Uric acid and other renal function parameters in patients with stable angina pectoris participating in the ACTION trial: impact of nifedipine GITS (gastro-intestinal therapeutic system) and relation to outcome.

BACKGROUND: Little data is available concerning the prognostic implications of renal function abnormalities, their evolution over time and the effects of nifedipine on such abnormalities in patients with stable angina pectoris. METHODS: The previously published ACTION trial compared long-acting nifedipine GITS 60 mg once daily to placebo among 7,665 patients. Standard laboratory tests including creatinine and uric acid were assessed at baseline, after 6 months, 2 and 4 years, and at the end of follow-up. We assessed the impact of nifedipine on markers of renal dysfunction and determined whether evidence of renal failure alters the impact of nifedipine on the clinical outcome of patients with stable angina. RESULTS: Uric acid was not while creatinine level and estimated creatinine clearance were potent conditionally independent predictors of total mortality and of cardiovascular clinical events. Relative to placebo, nifedipine reduced 6-month uric acid levels by 3% (P < 0.001) of the baseline value. This difference was maintained during long-term follow-up, was present both in normotensives and in hypertensives, and was not explained by differences in diuretic therapy or allopurinol use. Nifedipine had no effect on the occurrence of clinical renal failure. Relative to placebo, the effects of nifedipine on cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-1.17], any stroke or transient ischaemic attack (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.88), new overt heart failure (HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.95), and the need for any coronary procedure (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.88) were consistent across strata of markers of renal dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, in patients with stable angina, nifedipine reduces uric acid levels and does not affect other markers of renal dysfunction. Renal dysfunction does not alter the effects of nifedipine on clinical outcome.

Effect of long-acting nifedipine on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with stable angina requiring treatment (ACTION trial): randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Calcium antagonists are widely prescribed for angina pectoris but their effect on clinical outcome is controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect of the calcium antagonist nifedipine on long-term outcome in patients with stable angina pectoris. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3825 patients with treated stable symptomatic coronary disease to double-blind addition of nifedipine GITS (gastrointestinal therapeutic system) 60 mg once daily and 3840 to placebo. The primary endpoint was the combination of death, acute myocardial infarction, refractory angina, new overt heart failure, debilitating stroke, and peripheral revascularisation. Mean follow-up was 4.9 years (SD 1.1). Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: 310 patients allocated nifedipine died (1.64 per 100 patient-years) compared with 291 people allocated placebo (1.53 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio 1.07 [95% CI 0.91-1.25], p=0.41). Primary endpoint rates were 4.60 per 100 patient-years for nifedipine and 4.75 per 100 patient-years for placebo (0.97 [0.88-1.07], p=0.54). With nifedipine, rate of death and any cardiovascular event or procedure was 9.32 per 100 patient-years versus 10.50 per 100 patient-years for placebo (0.89 [0.83-0.95], p=0.0012). The difference was mainly attributable to a reduction in the need for coronary angiography and interventions in patients assigned nifedipine, despite an increase in peripheral revascularisation. Nifedipine had no effect on the rate of myocardial infarction. INTERPRETATION: Addition of nifedipine GITS to conventional treatment of angina pectoris has no effect on major cardiovascular event-free survival. Nifedipine GITS is safe and reduces the need for coronary angiography and interventions.

Effects of the combination of low-dose nifedipine GITS 20 mg and losartan 50 mg in patients with mild to moderate hypertension.

Most hypertensive patients require more than one medication to effectively control elevated blood pressure (BP) values. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study was aimed at testing the efficacy and safety of the combination of low-dose nifedipine GITS 20 mg/ losartan 50 mg compared with either monotherapy in patients with grade 1 to 3 hypertension over an eight-week period. Of 352 patients enrolled in the study, 300 were randomized. All the three treatments lowered elevated BP without clinically relevant changes in heart rate. All the three treatments lowered mean 24-hour diastolic BP: nifedipine GITS/losartan -10.6 mm Hg, losartan -5.4 mm Hg, nifedipine GITS 20 mg -8.0 mm Hg. There was a statistically significant difference of diastolic BP change between patients receiving losartan compared with those receiving combination treatment (P < 0.05). Diastolic BP trough-to-peak ratio and smoothness index were highest in the patient group receiving combination therapy (70%). Nifedipine GITS monotherapy had the highest systolic BP trough-to-peak ratio of all treatment arms (78%) and higher diastolic BP trough-to-peak ratio and smoothness index than losartan monotherapy. All treatments were safe. These data provide evidence that in hypertensive patients combination of nifedipine GITS 20 mg and losartan 50 mg improves control of systolic and diastolic BP compared with either monotherapy.

Outcomes with nifedipine GITS or Co-amilozide in hypertensive diabetics and nondiabetics in Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension (INSIGHT).

To investigate the impact of treatment on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, we assessed outcomes in patients with hypertension and diabetes who received co-amilozide or nifedipine in the International Nifedipine GITS Study: Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension. Participants had to be 55 to 80 years of age, with hypertension (> or =150/95 or > or =160 mm Hg) and at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. Patients received 30 mg nifedipine once daily or co-amilozide (25 mg hydrochlorothiazide and 2.5 mg amiloride) daily. Doses were doubled if target blood pressures (<140/90 mm Hg) were not achieved. Primary (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and stroke) and secondary outcomes (composite of primary outcomes, including all-cause mortality and death from vascular and nonvascular causes) were assessed by means of intent-to-treat analyses. There was no significant difference in the incidence of primary outcomes between nifedipine-treated and co-amilozide-treated patients with diabetes at baseline (n=1302) (8.3% versus 8.4%; relative risk, 0.99, 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.42; P=1.00). A significant benefit for nifedipine-treated patients was seen for the composite secondary outcome (14.2% versus 18.7%; relative risk, 0.76, 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.97; P=0.03). Among patients without diabetes at baseline (n=5019), there was a significant difference in the incidence of new diabetes (nifedipine 4.3% versus co-amilozide 5.6%, P=0.023). Nifedipine GITS once daily is as effective as diuretic therapy in reducing cardiovascular complications in hypertensive diabetics. Nifedipine-treated patients were also less likely to have diabetes or have secondary events (a composite of all-cause mortality, death from a vascular cause, and death from a nonvascular cause) than co-amilozide recipients. Our results suggest that nifedipine could be considered as first-line therapy for hypertensive diabetics.