Long-term safety and tolerability of ambrisentan treatment for pediatric patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: An open-label extension study.

This open-label, extension study assessed long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of ambrisentan in a pediatric population (age 8- < 18 years) with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Following completion of a 6-month, randomized study, participants entered the long-term extension at individualized ambrisentan dosages (2.5/5/7.5 or 10 mg/day). Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), AEs of special interest, and serious AEs (SAEs); efficacy outcomes included 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and World Health Organization functional class (WHO FC). Thirty-eight of 41 (93%) randomized study participants entered the extension; 21 (55%) completed (reaching age 18 years). Most participants received concomitant phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (n = 25/38, 66%). Median ambrisentan exposure was 3.5 years. Most participants experienced ≥ 1 AE (n = 34/38, 89%), and 21 (55%) experienced SAEs, most commonly worsening PAH (n = 3/38, 8%), acute cardiac failure, pneumonia, or anemia (n = 2/38; 5% each); none considered ambrisentan-related. Seven participants (18%) died, with recorded reasons (MedDRA preferred term): cardiac failure (n = 2), PAH (n = 2), COVID-19 (n = 1), acute right ventricular failure (n = 1), and failure to thrive (n = 1); median time to death: 5.2 years. Anemia and hepatotoxicity AEs were generally mild to moderate and did not require ambrisentan dose adjustment. Assessed at study end in 29 participants (76%), mean 6MWD improved by 17% (standard deviation: 34.3%), and all (29/29, 100%) had improved or unchanged WHO FC.    Conclusion: Long-term weight-based ambrisentan dosing, alone or combined with other PAH therapies in children with PAH aged 8- < 18 years, exhibited tolerability and clinical improvements consistent with prior randomized study results.    Trial registration: NCT01342952, April 27, 2011. What is Known: • The endothelin receptor antagonist, ambrisentan, is indicated for treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Previous studies have shown similar efficacy and tolerability in pediatric patients as in adults. What is New: • This open-label extension study assessed the long-term use of ambrisentan in pediatric patients (8-<18 years) with PAH, most of whom were also receiving recommended background PAH treatment. • Weight-based dosing of ambrisentan, given alone or in combination with other PAH therapies, was well tolerated with clinical improvements consistent with prior randomized study results.

Pediatric Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Exposure-Response Analysis of Ambrisentan in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Comparison With Adult Data.

This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model of ambrisentan in pediatric patients (8 to <18 years) with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and compare pediatric ambrisentan systemic exposure with previously reported adult data. Association of ambrisentan exposure with efficacy (6-minute walking distance) and safety (adverse events) were exploratory analyses. A population PK model was developed using pediatric PK data. Steady-state systemic exposure metrics were estimated for the pediatric population and compared with previously reported data in adult patients with PAH and healthy subjects. No covariates had a significant effect on PK parameters; therefore, the final covariate model was the same as the base model. The pediatric population PK model was a 2-compartment model including the effect of body weight (allometric scaling), first-order absorption and elimination, and absorption lag time. Steady-state ambrisentan exposure was similar between the pediatric and adult population when accounting for body weight differences. Geometric mean area under the concentration-time curve at steady state in pediatric patients receiving ambrisentan low dose was 3% lower than in the adult population (and similar in both populations receiving high dose). Geometric mean maximum plasma concentration at steady state in pediatric patients receiving low and high doses was 11% and 18% higher, respectively, than in the adult population. There was no apparent association in the pediatric or adult population between ambrisentan exposure and change in 6-minute walking distance or incidence of ambrisentan-related adverse events in pediatric patients. The similar ambrisentan exposure and exposure-response profiles observed in pediatric and adult populations with PAH suggests appropriateness of body-weight-based dosing in the pediatric population with PAH.

