Discovery Belux: comparison of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin in hypercholesterolaemia.

METHODS: Discovery Belux is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase IIIb, parallel group study comparing the efficacy of rosuvastatin (RSV) and atorvastatin (ATV) on changes in lipid levels and the achievement of European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) lipid goals. Patients (> or = 18 years) with primary hypercholesterolaemia, with a low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) level > 120 mg/dl (on treatment) or > 135 mg/dl (naive subjects), and with a statin indication, were randomised to receive RSV 10 mg/day or ATV 10 mg/day for 12 weeks. Patients not at goal after 12 weeks and receiving ATV 10 were further switched to RSV 10 mg for another 12 weeks. Patients not at goal with RSV 10 mg were further titrated to RSV 20 mg. RESULTS: 938 patients were randomised to the two treatment groups. After 12 weeks of treatment, a significantly greater percentage of patients receiving RSV 10 compared with ATV 10 achieved EAS LDL-C target goal (< 115 mg/dl) (85% vs. 67%). LDL-C was reduced by 47% and total cholesterol (TC) by 33% with RSV 10.This was 38% and 27% for ATV 10, respectively. After 24 weeks, an additional 57% of patients initially taking RSV 10 and uncontrolled, reached the target with RSV 20. In the patient group, initially taking ATV 10 and uncontrolled, 65% reached the target with RSV 10 after 24 weeks. Both treatments were well tolerated with a similar incidence of adverse events. In addition, a health economic analysis was performed. As RSV 10 is available at a lower cost in Belgium and as it is more effective, compared to ATV 10, it appeared to be the option of choice from a cost-effectiveness perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Rosuvastatin 10 mg treatment is significantly more effective than atorvastatin 10 mg at achieving European LDL-C goals, at lowering LDL-C and TC. These results were obtained with a similar safety profile. From a cost-effectiveness perspective RSV 10 is the preferred therapeutic option in comparison with ATV 10. Uptitration of uncontrolled patients to RSV 20 mg and switch from ATV 10 to RSV 10 allowed significantly more patients to reach the LDL-C and TC target goal.

Antihypertensive treatment based on blood pressure measurement at home or in the physician's office: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Self-measurement of blood pressure is increasingly used in clinical practice, but how it affects the treatment of hypertension requires further study. OBJECTIVE: To compare use of blood pressure (BP) measurements taken in physicians' offices and at home in the treatment of patients with hypertension. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Blinded randomized controlled trial conducted from March 1997 to April 2002 at 56 primary care practices and 3 hospital-based outpatient clinics in Belgium and 1 specialized hypertension clinic in Dublin, Ireland. Four hundred participants with a diastolic BP (DBP) of 95 mm Hg or more as measured at physicians' offices were enrolled and followed up for 1 year. INTERVENTIONS: Antihypertensive drug treatment was adjusted in a stepwise fashion based on either the self-measured DBP at home (average of 6 measurements per day during 1 week; n = 203) or the average of 3 sitting DBP readings at the physician's office (n = 197). If the DBP guiding treatment was above (>89 mm Hg), at (80-89 mm Hg), or below (<80 mm Hg) target, a physician blinded to randomization intensified antihypertensive treatment, left it unchanged, or reduced it, respectively. MEAN OUTCOME MEASURES: Office and home BP levels, 24-hour ambulatory BP, intensity of drug treatment, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic left ventricular mass, symptoms reported by questionnaire, and costs of treatment. RESULTS: At the end of the study (median follow-up, 350 days; interquartile range, 326-409 days), more home BP than office BP patients had stopped antihypertensive drug treatment (25.6% vs 11.3%; P<.001) with no significant difference in the proportions of patients progressing to multiple-drug treatment (38.7% vs 45.1%; P =.14). The final office, home, and 24-hour ambulatory BP measurements were higher (P<.001) in the home BP group than in the office BP group. The mean baseline-adjusted systolic/diastolic differences between the home and office BP groups averaged 6.8/3.5 mm Hg, 4.9/2.9 mm Hg, and 4.9/2.9 mm Hg, respectively. Left ventricular mass and reported symptoms were similar in the 2 groups. Costs per 100 patients followed up for 1 month were only slightly lower in the home BP group (3875 vs 3522 [4921 dollars vs 4473 dollars]; P =.04). CONCLUSIONS: Adjustment of antihypertensive treatment based on home BP instead of office BP led to less intensive drug treatment and marginally lower costs but also to less BP control, with no differences in general well-being or left ventricular mass. Self-measurement allowed identification of patients with white-coat hypertension. Our findings support a stepwise strategy for the evaluation of BP in which self-measurement and ambulatory monitoring are complementary to conventional office measurement and highlight the need for prospective outcome studies to establish the normal range of home-measured BP.