Looking for an optimal antihypertensive combination. Focus on azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone
https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2024-6190
EDN: ETEEFS
Abstract
The article analyzes data from clinical studies on the efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone combination and its components. According to the analyzed sources, both individual components and their combination have proven their efficacy and safety in patients with hypertension, including those with comorbid pathology. Azilsartan medoxomil demonstrated greater efficacy with comparable safety in terms of lowering blood pressure, both office and ambulatory, compared to candesartan, valsartan, olmesartan. Chlorthalidone showed greater hypotensive efficacy compared to hydrochlorothiazide and proved its protective effect in cardiovascular risk reduction. The combination of azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone, in turn, has proven its safety and greater hypotensive efficacy compared to both the combination of olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide and azilsartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide.
Supporting agencies: The article was supported by AO Nizhpharm, but this did not affect the results of the systematic review and the authors' opinion. The authors' opinion may not coincide with the opinion of the company.
About the Authors
M. D. Smirnova
Chazov National Medical Research Center for Cardiology
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Moscow
Competing Interests:
None
T. V. Fofanova
Chazov National Medical Research Center for Cardiology
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Moscow
Competing Interests:
None
F. T. Ageyev
Chazov National Medical Research Center for Cardiology
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Moscow
Competing Interests:
None
References
1. Kobalava ZhD, Konradi AO, Nedogoda SV, et al. 2024 Clinical practice guidelines for Hypertension in adults. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2024;29(9):6117. (In Russ.) EDN GUEWLU.
2. KDIGO 2021 Clinical practice guideline for the management of blood pressure in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2021;99(3S):S1-S87. doi:10.1016/j.kint.2020.11.003.
3. Arija V, Villalobos F, Pedret R, et al. Physical activity, cardiovascular health, quality of life and blood pressure control in hypertensive subjects: randomized clinical trial. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):184. doi:10.1186/s12955-018-1008-6.
4. Yan R, Gu HQ, Wang W, et al. Health-related quality of life in blood pressure control and blood lipid-lowering therapies: results from the CHIEF randomized controlled trial. Hypertens Res. 2019;(42):1561-71. doi:10.1038/s41440-019-0281-z.
5. Mancia G, Seravalle G, Grassi G. Tolerability and treatment compliance with angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Am J Hypertens. 2003;16(12):1066-73. doi:10.1016/j.amjhyper.2003.07.012.
6. Wang JG, Zhang M, Feng YQ, et al. Is the newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil more effi cacious in lowering blood pressure than the older ones? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2021;23(5):901-14. doi:10.1111/jch.14227.
7. Miura S, Okabe A, Matsuo Y, et al. Unique binding behavior of the recently approved angiotensin II receptor blocker azilsartan compared with that of candesartan. Hypertens Res. 2013;36(2):134-9. doi:10.1038/hr.2012.147.
8. Rakugi H, Enya K, Sugiura K, Ikeda Y. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of azilsartan with that of candesartan cilexetil in Japanese patients with grade I—II essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Hypertens Res. 2012;35:552-8. doi:10.1038/hr.2012.8.
9. Rakugi H, Kario K, Enya K, et al. Effect of azilsartan versus candesartan on nocturnal blood pressure variation in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Blood Press. 2013;22 Suppl.1:22-8. doi:10.3109/08037051.2013.818758.
10. Rakugi H, Kario K, Enya K, et al. Effect of azilsartan versus candesartan on morning blood pressure surges in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Blood Press Monit. 2014;19:164-9 doi:10.1097/MBP.0000000000000042.
11. Perez A, Cao C. Azilsartan in patients with mild to moderate hypertension using clinic and ambulatory blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19: 82-9. doi:10.1111/jch.12873.
12. Bakris GL, Sica D, Weber M, et al. The comparative effects of azilsartan medoxomil and olmesartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011;13:81-8. doi:10.1111/j.1751-7176.2010.00425.x.
13. Sica D, White WB, Weber MA, et al. Comparison of the novel angiotensin II receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil vs valsartan by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Clin Hypertens. 2011;13:467-72. doi:10.1111/j.1751-7176.2011.00482.x.
14. White WB, Cuadra RH, Lloyd E, et al. Effects of azilsartan medoxomil compared with olmesartan and valsartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes. J Hypertens. 2016;34(4):788-97. doi:10.1097/HJH.0000000000000839.
15. Kusuyama T, Ogata H, Takeshita H, et al. Effects of azilsartan compared to other angiotensin receptor blockers on left ventricular hypertrophy and the sympathetic nervous system in hemodialysis patients. Ther Apher Dial. 2014;18(5):398-403. doi:10.1111/1744-9987.12168.
