls. The DMD patients were divided in 2 groups. Group A (N = 12) were under treatment with both deflazacort and perindopril, while Group B (n = 12) were under treatment with deflazacort, only. BMD patients did not take any medication. Biventricular function was assessed using a standard SSFP sequence. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was assessed from T1 images taken 15 min after injection of 0.2 mg/Kg gadolinium DTPA using a 3D-T1-TFE sequence., Results: Group A and BMDs were asymptomatic with normal ECG, 24 h ECG recording and echocardiogram. Group B were asymptomatic but 6/12 had abnormal ECG and mildly impaired LVEF. Their 24 h ECG recording revealed supraventricular and ventricular extrasystoles (all at 12-13 yrs). LV indices in Group A and BMD did not differ from those of controls. However, LV indices in Group B were significantly impaired compared with controls, Group A and BMDs (p < 0.001). An epicardial LGE area = 3 ± 0.5% of LV mass was identified in the posterolateral wall of LV only in 6/12 patients of Group B, but in not in any BMD or Group A., Conclusion: Children with either BMD or DMD under treatment with both deflazacort and perindopril present preserved LV function and lack of LGE. However, further large scale multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these data, including further CMR mapping approaches.

Objective: To measure the placebo-controlled effects of combination therapy on hypotension, treatment discontinuation, and major renal outcomes, according to baseline blood pressure., Methods: We conducted an analysis of the action in diabetes and vascular disease: preterax and diamicron-MR controlled evaluation ADVANCE and perindopril protection against recurrent stroke study PROGRESS trials, including 14 684 participants allocated combination therapy or placebo. The mean age was 65 years, 61% were men, and 64% were receiving background blood pressure lowering (BPL) therapy. Participants were stratified into five subgroups by baseline SBP less than 120, 120-129, 130-139, 140-159, and at least 160 mmHg. Discontinuation of study treatment during the active run-in phase and postrandomization follow-up was assessed for hypotension/dizziness and other causes. Major renal outcomes (sustained doubling in creatinine or renal death) were also assessed., Results: Discontinuation during the 4-6-week active run-in phase due to hypotension/dizziness ranged from 3.6% in those with SBP less than 120 mmHg to 1.3% in those with SBP at least 160 mmHg. Median follow-up in the randomized phase was 5.6 years, and discontinuation for hypotension was higher with combination therapy compared with placebo in the less than 120 mmHg group (4.7 vs. 1.2%). However, for each subgroup with baseline SBP 120-129, 130-139, and 140-159 mmHg, the absolute excess of discontinuation due to hypotension with combination therapy was 0.7%. Total discontinuations were only increased in the less than 120 mmHg group (18.4 vs. 12.5%) and the 120-129-mmHg subgroup (17.6 vs. 14.2%). There were no clear differences across the SBP subgroups for the combined renal outcome (overall, 0.8 vs. 0.6%)., Conclusion: Compared with those with baseline SBP 140-159 mmHg, side effects of dual combination BPL are essentially the same for people with SBP 130-139 mmHg and only modestly increased among patients with SBP 120-129 mmHg. During long-term therapy, side effects sufficient to stop treatment that are treatment related (i.e. occur in excess of rates seen with placebo) occur at less than 0.5%/year in patients with baseline SBP 120-139 mmHg. These results have important implications in assessing the likely balance of benefits and side effects of BPL with combination therapy among those with SBP 120-139 mmHg.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) are one of the most frequently used drugs in the therapy of cardiovascular diseases. Beneficial therapeutic effects may be accompanied by different adverse reactions including angioedema. Recently published data suggest that ACEI-induced angioedema can be life-threatening without emergent intervention, for example due to the respiratory arrest. Monitoring this adverse Jreaction may be especially important for elderly patients who probably receive many different medicines and supplements and thus might be particularly at risk of adverse drug reactions. In the paper we describe two cases of ACEI-induced angioedema in older patients.

