Overview of the Evolution of Hypertension: From Ancient Chinese Emperors to Today.

Hypertension is one of the most commonly treated conditions in modern medical practice, but despite its long history, it was largely ignored until the midpoint of the 20th century. This article will review the origins of elevated blood pressure from when it was first appreciated in 2600 BC to its most recent emerging treatments. Awareness of sustained elevations in blood pressure goes back to the Chinese Yellow Emperor's Classic of Internal Medicine (2600 BC); even then, salt was appreciated as a contributor to elevated pressure. Early treatments included acupuncture, venesection, and bleeding by leeches. About 1000 years later, the association between the palpated pulse and the development of heart and brain diseases was described by Ebers Papyrus (1550 BC). But really, it has only been since well after World War II that hypertension has finally been appreciated as the cause of so much heart, stroke, and kidney disease. We review the development of effective treatments for hypertension while acknowledging that so many people with hypertension in need of treatment have unacceptably poor blood pressure control. We explore why, despite our considerable and growing knowledge of hypertension, it remains a significant public health problem globally.

Slowing the Progression of Diabetic Kidney Disease.

Diabetes is the most frequent cause of kidney disease that progresses to end-stage renal disease worldwide, and diabetic kidney disease is significantly related to unfavorable cardiovascular outcomes. Since the 1990s, specific therapies have emerged and been approved to slow the progression of diabetic kidney disease, namely, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers (including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), the non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (NS-MRA), finerenone, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors). Mechanistically, these different classes of agents bring different anti-inflammatory, anti-fibrotic, and complementary hemodynamic effects to patients with diabetic kidney disease such that they have additive benefits on slowing disease progression. Within the coming year, there will be data on renal outcomes using the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, semaglutide. All the aforementioned medications have also been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes. Thus, all three classes (maximally dosed ACEi or ARB, low-dose SGLT-2 inhibitors, and the NS-MRA, finerenone) form the "pillars of therapy" such that, when used together, they maximally slow diabetic kidney disease progression. Ongoing studies aim to expand these pillars with additional medications to potentially normalize the decline in kidney function and reduce associated cardiovascular mortality.

Novel antihypertensive agents for resistant hypertension: what does the future hold?

Finding complementary compelling novel therapeutic agents for better control of blood pressure in people with resistant hypertension is moving into unchartered territory. The latest therapeutic developments explore approaches in the clinical arena that were either not examined or could only be examined in animal models two decades ago. Four main mechanisms have now been explored and operationalized in drug development: (a) mineralocorticoid receptor blockade using a nonsteroidal structure with many fewer side effects, (b) an aminopeptidase A inhibitor that has central effects on vasopressin, (c) a combined endothelin A and B receptor blocker and (d) an aldosterone synthase inhibitor devoid of glucocorticoid activity. All these agents are either completing Phase II development and starting Phase III or are involved in the ongoing recruitment of Phase III trials. Additionally, novel agents use antisense inhibition to block angiotensinogen development in the liver. These agents are discussed only for completeness, as they are still in Phase II trial development. Last, another agent that was initially being developed as an antihypertensive and once the data were reviewed by the company clearly showed efficacy as a heart failure agent was sacubitril/valsartan, which was ultimately approved. However, there are some discussions about reinvigorating the quest for an indication for hypertension, although no such steps have been formally initiated.

Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the FIDELITY pooled analysis.