An observational, non-interventional study for the follow-up of patients with amyloidosis who received miridesap followed by dezamizumab in a phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Miridesap depletes circulating serum amyloid P (SAP) and dezamizumab (anti-SAP monoclonal antibody) targets SAP on amyloid deposits, triggering amyloid removal. In a phase 1, first-in-human study (FIHS), progressive amyloid removal was observed in some patients after ≤ 3 cycles of miridesap/dezamizumab. METHODS: This observational, non-interventional study in patients who received miridesap/dezamizumab during the FIHS (planned follow-up: 5 years) evaluated response to treatment based on routine assessments of disease status and key organ function. In a post hoc analysis, patients responding to treatment in the FIHS during follow-up were identified as responders and further categorized as sustained or declining responders. RESULTS: In the FIHS, 17/23 patients were treatment responders. Of these patients, seven (immunoglobulin light chain [AL], n = 6; serum amyloid A, n = 1) were considered sustained responders and ten (fibrinogen-a alpha chain [AFib], n = 5; AL, n = 4; apolipoprotein A-I, n = 1) were considered declining responders. We primarily present responder patient-level data for functional, cardiac, laboratory and imaging assessments conducted during the follow-up period, with non-responder data presented as supplementary. CONCLUSION: No further development of miridesap/dezamizumab is planned in amyloidosis. However, long-term follow-up of these patients may provide insight into whether active removal of amyloid deposits has an impact on disease progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01777243. Registered 28 January 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01777243 .

Pharmacodynamic evaluation and safety assessment of treatment with antibodies to serum amyloid P component in patients with cardiac amyloidosis: an open-label Phase 2 study and an adjunctive immuno-PET imaging study.

BACKGROUND: In a Phase I study treatment with the serum amyloid P component (SAP) depleter miridesap followed by monoclonal antibody to SAP (dezamizumab) showed removal of amyloid from liver, spleen and kidney in patients with systemic amyloidosis. We report results from a Phase 2 study and concurrent immuno-positron emission tomography (PET) study assessing efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety and cardiac uptake (of dezamizumab) following the same intervention in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS: Both were uncontrolled open-label studies. After SAP depletion with miridesap, patients received ≤ 6 monthly doses of dezamizumab in the Phase 2 trial (n = 7), ≤ 2 doses of non-radiolabelled dezamizumab plus [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab (total mass dose of 80 mg at session 1 and 500 mg at session 2) in the immuno-PET study (n = 2). Primary endpoints of the Phase 2 study were changed from baseline to follow-up (at 8 weeks) in left ventricular mass (LVM) by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and safety. Primary endpoint of the immuno-PET study was [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab cardiac uptake assessed via PET. RESULTS: Dezamizumab produced no appreciable or consistent reduction in LVM nor improvement in cardiac function in the Phase 2 study. In the immuno-PET study, measurable cardiac uptake of [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab, although seen in both patients, was moderate to low. Uptake was notably lower in the patient with higher LVM. Treatment-associated rash with cutaneous small-vessel vasculitis was observed in both studies. Abdominal large-vessel vasculitis after initial dezamizumab dosing (300 mg) occurred in the first patient with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis enrolled in the Phase 2 study. Symptom resolution was nearly complete within 24 h of intravenous methylprednisolone and dezamizumab discontinuation; abdominal computed tomography imaging showed vasculitis resolution by 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous observations of visceral amyloid reduction, there was no appreciable evidence of amyloid removal in patients with cardiac amyloidosis in this Phase 2 trial, potentially related to limited cardiac uptake of dezamizumab as demonstrated in the immuno-PET study. The benefit-risk assessment for dezamizumab in cardiac amyloidosis was considered unfavourable after the incidence of large-vessel vasculitis and development for this indication was terminated. Trial registration NCT03044353 (2 February 2017) and NCT03417830 (25 January 2018).

A Randomized Study of Safety and Efficacy of Two Doses of Ambrisentan to Treat Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Pediatric Patients Aged 8 Years up to 18 Years.

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of the endothelin receptor antagonist ambrisentan in pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Study design: In this open-label, phase IIb study, patients with PAH aged 8 to <18 years were randomized to low- or high-dose ambrisentan for 24 weeks. Most patients were receiving other PAH medication(s) that could not be changed during the trial. The primary outcome was safety (treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]); secondary outcome was efficacy (including change from baseline to week 24 in 6-minute walking distance and World Health Organization functional class). Study staff were blinded to treatment. No statistical testing was performed. Results: Most of the 41 patients randomized (80%) experienced ≥1 TEAE; most were mild (22%) or moderate (49%) in severity (no difference between dose groups). Most common TEAEs were headache (24%), nausea (17%), abdominal pain (12%), and nasopharyngitis (12%). Eight patients had serious TEAEs; 2 were fatal (unrelated to study treatment). Improved 6-minute walking distance was observed from baseline to week 24: total mean (SD) change, +40.69 (84.58) meters; World Health Organization functional class was maintained or improved in 70% and 27% patients, respectively. Conclusions: Ambrisentan was well tolerated; TEAEs were consistent with the adult safety profile. Efficacy was similar to previous findings in adult PAH; however, interpretation is limited by small sample size. Findings support a potentially similar benefit:risk profile in pediatric (8 to <18 years) and adult patients with PAH. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01332331.