Introduction: Blood pressure (BP) control is the main clinical goal in the management of hypertensive patients; however, BP in most of these patients remains uncontrolled, despite the widespread availability of antihypertensive drugs as free-combination therapy. This study compared the efficacy of a fixed-dose triple combination (FDTC) of antihypertensive drugs with that of a free combination of three antihypertensives in patients with uncontrolled hypertension., Methods: Ninety-two patients (mean age 60.8 ± 12.1, 58.0% male) with uncontrolled essential hypertension (office systolic BP ≥ 140 or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg) previously treated with a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor plus hydrochlorothiazide were switched to once-daily FDTC therapy with perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine (5-10/1.25-2.5/5-10 mg). Patients were age- and sex-matched with a control group of hypertensive patients receiving free-combination therapy with three drugs including a RAAS inhibitor, a diuretic, and a calcium channel blocker. Office BP and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) were evaluated at baseline and after 1 and 4 months., Results: Significant reductions in ambulatory 24-h, daytime, and nighttime systolic BP, and pulse pressure (PP) were found in the FDTC group relative to reductions seen with free-combination therapy, after the first month only of follow-up. Target BP values (mean 24-h ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP < 130/80 mmHg) were reached by more recipients of FDTC than free-combination therapy (64.8% vs. 46.9%, p < 0.05) at month 4 of follow-up, despite reductions in 24-h ABPM values from baseline being similar in both groups at this time point., Conclusion: FDTC of perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine was effective at reducing SBP and PP in previously treated patients with uncontrolled hypertension, and well tolerated, providing support for clinicians in choosing a fixed-dose triple combination over the free-combination of a RAAS inhibitor, a diuretic, and a calcium antagonist.

Introduction: Several lines of research indicate that statins can lower blood pressure (BP) independently of their lipid-lowering effects when used as monotherapy and in combination with antihypertensive agents., Aim: This short-term, open-label study examined whether statin therapy had a synergistic effect on the BP-lowering efficacy of perindopril/amlodipine in a subgroup of patients in the PERSPECTIVA study with concomitant hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, with or without statin at baseline., Methods: The PERSPECTIVA study recruited 732 adults with untreated or uncontrolled hypertension. This subgroup analysis of PERSPECTIVA included 587 patients with concomitant hypertension and hypercholesterolemia (mean age 56.7 years) of whom 226 were receiving a statin at baseline (statin [+] group) and 361 were not (statin [-] group). All patients received treatment with single-pill combination perindopril/amlodipine at a dose of 5/5, 10/5 or 10/10 mg/day. The study duration was 60 days with follow-up visits for BP monitoring at 7, 15, 30 and 60 days., Results: At day 60, BP control (<140/90 mmHg) was significantly greater in the statin [+] vs statin [-] group: 73 vs 64% respectively (+14%, P < 0.05). In the statin [+] group, the single-pill perindopril/amlodipine combination significantly reduced BP in patients previously untreated (n = 18), or treated with monotherapy (n = 97), dual therapy (n = 93), or triple therapy (n = 18): -38.8/-20.0, -39.1/-20.1, -38.0/-19.4, -39.9/-18.3 mmHg respectively (P < 0.001 vs baseline BP). The greatest BP reductions were observed in the first 7 days. Treatment was well tolerated with a similar rate of adverse events in the statin [+] group (0.9%) vs the statin [-] group (2.5%)., Conclusion: BP control rates in patients with uncontrolled hypertension and concomitant hypercholesterolemia are significantly improved with a treatment regimen that combines perindopril/amlodipine with statin therapy, regardless of previous antihypertensive therapy. This subanalysis of the PERSPECTIVA study supports the synergistic BP-lowering effect of statins and perindopril/amlodipine.

Aim: To evaluate the efficiency of triple antihypertensive therapy in patients with uncontrolled hypertension and depressive disorders (DD)., Material and Methods: 153 patients with uncontrolled hypertension were examined, of whom 82 patients were diagnosed with mild and moderate DD. A combination of perindopril 10 mg/day, indapamide SR 1.5 mg/day, and amlodipine at an initial dose of 5 mg/day was given to patients with hypertension and DD. After 4 weeks of treatment, if target blood pressure (BP) levels could not be achieved, the dose of amlodipine was increased up to 10 mg/day. General clinical examination and 24-hour BP monitoring (BPM) were performed in all the patients at baseline and in the patients with DD also after 24 weeks of therapy. The traditional measures of the diurnal BP profile, as well as the parameters characterizing arterial stiffness and central aortic pressure (CAP) were estimated., Results: After 8 weeks of therapy, target BP levels were recorded in 63 (76.8%) patients. After 24 weeks of treatment, the hypertensive patients with DD showed significant positive changes in all the investigated 24-hour BPM parameters and normalization of the diurnal BP profile in 65.1% of cases. During the treatment, there were significant decreases in pulse wave velocity, brachial arterial and aortic augmentation indices, aortic systolic and diastolic pressures, and mean aortic BP and an increase in the velocity of the reflected wave., Conclusion: Triple therapy, including perindopril, indapamide SR, and amlodipine, contributed to the achievement of target BP levels in the majority of hypertensive patients with DD, with significant positive changes in all 24-hour BPM parameters, optimization of the diurnal BP profile in most patients, clinically significant improvement of the parameters that characterize arterial stiffness and CAP.