AIMS: The complementary studies FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) examined cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in different, overlapping stages of CKD. The purpose of the FIDELITY analysis was to perform an individual patient-level prespecified pooled efficacy and safety analysis across a broad spectrum of CKD to provide more robust estimates of safety and efficacy of finerenone compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS: For this prespecified analysis, two phase III, multicentre, double-blind trials involving patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes, randomized 1:1 to finerenone or placebo, were combined. Main time-to-event efficacy outcomes were a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure, and a composite of kidney failure, a sustained ≥57% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline over ≥4 weeks, or renal death. Among 13 026 patients with a median follow-up of 3.0 years (interquartile range 2.3-3.8 years), the composite cardiovascular outcome occurred in 825 (12.7%) patients receiving finerenone and 939 (14.4%) receiving placebo [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-0.95; P = 0.0018]. The composite kidney outcome occurred in 360 (5.5%) patients receiving finerenone and 465 (7.1%) receiving placebo (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88; P = 0.0002). Overall safety outcomes were generally similar between treatment arms. Hyperkalaemia leading to permanent treatment discontinuation occurred more frequently in patients receiving finerenone (1.7%) than placebo (0.6%). CONCLUSION: Finerenone reduced the risk of clinically important cardiovascular and kidney outcomes vs. placebo across the spectrum of CKD in patients with type 2 diabetes. KEY QUESTION: Does finerenone, a novel selective, nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, added to maximum tolerated renin-angiotensin system inhibition reduce cardiovascular disease and kidney disease progression over a broad range of chronic kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes? KEY FINDING: In a prespecified, pooled individual-level analysis from two randomized trials, we found reductions both in cardiovascular events and kidney failure outcomes with finerenone. Because 40% of the patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of >60 mL/min/1.73m2 they were identified solely on the basis of albuminuria. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Finerenone reduces the risk of clinical cardiovascular outcomes and kidney disease progression in a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes. Screening for albuminuria to identify at-risk patients among patients with type 2 diabetes facilitates reduction of both cardiovascular and kidney disease burden.

Resistant Hypertension: Detection, Evaluation, and Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Resistant hypertension (RH) is defined as above-goal elevated blood pressure (BP) in a patient despite the concurrent use of 3 antihypertensive drug classes, commonly including a long-acting calcium channel blocker, a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker), and a diuretic. The antihypertensive drugs should be administered at maximum or maximally tolerated daily doses. RH also includes patients whose BP achieves target values on ≥4 antihypertensive medications. The diagnosis of RH requires assurance of antihypertensive medication adherence and exclusion of the "white-coat effect" (office BP above goal but out-of-office BP at or below target). The importance of RH is underscored by the associated risk of adverse outcomes compared with non-RH. This article is an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on the detection, evaluation, and management of RH. Once antihypertensive medication adherence is confirmed and out-of-office BP recordings exclude a white-coat effect, evaluation includes identification of contributing lifestyle issues, detection of drugs interfering with antihypertensive medication effectiveness, screening for secondary hypertension, and assessment of target organ damage. Management of RH includes maximization of lifestyle interventions, use of long-acting thiazide-like diuretics (chlorthalidone or indapamide), addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (spironolactone or eplerenone), and, if BP remains elevated, stepwise addition of antihypertensive drugs with complementary mechanisms of action to lower BP. If BP remains uncontrolled, referral to a hypertension specialist is advised.

Novel therapies for diabetic kidney disease.

Over the past 30 years there have been many complementary therapies developed to achieve glycemic control and have an impact on cardiovascular outcomes, as well as reduce the risk of microvascular disease. The 2 most notable new entries have been the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists. Both these classes of agents have demonstrated reductions in cardiovascular event rates as well as reductions in blood pressure and weight. Moreover, while both have demonstrated a benefit in slowing nephropathy progression, the SGLT2 inhibitors appear to have a significantly greater effect compared with the GLP-1 agents. There is an ongoing trial specifically powered for renal disease progression, CREDENCE (Evaluation of the Effects of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Participants With Diabetic Nephropathy). Additionally, there are 2 other classes of agents being tested to slow nephropathy progression, a selective endothelin-1 receptor antagonist, atrasantan, in the SONAR (Study of Diabetic Nephropathy With Atrasentan) trial and a nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, finerenone, in the FIDELIO (Efficacy and Safety of Finerenone in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus) trial. These and other studies are discussed.

Severe menses-associated hypertension successfully treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist.