Metabolic syndrome and the risk of adverse cardiovascular events after an acute coronary syndrome.

Background The incremental prognostic value of assessing the metabolic syndrome has been disputed. Little is known regarding its prognostic value in patients after an acute coronary syndrome. Design and methods The presence of metabolic syndrome (2005 International Diabetes Federation) was assessed at baseline in SOLID-TIMI 52, a trial of patients within 30 days of acute coronary syndrome (median follow-up 2.5 years). The primary endpoint was major coronary events (coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction or urgent coronary revascularization). Results At baseline, 61.6% ( n = 7537) of patients met the definition of metabolic syndrome, 34.7% (n = 4247) had diabetes and 29.3% had both ( n = 3584). The presence of metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risk of major coronary events (adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 1.29, p < 0.0001) and recurrent myocardial infarction (adjHR 1.30, p < 0.0001). Of the individual components of the definition, only diabetes (adjHR 1.48, p < 0.0001) or impaired fasting glucose (adjHR 1.21, p = 0.002) and hypertension (adjHR 1.46, p < 0.0001) were associated with the risk of major coronary events. In patients without diabetes, metabolic syndrome was numerically but not significantly associated with the risk of major coronary events (adjHR 1.13, p = 0.06). Conversely, diabetes was a strong independent predictor of major coronary events in the absence of metabolic syndrome (adjHR 1.57, p < 0.0001). The presence of both diabetes and metabolic syndrome identified patients at highest risk of adverse outcomes but the incremental value of metabolic syndrome was not significant relative to diabetes alone (adjHR 1.07, p = 0.54). Conclusions After acute coronary syndrome, diabetes is a strong and independent predictor of adverse outcomes. Assessment of the metabolic syndrome provides only marginal incremental value once the presence or absence of diabetes is established.

Short Sleep Duration, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Shiftwork, and the Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients After an Acute Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether short sleep duration, obstructive sleep apnea, and overnight shift work are associated with the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients after an acute coronary syndrome. METHODS AND RESULTS: SOLID-TIMI 52 (The Stabilization of PLaques UsIng Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52 Trial) was a multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled 13 026 patients ≤30 days of acute coronary syndrome. At baseline, all patients were to complete the Berlin questionnaire to assess risk of obstructive sleep apnea and a sleep and shift work survey. Median follow-up was 2.5 years. The primary outcome was major coronary events (MCE; coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization). Cox models were adjusted for clinical predictors. Patients who reported <6 hours sleep per night had a 29% higher risk of MCE (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.49; P<0.001) compared with those with longer sleep. Patients who screened positive for obstructive sleep apnea had a 12% higher risk of MCE (1.12; 1.00-1.24; P=0.04) than those who did not screen positive. Overnight shift work (≥3 night shifts/week for ≥1 year) was associated with a 15% higher risk of MCE (1.15; 1.03-1.29; P=0.01). A step-wise increase in cardiovascular risk was observed for individuals with more than 1 sleep-related risk factor. Individuals with all 3 sleep-related risk factors had a 2-fold higher risk of MCE (2.01; 1.49-2.71; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Short sleep duration, obstructive sleep apnea, and overnight shift work are under-recognized as predictors of adverse outcomes after acute coronary syndrome. Increased efforts should be made to identify, treat, and educate patients about the importance of sleep for the potential prevention of cardiovascular events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01000727.