Aims/hypothesis: Intensive glucose control reduces the risk of vascular complications while increasing the risk of severe hypoglycaemia at a group level. We sought to estimate individual beneficial and adverse effects of intensive glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial, a randomised controlled trial evaluating standard vs intensive glucose control (HbA 1c target ≤6.5% [48 mmol/mol]). In 11,140 participants, we estimated the individual 5 year absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the composite outcome of major micro- and macrovascular events and absolute risk increase (ARI) for severe hypoglycaemia for intensive vs standard glucose control. Predictions were based on competing risks models including clinical characteristics and randomised treatment., Results: Based on these models, 76% of patients had a substantial estimated 5 year ARR for major vascular events (>1%, 5 year number-needed-to-benefit [NNTB 5 ] <100) and 1% had a small ARR (<0.5%, NNTB 5 >200). Similarly, 36% of patients had a substantial estimated ARI for severe hypoglycaemia (5 year number-needed-to-harm [NNTH 5 ] <100) and 29% had a small ARI (NNTH 5 >200). When assigning similar or half the weight to severe hypoglycaemia compared with a major vascular event, net benefit was positive in 85% or 99% of patients, respectively. Limiting intensive treatment to the 85% patient subgroup had no significant effect on the overall incidence of major vascular events and severe hypoglycaemia compared with treating all patients., Conclusions/interpretation: Taking account of the effects of intensive glucose control on major micro- and macrovascular events and severe hypoglycaemia for individual patients, the estimated net benefit was positive in the majority of the participants in the ADVANCE trial. The estimated individual effects can inform treatment decisions once individual weights assigned to positive and adverse effects have been specified., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00145925.

Background: Recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after ablation is still high. Perindopril plays an essential role in AF induction and maintenance., Objective: We aimed to prove that perindopril (8 mg) could prevent recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation., Methods: Patients with paroxysmal AF who received radiofrequency ablation were randomized to a 3-month course of perindopril 8 mg once daily (perindopril group) or placebo (placebo group). Angiotensin-II (Ang-II) therapy and standard transthoracic echocardiography were performed. All 256 patients with paroxysmal AF who received radiofrequency ablation were randomized. And we followed them for complete 1 year. The 3-month recurrence and the 1-year recurrence were compared between the 2 groups., Results: The 3-month recurrence of AF was observed in 33 (26.19%) of 126 patients in the placebo group vs 19 (14.62%) of 130 patients who received perindopril 8 mg once daily (χ2, P = .021). One-year recurrence of AF was observed in 36 (28.5%) of 126 patients in the placebo group as compared with 21 (16.2%) of 130 patients who received perindopril after 1 year (P = .017). The κ value was 0.94 in the control group (P < .001) and 0.96 in the perindopril group (P < .001) between 3-month and 1-year recurrence. The Ang-II level was related to the left atrial distance with the reduction in AF recurrence (r = 0.17, P = .005 at 3 months; r = 0.25, P < .001 at 1 year)., Conclusion: Perindopril is an effective and safe treatment for the prevention of AF recurrence after radiofrequency catheter ablation. This effect seems to be strongly associated with a significant decrease in Ang-II level and left atrial distance., (Copyright © 2016 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Although single-pill, fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) are widely endorsed for the reduction of blood pressure and cardiovascular risk, studies to date have not evaluated the differences between FDCs and free associations using matched drugs and doses. The objective of this study was to determine whether switching from a free association of perindopril/amlodipine to the FDC formulation led to significant improvements in efficacy and tolerability., Methods: In this subanalysis of the previously published SYMBIO study, we looked at the effect of switching patients from a free association of perindopril/amlodipine to an equivalent dose of FDC (N = 335). In the SYMBIO study, concomitant antihypertensive medications were allowed; however, they remained unchanged till the end of the study. Blood pressure was measured at baseline, 1, and 3 months. Targets were defined as blood pressure <140/90 mmHg or <130/80 mmHg for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus or at high cardiovascular risk., Results: Compared to baseline, mean blood pressure decreased significantly after 1 and 3 months of treatment with FDC perindopril/amlodipine. Mean changes from baseline were -15.6 ± 14.3/-7.7 ± 9.1 mmHg at 1 month (p < 0.0001) and -23.3 ± 16.4/-11.3 ± 9.8 mmHg at 3 months (p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients who reached their blood pressure target increased from 16.0 % at baseline to 50.6 % at 1 month, to 75.9 % at 3 months. The incidence of ankle edema decreased from 14.9 % at baseline, to 9.9 % at 1 month, to 5.4 % at 3 months. The relative risk reduction for ankle edema was -37.5 % at 1 month (vs. baseline; p < 0.001) and -57.2 % at 3 months (vs. baseline; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: These data suggest that switching from a free association of perindopril/amlodipine to the same dose of the FDC formulation led to significant improvements in efficacy and tolerability.