A case of a 32-year-old nulliparous white woman referred for a 5-year history of severe hypertension, hypokalemia, and resultant systolic dysfunction is presented. She additionally had a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% including left ventricular dilation and normal left ventricular mass index, as measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging when she initially presented to us. Her history revealed that her severe hypertension episodes were monthly and would occur around the catamenial (menses-associated) time. Two weeks following her menses, blood pressure decreased significantly but remained elevated above 140/90 mm Hg. This cycle repeated monthly and required multiple hospitalizations for hypertensive emergency in the form of acute decompensated heart failure and severe headaches. She required potassium supplementation. This prompted a complete evaluation for secondary causes of hypertension, which was negative. Female and male sex hormone levels, including testosterone, were also within normal limits. She received an injection of leuprolide acetate depot (11.25 mg every 3 months), a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist. This significantly reduced the magnitude of these episodes.

Sustained Reduction of Blood Pressure With Baroreceptor Activation Therapy: Results of the 6-Year Open Follow-Up.

Baroreflex activation therapy is a novel technique for treating patients with resistant hypertension. Although short-term studies have demonstrated that it lowers blood pressure, long-term results have not yet been reported. The aim of the present study is to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of baroreflex activation therapy. Long-term follow-up data were analyzed from all patients who had been included in 1 of the 3 trials that focused on treatment-resistant hypertensive patients. Altogether, 383 patients were available for analysis: 143 of these had completed 5 years of follow-up and 48 patients had completed 6 years of follow-up. In the entire cohort, office systolic blood pressure fell from 179±24 mm Hg to 144±28 mm Hg (P<0.0001), whereas office diastolic pressure dropped from 103±16 mm Hg to 85±18 mm Hg (P<0.0001). Heart rate fell from 74±15 beats per minute to 71±13 beats per minute (P<0.02). The effect of baroreflex activation therapy is greater than average in patients with signs of heart failure and less than average in patients with isolated systolic hypertension. In ≈25% of patients, it was possible to reduce the number of medications from a median of 6 to a median of 3. Temporary side effects, related to either the surgical procedure or the cardiovascular instability, do occur, but they do not require specific measures and resolve over time.After a follow-up of 6 years, baroreflex activation therapy maintains its efficacy for persistent reduction of office blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension without major safety issues.

An exploratory propensity score matched comparison of second-generation and first-generation baroreflex activation therapy systems.

Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) is a device-based therapy for patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. In a randomized, controlled trial, the first-generation system significantly reduced blood pressure (BP) versus sham. Although an open-label validation study of the second-generation system demonstrated similar BP reductions, controlled data are not presently available. Therefore, this investigation compares results of first- and second-generation BAT systems. Two cohorts of first-generation BAT system patients were generated with propensity matching to compare against the validation group of 30 second-generation subjects. The first cohort was drawn from the first-generation randomized trial sham group and the second cohort from the active therapy group. Safety and efficacy were compared for the second-generation group relative to the first generation. At 6 months, second-generation BAT outperformed first-generation sham systolic BP reduction by 20 ± 28 mm Hg (mean ± standard deviation, P = .008), while BP reduction in first- and second-generation active groups was similar. At 12 months, efficacy was comparable between all three groups after the sham group had received 6 months of therapy; 47% of second-generation patients achieved goal systolic BP of 140 mm Hg or less after 12 months, comparable to 50% of patients at goal in the first-generation group (P > .999). Implant procedure time, system/procedural safety, and pulse generator longevity improved with the second-generation system. Propensity-matched cohort analysis of the first- and second-generation BAT systems suggests similar therapeutic benefit and superior BP reduction of the second-generation system relative to sham control. Implantation procedure duration and perioperative safety were improved with the second-generation device. These findings should be validated in a prospective randomized trial.

Sympathetic activation in resistant hypertension: theory and therapy.

Resistant hypertension defined as requiring 3 or more complementary antihypertensive drugs at maximally tolerated doses accounts for approximately 3% to 4% of all cases of hypertension. Its increased incidence over the past decade is related to the increase in obesity in the Western world. There are a number of dietary factors that affect sympathetic tone including sodium intake apart from increased body mass. This article discusses the mechanisms of sympathetic stimulation and activation in the context of animal models and human studies. In addition, there is a review of clinical trials with and without device therapy that summarizes the clinical findings. Effective management should be based on pathophysiologic principles and a focus on blood pressure reduction to levels well below 150/90 mm Hg because outcome trial evidence and Food and Drug Administration guidance supports this construct. The key to success of device-based therapy depends on identifying the cohort with true resistant hypertension that can benefit from therapies that are adjuncts to pharmacotherapy. Physicians need to concentrate on educating the patient on lifestyle modifications and themselves on use of proper combinations of antihypertensive medications. If this approach fails to result in a safe level of blood pressure then the patient should be referred to a board-certified clinical hypertension specialist.