Interleukin-6 and the Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Patients After an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Observations From the SOLID-TIMI 52 (Stabilization of Plaque Using Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is an inflammatory cytokine implicated in plaque instability in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic implications of IL-6 post-ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: IL-6 concentration was assessed at baseline in 4939 subjects in SOLID-TIMI 52 (Stabilization of Plaque Using Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52), a randomized trial of darapladib in patients ≤30 days from ACS. Patients were followed for a median of 2.5 years for major adverse cardiovascular events; cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization. Primary analyses were adjusted first for baseline characteristics, days from index ACS, ACS type, and randomized treatment arm. For every SD increase in IL-6, there was a 10% higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [adj HR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.19) and a 22% higher risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.11-1.34). Patients in the highest IL-6 quartile had a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adj HR Q4:Q1 1.57, 95% CI 1.22-2.03) and cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.6-3.29). After further adjustment for biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 activity, high-sensitivity troponin I, and B-type natriuretic peptide), IL-6 remained significantly associated with the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adj HR Q4:Q1 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.88) and cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.22-2.63). CONCLUSIONS: In patients after ACS, IL-6 concentration is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes independent of established risk predictors and biomarkers. These findings lend support to the concept of IL-6 as a potential therapeutic target in patients with unstable ischemic heart disease.

Predictors of Nonuse of a High-Potency Statin After an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From the Stabilization of Plaques Using Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52 (SOLID-TIMI 52) Trial.

BACKGROUND: High-potency statins reduce cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndromes but remain underused in clinical practice. We examined predictors of nonuse of high-potency statins after acute coronary syndromes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Stabilization of pLaques usIng Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (SOLID-TIMI 52) trial enrolled patients after an acute coronary syndrome in 36 countries between 2009 and 2011. Statin use was strongly encouraged throughout the trial, and statin potency was at the discretion of the treating physician. A high-potency statin was defined as ≥40 mg atorvastatin, ≥20 mg rosuvastatin, or 80 mg simvastatin daily. Predictors of nonuse of high-potency statins were examined using logistic regression. Of the patients included (n=12 446), 11 850 (95.2%) were treated with a statin at baseline after acute coronary syndrome (median 14 days), but only 5212 (41.9%) were on a high-potency statin. Selected patient factors associated with nonuse of high-potency statins included age ≥75 years (odds ratio 1.39, 95% CI 1.24-1.56), female sex (odds ratio 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.22), renal dysfunction (odds ratio 1.17, 95% CI 1.03-1.32), and heart failure during hospital admission (odds ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.27-1.62). At 3 months after baseline, only 49% of patients had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL. Among the 5490 patients (59%) who were not on a high-potency statin at 3 months, lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was a predictor of nonuse of a high-potency statin after a median of 2.3 years (odds ratio 1.15 for 10 mg/dL decrease, 95% CI 1.11-1.19). CONCLUSION: Despite the widespread use of statins after acute coronary syndromes, most patients are not treated with high-potency statins early and late after the event, including patients at the highest risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01000727.

Effect of darapladib on major coronary events after an acute coronary syndrome: the SOLID-TIMI 52 randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) has been hypothesized to be involved in atherogenesis through pathways related to inflammation. Darapladib is an oral, selective inhibitor of the Lp-PLA2 enzyme. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darapladib in patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: SOLID-TIMI 52 was a multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized 13,026 participants within 30 days of hospitalization with an ACS (non-ST-elevation or ST-elevation myocardial infarction [MI]) at 868 sites in 36 countries. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to either once-daily darapladib (160 mg) or placebo on a background of guideline-recommended therapy. Patients were followed up for a median of 2.5 years between December 7, 2009, and December 6, 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point (major coronary events) was the composite of coronary heart disease (CHD) death, MI, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia. Kaplan-Meier event rates are reported at 3 years. RESULTS: During a median duration of 2.5 years, the primary end point occurred in 903 patients in the darapladib group and 910 in the placebo group (16.3% vs 15.6% at 3 years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91-1.09]; P = .93). The composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke occurred in 824 in the darapladib group and 838 in the placebo group (15.0% vs 15.0% at 3 years; HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.09]; P = .78). There were no differences between the treatment groups for additional secondary end points, for individual components of the primary end point, or in all-cause mortality (371 events in the darapladib group and 395 in the placebo group [7.3% vs 7.1% at 3 years; HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.82-1.08]; P = .40). Patients were more likely to report an odor-related concern in the darapladib group vs the placebo group (11.5% vs 2.5%) and also more likely to report diarrhea (10.6% vs 5.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients who experienced an ACS event, direct inhibition of Lp-PLA2 with darapladib added to optimal medical therapy and initiated within 30 days of hospitalization did not reduce the risk of major coronary events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01000727.