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) constitute a heterogeneous group in which the treatment benefits by angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor therapy vary between individuals. Our objective was to integrate clinical and pharmacogenetic determinants in an ultimate combined risk prediction model., Methods and Results: Clinical, genetic, and outcomes data were used from 8726 stable CAD patients participating in the EUROPA/PERGENE trial of perindopril versus placebo. Multivariable analysis of phenotype data resulted in a clinical risk score (range, 0-21 points). Three single-nucleotide polymorphisms (rs275651 and rs5182 in the angiotensin-II type I-receptor gene and rs12050217 in the bradykinin type I-receptor gene) were used to construct a pharmacogenetic risk score (PGXscore; range, 0-6 points). Seven hundred eighty-five patients (9.0%) experienced the primary endpoint of cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction or resuscitated cardiac arrest, during 4.2 years of follow-up. Absolute risk reductions ranged from 1.2% to 7.5% in the 73.5% of patients with PGXscore of 0 to 2. As a consequence, estimated annual numbers needed to treat ranged from as low as 29 (clinical risk score ≥10 and PGXscore of 0) to 521 (clinical risk score ≤6 and PGXscore of 2). Furthermore, our data suggest that long-term perindopril prescription in patients with a PGXscore of 0 to 2 is cost-effective., Conclusions: Both baseline clinical phenotype, as well as genotype determine the efficacy of widely prescribed ACE inhibition in stable CAD. Integration of clinical and pharmacogenetic determinants in a combined risk prediction model demonstrated a very wide range of gradients of absolute treatment benefit., (© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Introduction: Combination therapy is needed to control blood pressure (BP) in a large number of hypertensive patients with diabetes mellitus. Adherence to treatment is a major clinical problem; therefore, the time duration of the antihypertensive action of a drug determines BP control when a dose is skipped., Objectives: The aim was to determine whether the fixed-dose combination of olmesartan/amlodipine provides equal efficacy and safety as the perindopril/amlodipine combination when a drug dose is missed., Methods: In this noninferiority trial with a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy parallel group, controlled design, 260 patients received either olmesartan 20-40 mg/amlodipine 5-10 mg or perindopril 4-8 mg/amlodipine 5-10 mg for 24 weeks. The main outcome was the sitting office DBP after 24 weeks of treatment at 48 h from last administration., Results: The olmesartan/amlodipine combination reached noninferiority criteria in reduction of office DBP after 24 weeks of treatment and after the missed dose, compared with the perindopril/amlodipine combination (-11.7 and -10.5 mmHg, respectively). Office SBP and pulse pressure were significantly lower in both groups after 24 weeks of treatment and 48 h after the missed dose, observing a trend to greater SBP reduction in the olmesartan/amlodipine group., Conclusions: The combination olmesartan/amlodipine is safe, well tolerated, and as effective as the combination of perindopril/amlodipine in the control of essential hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus. A missed dose does not leave the patients unprotected in both treatments; however, a faster control with less dose increment is observed with olmesartan/amlodipine.

Objectives: To assess the blood pressure-lowering efficacy and tolerability of perindopril/amlodipine fixed-dose combinations in Chinese patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension not adequately controlled with monotherapy alone., Methods: In 2 separate double-blind studies, patients received a 4-week run-in monotherapy of amlodipine 5 mg or perindopril 4 mg, respectively. Those whose blood pressure was uncontrolled were then randomized to receive the fixed-dose combination of perindopril 5 mg/amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Amlo group) or remain on the monotherapy for 8 weeks. Patients who were uncontrolled at the week 8 (W8) visit were up-titrated for the Per/Amlo combination, or received additional treatment if on monotherapy, for a further 4 weeks. The main efficacy assessment was at 8 weeks., Results: After 8 weeks, systolic blood pressure (SBP; primary criterion) was statistically significantly lower in the Per/Amlo group (vs. Amlo 5 mg, p = 0.0095; vs. Per 4 mg, p < 0.0001). Uncontrolled patients at W8 who received an up-titration of the Per/Amlo combination showed a further SBP reduction. These changes were mirrored by reassuring reductions in diastolic blood pressure. The fixed-dose combinations were well tolerated., Conclusions: Single-pill combinations of perindopril and amlodipine provide hypertensive patients with a convenient and effective method of reducing blood pressure., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)