The OSCAR for cardiovascular disease prevention in chronic kidney disease goes to blood pressure control.

Nephropathy progression is slowed and cardiovascular events reduced in patients with stage 3 or higher chronic kidney disease when blood pressure is controlled using combinations of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers with dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers or diuretics. We discuss a trial comparing high-dose RAS blockade with lower-dose RAS blockade combined with a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker. The primary outcome was cardiovascular events. The combination group had better blood pressure control and fewer total events.

Timing and efficacy of alternative methods of sympathetic blockade.

Despite the presence of seven different antihypertensive drug classes and over 120 different antihypertensive medications, about 48 % of the 75 million people with hypertension are not reaching their target blood pressure goals. One of the reasons for this lack of control is the failure to adequately inhibit the sympathetic nervous system. Consequently, alternative therapies have been attracting interest. Recent technical advances targeting the sympathetic over-activity of the carotid sinuses (baroreflex activation therapy, BAT) and the renal sympathetic nerves (renal denervation therapy, RDT) have renewed interest in invasive therapies for the treatment of drug-resistant hypertension. Encouraging results from the recent Rheos Pivotal and Symplicity HTN-2 trials on the safety and efficacy of BAT and RDT, respectively, indicate that invasive approaches can safely reduce blood pressure in patients with resistant/refractory hypertension. These approaches, while still experimental in the US, are appropriate for those on more than three fully tolerated doses of antihypertensive medications whose blood pressure is not at goal, i.e. <140/90 mmHg. The present review is focused on the clinical implications of these two technics and when they are appropriate.

Baroreflex activation therapy provides durable benefit in patients with resistant hypertension: results of long-term follow-up in the Rheos Pivotal Trial.

The objective of this study was to assess long-term blood pressure control in resistant hypertension patients receiving baroreflex activation therapy (BAT). Following completion of the randomized Rheos Pivotal Trial, patients participated in open-label, nonrandomized follow-up to assess safety and efficacy of BAT. Blood pressure reductions were measured relative to a pre-implant baseline as well as the results achieved at the completion of 1 year of follow-up in the randomized phase. Clinically significant responder status was assessed according to FDA-mandated criteria. Of the 322 patients implanted, 76% (n = 245) qualified as clinically significant responders, an additional 10% were indeterminate. Among long-term responders receiving BAT, the mean blood pressure drop was 35/16 mm Hg. Medication use was reduced by the end of the randomized phase and remained lower through the follow-up period. Among responders, 55% achieved goal blood pressures (<140 mm Hg or <130 mm Hg in diabetes or kidney disease). Blood pressures of all active patients remained stable from completion of the randomized phase through long-term follow-up. BAT substantially reduced arterial pressure for most patients participating in the Rheos Pivotal Trial. This blood pressure reduction or goal achievement was maintained over long-term follow-up of 22 to 53 months.

Newer renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blocker combinations: is there an advantage?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The necessity for new and more effective management approaches to achieve blood pressure goals is still present in spite of the number of antihypertensive medications available. One of the cornerstones of successful therapy is implementation of drug combinations that act on complementary biological pathways. This review article focuses on the evaluation of recent data supporting newer combinations involving inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) with other drug classes such as calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and diuretics. RECENT FINDINGS: New angiotensin receptor blockers as well as renin inhibitors, with a more robust blood pressure-lowering effect than their predecessors, have emerged recently. The data presented in this text also strongly supports a combination therapy approach as initial therapy to achieve blood pressure goals in a timely fashion. Additionally, the blood pressure-lowering effect is more robust with lower-dose, single-pill combinations than with highest doses of single agents alone. Therefore, using combination agents is less prone to side effects. The challenges for such single-pill combinations remain affordability. For this reason, payers and patients have traditionally not preferred such agents in spite of better blood pressure control and adherence rates. SUMMARY: The new combinations of renin inhibitors and the new angiotensin receptor blocker combinations add to the armamentarium of agents to control blood pressure. Whereas the new angiotensin receptor blocker offers greater efficacy on blood pressure control over other agents in the class and the availability of the only chlorthalidone combination, no outcome data exist yet with any of the new agents.