Study design and rationale for the Stabilization of pLaques usIng Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (SOLID-TIMI 52) trial in patients after an acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Higher levels of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) (Lp-PLA(2)) are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events and may play a causal role in atherogenesis. Darapladib inhibits Lp-PLA(2) activity in plasma and in arterial plaques and may confer clinical benefit in preventing cardiovascular events. STUDY DESIGN: The SOLID-TIMI 52 trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, event-driven trial. Approximately 13,000 subjects are being randomized to darapladib (160 mg enteric-coated tablet daily) or matching placebo within 30 days of hospitalization with an acute coronary syndrome. The primary end point is the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary end points include major and total coronary events, individual components of the primary end point, and all-cause mortality. The study will continue until approximately 1,500 primary end point events have occurred to achieve 90% power to detect a 15.5% reduction in the primary end point. The median treatment duration is anticipated to be approximately 3 years, with a total study duration of approximately 4.1 years. CONCLUSIONS: The SOLID-TIMI 52 trial will determine the clinical benefit of direct inhibition of Lp-PLA(2) activity with darapladib in patients after an acute coronary syndrome.

Efficacy and safety of carvedilol in treatment of heart failure with chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of different types of ß-blocker therapy in patients with non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) and systolic heart failure (HF) are not well described. We assessed whether treatment of systolic HF with carvedilol is efficacious and safe in adults with CKD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a post hoc analysis of pooled individual patient data (n=4217) from 2 multinational, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trials, CAPRICORN (Carvedilol Postinfarct Survival Control in Left Ventricular Dysfunction Study) and COPERNICUS (Carvedilol Prospective Randomized, Cumulative Survival study). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, HF mortality, first HF hospitalization, the composite of cardiovascular mortality or first HF hospitalization, and sudden cardiac death. Non-dialysis-dependent CKD was defined by estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), using the abbreviated Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. CKD was present in 2566 of 4217 (60.8%) of the cohort, 50.4% of whom were randomly assigned to carvedilol therapy. Within the CKD group, treatment with carvedilol decreased the risks of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.93; P=0.007), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.94; P=0.011), HF mortality (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.88; P=0.003), first hospitalization for HF (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.88; P=0.0009), and the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.87; P<0.001) but was without significant effect on sudden cardiac death (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.05; P=0.098). There was no significant interaction between treatment arm and study type. Carvedilol was generally well tolerated by both groups of patients, with an increased relative incidence in transient increase in serum creatinine without need for dialysis and other electrolyte changes in the CKD patients. However, in a sensitivity analysis among HF subjects with estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (CKD stage 3b), the efficacy of carvedilol was not significantly different from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that the benefits of carvedilol therapy in patients with systolic left ventricular dysfunction with or without symptoms of HF are consistent even in the presence of mild to moderate CKD. Whether carvedilol therapy is similarly efficacious in HF patients with more advanced kidney disease requires further study.

Effect of combining extended-release carvedilol and lisinopril in hypertension: results of the COSMOS study.