16. Liu H, Mao P, Wang J, et al. Azilsartan, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker, attenuates tert-butyl hydroperoxide-induced endothelial cell injury through inhibition of mitochondrial dysfunction and anti-inflammatory activity. Neurochem Int. 2016;94:48-56. doi:10.1016/j.neuint.2016.02.005.
17. Lei J, He M, Xu L, et al. Azilsartan prevented AGE-induced inflammatory response and degradation of aggrecan in human chondrocytes through inhibition of Sox4. J Biochem Mol Toxicol. 2021;35(8):e22827. doi:10.1002/jbt.22827.
18. Gupta V, Dhull DK, Joshi J, et al. Neuroprotective potential of azilsartan against cerebral ischemic injury: Possible involvement of mitochondrial mechanisms. Neurochem Int. 2020;132:104604. doi:10.1016/j.neuint.2019.104604.
19. Carter BL, Ernst ME, Cohen JD. Hydrochlorothiazide versus chlorthalidone: evidence supporting their interchangeability. Hypertension. 2004;43:4‐9. doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000103632.19915.0E.
20. Ernst ME, Carter BL, Zheng S, Grimm RH Jr. Meta‐analysis of dose‐response characteristics of hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone: effects on systolic blood pressure and potassium. Am J Hypertens. 2010;23:440‐6. doi:10.1038/ajh.2010.1.
21. Peterzan MA, Hardy R, Chaturvedi N, Hughes AD. Meta‐analysis of dose‐response relationships for hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone, and bendroflumethiazide on blood pressure, serum potassium, and urate. Hypertension. 2012;59:1104‐9. doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.190637.
22. Lund BC, Ernst ME. The comparative effectiveness of hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone in an observational cohort of veterans. J Clin Hypertension (Greenwich). 2012;14:623-9. doi:10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00679.x.
23. Ernst ME, Carter BL, Goerdt CJ, et al. Comparative antihypertensive effects of hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone on ambulatory and office blood pressure. Hypertension. 2006;47(3):352-8. doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000203309.07140.d3.
24. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin — converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA. 2002;288:2981-97. doi:10.1001/jama.288.23.2981.
25. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). SHEP Cooperative Research Group. JAMA. 1991;265(24):3255-64.
26. Ernst ME, Neaton JD, Grim RH, et al. For the MRFIT Research Group. Long-termeffects of chlorthalidone vs hydrochlorothiazide on electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in themultiple risk factor interventional trial. Hypertension. 2011;57:689-94. doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.181248.
27. Neaton JD, Grimm RH Jr, Prineas RJ, et al. Treatment of mild hypertension study: Final results: Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study Research Group. JAMA. 1993;270(6): 713-24.
28. Roush GC, Buddharaju V, Ernst ME. Is chlorthalidone better than hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular events in hypertensives? Curr Opin Cardiol. 2013;28:426‐32. doi:10.1097/HCO.0b013e3283622075.
29. Roush GC, Holford TR, Guddati K. Chlorthalidone compared with hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular events: systematic review and network meta‐analyses. Hypertension. 2012;59:1110‐7. doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.191106.
30. Bakris GL, Sica D, White WB, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy of hydrochlorothiazide vs chlorthalidone combined with azilsartan medoxomil. Am J Med. 2012;125(12):1229. e1-1229.e10. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.05.023.
31. Cushman WC, Bakris GL, White WB, et al. Azilsartan medoxomil plus chlorthalidone reduces blood pressure more effectively than olmesartan plus hydrochlorothiazide in stage 2 systolic hypertension. Hypertension. 2012;60:310‐8. doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.188284.
32. Bakris GL, Zhao L, Kupfer S, et al. Long-term efficacy and tolerability of azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone vs olmesartan medoxomil/ hydrochlorothiazide in chronic kidney disease. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018;20:694-702. doi:10.1111/jch.13230.
Supplementary files
- Azilsartan has a stronger antihypertensive effect than other angiotensin II receptor blockers, including in comorbid patients. There is experimental evidence of pleiotropic effects of azilsartan.
- The data that allowed low diuretic doses taking the place of first-line antihypertensive drugs were mainly obtained in randomized clinical trials using chlorthalidone.
- Chlorthalidone showed greater antihypertensive efficacy compared to hydrochlorothiazide.
- Azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone combination proved its greater antihypertensive efficacy compared to both the combination of olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide and azilsartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide.
Review
For citations:
Smirnova M.D., Fofanova T.V., Ageyev F.T. Looking for an optimal antihypertensive combination. Focus on azilsartan medoxomil/chlorthalidone. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2024;29(12):6190. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2024-6190. EDN: ETEEFS
Views:
622
Email this article 