Predictors of hyperkalemia risk following hypertension control with aldosterone blockade.

BACKGROUND: Aldosterone antagonists have proven efficacy for management of resistant hypertension and proteinuria reduction; however, they are not widely used due to risk of hyperkalemia. This study assesses the risk factors for hyperkalemia in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and resistant hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) is reduced to a guideline goal. METHODS: This is a two-center study conducted in university-based hypertension clinics directed by clinical hypertension specialists. Forty-six patients with resistant hypertension and stages 2 or 3 CKD (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 56.5 + or - 16.2 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) were evaluated for safety and efficacy of aldosterone blockade added to preexisting BP-lowering regimens. All patients were on three mechanistically complementary antihypertensive agents including a diuretic and a renin-angiotensin system blocker. Patients were evaluated after a median of 45 treatment days. The primary endpoint was change in systolic BP. Secondary endpoints included change in serum potassium, creatinine, eGFR, diastolic BP and tolerability. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients studied was 64.9 + or - 10.7 years, all were obese and 86% had type 2 diabetes, with 82% being African-American. Addition of aldosterone antagonism yielded a further mean reduction in systolic BP of 14.7 + or - 5.1 mm Hg (p = 0.001). Females with BMI >30 and those with a baseline systolic BP >160 mm Hg were more likely to have a greater BP reduction to aldosterone antagonism. In total, 39% of the patients had a >30% decrease in eGFR when the BP goal was achieved. The mean increase in serum potassium was 0.4 mEq/l above baseline (p = 0.001), with 17.3% manifesting hyperkalemia, i.e. serum potassium >5.5 mEq/l. Predictors of hyperkalemia included a baseline eGFR of < or = 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2) in whom serum potassium was >4.5 mEq/l on appropriately dosed diuretics. Contributing risks in this subgroup included a systolic BP reduction of >15 mm Hg associated with an eGFR fall of >30%. CONCLUSION: Aldosterone antagonism is effective and safe for achieving a BP goal among people with diabetic nephropathy when added to a triple antihypertensive regimen that includes a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system and an appropriately selected and dosed diuretic. Caution is advised when using aldosterone blockade for BP control in people with advanced stage 3 nephropathy with a serum potassium of >4.5 mEq/l for safety reasons.

Plasma parathyroid hormone level and prevalent cardiovascular disease in CKD stages 3 and 4: an analysis from the Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP).

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Secondary hyperparathyroidism is common in patients with CKD, and its relationship to CVD is not well defined. This analysis aims to assess whether serum intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) level is an independent risk factor for CVD in patients with CKD stages 3 and 4. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, medical history surveys, including CVD events, were collected from 4,472 patients with stages 3 and 4 CKD identified by the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP), which included blood pressure measurement and laboratory testing. Age, hemoglobin level, estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum phosphorus level, and serum calcium level were evaluated as continuous variables, and plasma PTH levels, by tertile: less than 35, 35 to 70, and greater than 70 pg/mL. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of CVD predictor variables. RESULTS: Mean age was 68.3 +/- 11.8 years. Of the study population, 68% were women, 69% were white, 6% were current smokers, 45% were obese, 46% had diabetes, and 83% had hypertension. A history of CVD was present for 1,972 (44.1%), and plasma PTH level greater than 70 pg/mL, for 2,239 (50.1%). Multivariate logistic regression showed ORs for CVD events increasing with age (OR, 1.03; P < 0.001), male sex (OR, 1.51; P < 0.001), diabetes (OR, 1.73; P < 0.001), hypertension (OR, 1.43; P < 0.001), and intact PTH level greater than 70 pg/mL (OR, 1.51; P < 0.001; reference, <35 pg/mL). CONCLUSIONS: PTH level greater than 70 pg/mL is independently associated with CVD events in patients with CKD stages 3 and 4. No association was observed between serum phosphorus or calcium level and CVD events. These findings provide support for intact PTH testing, along with testing for other indicators of CKD mineral and bone disorders, at earlier CKD stages.