Hypertension treatment commonly requires multiple agents to achieve target blood pressure (BP). ß-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are commonly co-prescribed in clinical practice although few data are available that test their additivity on BP lowering. The efficacy and safety of once-daily extended-release carvedilol (carvedilol CR) combined with the ACEI lisinopril in a double-blind, randomized, factorial design study were studied. Patients (N=656) with stage 1 or 2 hypertension were randomized evenly to 1 of 15 groups for 6 weeks: carvedilol CR monotherapy 20 mg, 40 mg, or 80 mg/d; lisinopril monotherapy 10 mg, 20 mg, or 40 mg/d; or 1 of 9 combinations of carvedilol CR plus lisinopril initiated simultaneously. Primary efficacy measures (assessed by ambulatory BP monitoring [ABPM]) were change from baseline in 24-hour mean diastolic BP (DBP) and in trough (20-24 hours) DBP. Continuous efficacy variables were assessed using analysis of covariance. Whether any combination dose was superior to its monotherapy components was assessed using the Hung AVE procedure. Despite the presence of additional BP lowering observed with most of the combinations compared with their monotherapy components, the Hung AVE test was not significant for either primary efficacy measures. Post hoc analyses of the high-dose combination groups (carvedilol CR/lisinopril regimens of 80/10 mg, 80/20 mg, 80/40 mg, 20/40 mg, and 40/40 mg) showed a significant treatment difference compared with both carvedilol CR 80 mg and lisinopril 40 mg for 24-hour mean DBP but not for trough DBP. With the exception of dizziness, individual adverse events did not increase with ascending doses or combinations. The superiority of initiating combination treatment with carvedilol CR and lisinopril compared with the monotherapy components was not demonstrated with the ABPM measurements. Nonetheless, the post hoc assessment combining all high-dose groups did produce significant 24-hour mean BP reduction when compared with the high-dose monotherapy groups. The tolerability profile of initiating combination therapy was generally comparable to the initiation of treatment with monotherapy.

Adherence with once daily versus twice daily carvedilol in patients with heart failure: the Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal compliance in taking guideline-based pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) potentially increases the burden of hospitalizations and diminishes quality of life. By simplifying the medical regimen, once-daily dosing can potentially improve compliance. The Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial was designed to measure differential compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life in chronic HF patients taking carvedilol immediate release (IR) twice daily versus the bioequivalent carvedilol controlled-release (CR) once daily. METHODS AND RESULTS: CASPER was a prospective multicenter, 3-arm, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial for a 5-month period. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate and compare compliance with carvedilol IR twice daily (BID) and carvedilol phosphate CR once daily (QD) in patients with chronic HF who were taking carvedilol IR. Secondary objectives included comparisons of quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire), satisfaction with medication, and brain natriuretic peptide levels between subjects taking the two formulations. A total of 405 patients with chronic HF and left ventricular dysfunction were randomized to: (A) carvedilol IR twice daily, given double blind; (B) carvedilol CR taken in the morning and placebo in the afternoon, given double blind; or (C) carvedilol CR once daily, open label. Compliance was measured using the medication event monitoring system that captures time of bottle opening. The primary end point was a comparison of taking compliance (doses taken divided by total number of prescribed doses over the actual duration of the study) between the double-blind carvedilol IR BID versus the open-label carvedilol CR QD groups. Sample size estimates were based on assumptions of 75% compliance with BID dosing and 90% compliance with QD dosing. Mean compliance with carvedilol IR BID was 89.3% compared with 88.2% for carvedilol CR QD, and differential mean compliance was 1.1% (95% CI -4.4%, 6.6%; ie, not significant). There were no statistically significant differences in compliance between any of the 3 groups, nor differences in quality of life, treatment satisfaction, or physiologic measures among the 3 study arms. There were also no significant differences in adverse events or side effects among patients switching from carvedilol IR to carvedilol CR in arms B or C over the 5-month study duration compared with patients remaining on carvedilol IR. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance among chronic HF patients in the CASPER trial was high at baseline and unaffected by QD versus BID dosing. Over the 5-month follow-up period, there were no differences in adverse events among patients switching from carvedilol IR to CR.

Differential effects of extended-release carvedilol and extended-release metoprolol on lipid profiles in patients with hypertension: results of the Extended-Release Carvedilol Lipid Trial.

Some beta-blockers, although they are effective antihypertensive agents, may adversely effect dyslipidemia and decrease insulin sensitivity. beta-blockers without adverse metabolic effects may provide an improvement in long-term hypertension therapy. Hypertensive patients (n = 568) without diabetes, not requiring lipid-lowering therapy, were randomized to once-daily extended-release carvedilol or extended-release metoprolol and titrated to target blood pressure (BP). Co-primary endpoints were comparison between groups in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) or triglycerides at 24 weeks. Extended-release carvedilol was superior to extended-release metoprolol in meeting the primary endpoint of a difference in triglycerides; the median % change in triglycerides being -8.026% (P = .0141; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -15.35, -0.67)] from baseline to 24 weeks. Triglycerides were unchanged with carvedilol and increased with metoprolol. There was no significant difference in effect on HDL. BP was similar between treatment groups. There was a significant decrease with extended-release carvedilol vs. extended-release metoprolol in insulin (-2.56 muU/mL [P = .0213; 95% CI, -4.74 to -0.38]) and c-peptide [(-0.43 ng/mL [P = .0007; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.18]). In hypertension, extended-release carvedilol resulted in lower triglycerides, insulin, and C-peptide levels compared with extended-release metoprolol. Similar effects were observed in high-risk subgroups. Both treatments were well tolerated. This differential metabolic profile could be useful in determining antihypertensive treatment options.

