Treatment of isolated systolic hypertension: the SHELL study results.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare the effect of lacidipine and chlorthalidone on cardiovascular outcome as a primary parameter and blood pressure as a secondary in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension in a prospective study with an open design. METHODS: 1882 males and females outpatients > or = 60 years were randomly assigned to the administration of chlorthalidone 12.5 mg o.d. or lacidipine 4 mg o.d. Patients were recruited if sitting systolic blood pressure was > or = 160 mmHg with a diastolic blood pressure equal or lower than 95 mmHg. Primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. RESULTS: At randomization mean systolic blood pressure was 178.1 mmHg in the lacidipine and 178.2 mmHg in the chlorthalidone group, the corresponding mean diastolic values being 86.9 and 86.8 mmHg. In both lacidipine and chlorthalidone groups treatment caused a significant (p < 0.001) and marked systolic blood pressure reduction which was maintained throughout the treatment period with a significant (p < 0.001) and steady although less marked reduction in diastolic blood pressure as well. At the end of treatment period (median 32 months), the reduction was 36.8/8.1 mmHg (systolic/diastolic) in the chlorthalidone and 38.4/7.9 mmHg in the lacidipine group, the final on treatment blood pressures being 142.0/79.2 and 143.2/79.5 mmHg, respectively. Treatments were similarly effective in males and females and in age groups between 60 and 69 years (n = 763), 70 and 79 years (n = 744) and > or = 80 years (n = 375). Similar reductions were obtained in a subgroup of patients (n = 209) followed in double-blind fashion for 1 year. The overall incidence of the primary endpoints was 9.3% with no significant between-group difference. Total mortality was also similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension, administration of lacidipine or chlorthalidone markedly reduced systolic blood pressure with no difference in the incidence of cardiovascular events and total mortality.

Combination treatment with metformin and glibenclamide versus single-drug therapies in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, double-blind, comparative study.

To compare efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with metformin and sulfonylurea with each of these drugs alone in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, 88 type 2 diabetic subjects (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] levels, 8.0%+/-1.0%; age, 57.3+/-7.1 years; body mass index [BMI]. 27.0+/-2.6 kg/m2; diabetes duration, 9.8+/-8.2 years; means +/- SD) were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with metformin (500 to 3,000 mg/d), glibenclamide (5 to 15 mg/d), or their combination (metformin 400 to 2,400 mg/d + glibenclamide 2.5 to 15 mg/d) for 6 months. Thereafter, groups were crossed over for the following 6 months. Thus, each patient received metformin or glibenclamide alone, and the combination treatment. Doses were titrated to obtain HbA1c levels < or = 6.0% and fasting plasma glucose levels less than 140 mg/dL. Eighty patients concluded both treatment periods and were included in the analysis of treatment efficacy. In patients receiving metformin or glibenclamide alone, the maximal dose was reached in 21 and 25 patients, respectively; 8 and 15 of these subjects, respectively, required the maximal dose when they were on the combination treatment. During the study, 4 (10.0%) subjects receiving metformin, 7 (17.1%) receiving glibenclamide, and 31 (39.2%) receiving the combination treatment reached HbA1c levels < or = 6.0%. Moreover, when efficacy of the combination treatment on glycemic control was compared with that of single-drug therapies in each individual patient, the combination was significantly more effective than either metformin or glibenclamide (HbA1c after treatment, 6.1%+/-1.1% v 7.3%+/-1.4%, and 6.5%+/-0.7% v 7.6%+/-1.5%, respectively, both P<.0001). In conclusion, combination treatment with metformin and sulfonylurea is more effective than these drugs alone in improving glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, while also allowing a reduction of the dosage of each drug.