Combined therapy with a calcium channel blocker and an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker.

Fixed-dosed combination regimens consisting of a calcium channel blocker and an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker represent a new addition to the available antihypertensive treatment options. Clinical trials demonstrate that both the dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker amlodipine and angiotensin II receptor blockers are effective agents for the management of hypertension in individuals with or without cardiovascular disease. When combined, these 2 classes of agents have complementary effects on blood pressure, as each targets separate signaling pathways in the vasculature pivotal to the regulation of vascular function. In clinical trials this combination has demonstrated better efficacy, defined by time to reach blood pressure targets as well as levels of blood pressure achieved, compared with the individual agents. In a comparative trial, a combination of amlodipine plus valsartan (an angiotensin II receptor blocker) also produced greater reductions in blood pressure compared with a combination of lisinopril (an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and hydrochlorothiazide. The combination of amlodipine and an angiotensin II receptor blocker is well tolerated, including in patients with stage 2 hypertension and the elderly.

Comparative efficacy of two different beta-blockers on 24-hour blood pressure control.

Atenolol and metoprolol succinate, dosed once daily, have different pharmacokinetic profiles. This study tests the hypothesis that differences that are especially noted in the early morning period, when cardiovascular risk is highest, in 24-hour blood pressure (BP) control exist between these 2 beta-blockers. This was a small, randomized open-label study with blinded end point evaluation in 36 hypertensive patients. All participants received hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg for 2 weeks before randomization to either 50 mg atenolol or metoprolol succinate given every morning; both treatments were force-titrated to 100 mg/d at 4 weeks. The primary end point was the change in early morning ambulatory systolic BP. Early morning (12 AM-6 AM) systolic BP differences were 3+/-14 mm Hg with atenolol vs -7+/-8 mm Hg with metoprolol succinate (P=.03). The overall 24-hour changes in systolic BP were 1+/-15 mm Hg with atenolol vs -9+/-11 mm Hg with metoprolol (P=.03). In conclusion, metoprolol succinate was more effective in sustaining 24-hour and early morning BP reductions compared with atenolol in a small group of hypertensive patients also treated with once-daily low-dose hydrochlorothiazide. It is possible that differences in outcome between atenolol-based and other therapies may be the result of inadequate dosing of atenolol, a medication that may not be effective for the entire 24-hour period.

Amlodipine/benazepril combination therapy for hypertensive patients nonresponsive to benazepril monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with hypertension require two or more antihypertensive medications to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals. This double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of high-dose combinations of amlodipine besylate (5 mg and 10 mg) and benazepril hydrochloride (40 mg) to benazepril hydrochloride (40 mg) alone in hypertensive patients not adequately controlled with benazepril hydrochloride (40 mg) monotherapy. METHODS: After a 2-week washout period and a 4-week lead-in period with benazepril 40 mg daily, patients with a mean sitting diastolic BP > or =95 mm Hg (i.e., nonresponders to benazepril 40 mg) were randomly assigned to active treatment with either a combination of amlodipine 5 mg and benazepril 40 mg for 4 weeks followed by a forced titration to amlodipine 10 mg and benazepril 40 mg for an additional 4 weeks, or to benazepril 40 mg alone for 8 weeks. RESULTS: The mean reduction in sitting BP from baseline (on benazepril) to endpoint (after 8 weeks of treatment) was 17/14 mm Hg with amlodipine/benazepril and 5/7 mm Hg with benazepril (P <.0001). The percentage of patients who met the diastolic BP response criteria (<90 mm Hg at endpoint or > or =10 mm Hg decrease from baseline) was 80% in the amlodipine/benazepril group and 45% in the benazepril group (P <.0001). The incidence of adverse events was infrequent and comparable for both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: High-dose amlodipine/benazepril combination therapy (5 mg/40 mg and 10 mg/40 mg) is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment option for hypertensive patients who do not respond adequately to benazepril alone.