Demographic analyses of the effects of carvedilol vs metoprolol on glycemic control and insulin sensitivity in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension in the Glycemic Effects in Diabetes Mellitus: Carvedilol-Metoprolol Comparison in Hypertensives (GEMINI) study.

In the Glycemic Effects in Diabetes Mellitus: Carvedilol-Metoprolol Comparison in Hypertensives (GEMINI) trial, carvedilol added to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers had neutral or beneficial effects on glycemic measures compared with metoprolol tartrate. For the 1235 diabetic hypertensive GEMINI patients, the authors assessed treatment differences by race (white/black/other), age (continuous variable), and sex on hemoglobin A(1c), insulin resistance (homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance [HOMA-IR]), and blood pressure. Both treatments significantly reduced blood pressure in all subgroups, but the metabolic effects of carvedilol were more beneficial in subgroups of race and sex. Carvedilol did not affect hemoglobin A(1c) but improved HOMA-IR results in all subgroups, significantly in males and "other race" subgroups. Metoprolol significantly increased hemoglobin A(1c) in all subgroups except "other race," with no effect on HOMA-IR findings. Differences vs metoprolol significantly favored carvedilol for hemoglobin A(1c) in white and female subgroups and favored carvedilol for HOMA-IR in black, "other race," and male subgroups. Carvedilol effects were favorable to adjustment of age as a covariate. In hypertensive patients with diabetes, carvedilol may be a more appropriate choice when beta-blockade is indicated.

Controlled-release carvedilol in the management of systemic hypertension and myocardial dysfunction.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death worldwide. Within the treatment armamentarium, beta-blockers have demonstrated efficacy across the spectrum of cardiovascular disease--from modification of a risk factor (ie, hypertension) to treatment after an acute event (ie, myocardial infarction). Recently, the use of beta-blockers as a first-line therapy in hypertension has been called into question. Moreover, beta-blockers as a class are saddled with a misperception of having poor tolerability. However, vasodilatory beta-blockers such as carvedilol have a different hemodynamic action that provides the benefits of beta-blockade with the addition of vasodilation resulting from alpha 1-adrenergic receptor blockade. Vasodilation reduces total peripheral resistance, which may produce an overall positive effect on tolerability. Recently, a new, controlled-release carvedilol formulation has been developed that provides the clinical efficacy of carvedilol but is indicated for once-daily dosing. This review presents an overview of the clinical and pharmacologic carvedilol controlled-release data.

Lowering blood pressure with beta-blockers in combination with other renin-angiotensin system blockers in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes: results from the GEMINI Trial.

The effects of beta-blockade in addition to more specific renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers on blood pressure (BP) in patients with diabetes are described. After washout of medications other than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, patients were titrated to a BP level <130/80 mm Hg using therapy with carvedilol 6.25 to 25 mg bid (n=498) or metoprolol tartrate 50 to 200 mg bid (n=737). At the end of the beta-blocker titration period, a BP level <130/80 mm Hg was achieved in 37% of carvedilol-treated and 36% of metoprolol-treated participants who continued to receive a renin-angiotensin system blocker. In the approximately 60% of participants in whom a BP level <130/80 mm Hg was not attained with renin-angiotensin system blockade plus beta-blockade, hydrochlorothiazide was added in 43% and 44% of carvedilol and metoprolol groups, respectively; 25% (both arms) also required a calcium channel blocker. Among those in whom goal BP was not achieved, 42% of carvedilol- and 40% of metoprolol-treated participants were not titrated to the highest dose of beta-blocker. The use of carvedilol compared with metoprolol did not effect glycemic control.