Effect of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring on Adherence and Blood Pressure: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug concentration in blood or urine is an acknowledged method to detect nonadherence. Observational studies suggest that informing patients about low or absent serum drug levels improves blood pressure (BP). We performed a multicenter randomized clinical trial to test the hypothesis that therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could improve drug adherence and BP in patients with uncontrolled hypertension (HT). METHODS: Patients were ≥18 years on stable treatment with at least 2 antihypertensive agents. We planned to randomize 80 nonadherent patients with a systolic daytime ambulatory BP ≥135 mm Hg to TDM intervention or not. The control group and the study personnel who measured BP remained uninformed about serum drug measurements throughout. All patients and physicians were blinded for BPs. Lifestyle advice and detailed information on the disease process and the importance of BP treatment were given to both groups. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2022, we randomized 46 diagnosed nonadherent from a total of 606 patients with uncontrolled HT. The TDM group had a 6.7 (±14.5) mm Hg reduction from 147.9 (±10.3) to 141.1 (±14.1) mm Hg, and the control group experienced a 7.3 (±13.2) mm Hg reduction from 147.1 (±9.2) to 139.1 (±17.4) mm Hg, P = 0.9 between groups. Adherence improved in both groups, 73% in the TDM group and 59% in the control group became adherent at 3 months, P = 0.51. CONCLUSIONS: In our prospective multicenter clinical trial of uncontrolled and nonadherent hypertensive patients, we found no additional effect of TDM on BP and drug adherence compared with standard care. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Trial Number NCT03209154, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Nonadherence by Serum Drug Analyses in Resistant Hypertension: 7-Year Follow-Up of Patients Considered Adherent by Directly Observed Therapy.

Background Measurement of serum concentrations of drugs is a novelty found useful in detecting poor drug adherence in patients taking ≥2 antihypertensive agents. Regarding patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, we previously based our assessment on directly observed therapy. The present study aimed to investigate whether serum drug measurements in patients with resistant hypertension offer additional information regarding drug adherence, beyond that of initial assessment with directly observed therapy. Methods and Results Nineteen patients assumed to have true treatment-resistant hypertension and adherence to antihypertensive drugs based on directly observed therapy were investigated repeatedly through 7 years. Serum concentrations of antihypertensive drugs were measured by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry from blood samples taken at baseline, 6-month, 3-year, and 7-year visits. Cytochrome P450 polymorphisms, self-reported adherence and beliefs about medicine were performed as supplement investigations. Seven patients (37%) were redefined as nonadherent based on their serum concentrations during follow-up. All patients reported high adherence to medications. Nonadherent patients expressed lower necessity and higher concerns regarding intake of antihypertensive medication (P=0.003). Cytochrome P450 polymorphisms affecting metabolism of antihypertensive drugs were found in 16 patients (84%), 21% were poor metabolizers, and none were ultra-rapid metabolizers. Six of 7 patients redefined as nonadherent had cytochrome P450 polymorphisms, however, not explaining the low serum drug concentrations measured in these patients. Conclusions Our data suggest that repeated measurements of serum concentrations of antihypertensive drugs revealed nonadherence in one-third of patients previously evaluated as adherent and treatment resistant by directly observed therapy, thereby improving the accuracy of adherence evaluation. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; unique identifier: NCT01673516.

Extreme altitude induces divergent mass reduction of right and left ventricle in mountain climbers.

Mountain climbing at high altitude implies exposure to low levels of oxygen, low temperature, wind, physical and psychological stress, and nutritional insufficiencies. We examined whether right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) myocardial masses were reversibly altered by exposure to extreme altitude. Magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography of the heart, dual x-ray absorptiometry scan of body composition, and blood samples were obtained from ten mountain climbers before departure to Mount Everest or Dhaulagiri (baseline), 13.5 ± 1.5 days after peaking the mountain (post-hypoxia), and six weeks and six months after expeditions exceeding 8000 meters above sea level. RV mass was unaltered after extreme altitude, in contrast to a reduction in LV mass by 11.8 ± 3.4 g post-hypoxia (p = 0.001). The reduction in LV mass correlated with a reduction in skeletal muscle mass. After six weeks, LV myocardial mass was restored to baseline values. Extreme altitude induced a reduction in LV end-diastolic volume (20.8 ± 7.7 ml, p = 0.011) and reduced E', indicating diastolic dysfunction, which were restored after six weeks follow-up. Elevated circulating interleukin-18 after extreme altitude compared to follow-up levels, might have contributed to reduced muscle mass and diastolic dysfunction. In conclusion, the mass of the RV, possibly exposed to elevated afterload, was not changed after extreme altitude, whereas LV mass was reduced. The reduction in LV mass correlated with reduced skeletal muscle mass, indicating a common denominator, and elevated circulating interleukin-18 might be a mechanism for reduced muscle mass after extreme altitude.

Detection of Nonadherence to Antihypertensive Treatment by Measurements of Serum Drug Concentrations.

[Figure: see text].

Renal sympathetic denervation lowers systemic vascular resistance in true treatment-resistant hypertension.

PURPOSE: Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) is again gaining interest as recent well-designed trials have demonstrated reduced ambulatory blood pressure (BP) after RDN. However, the hemodynamic mechanisms have not been elucidated. We aimed for the first time to investigate the effect of RDN on the "Hallmark of Hypertension" namely increased systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated SVRI change in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension randomised to RDN (n = 9) or drug adjusted control (n = 9). Treatment-resistant hypertension was defined as office systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg despite ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. True treatment-resistant hypertension was confirmed prior to inclusion with ambulatory daytime systolic BP ≥ 135 mmHg immediately after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs. Hemodynamic variables were recorded with thoracic impedance cardiography at baseline and at three and six months follow-up after RDN. This non-invasive method also guided further tailoring of drug treatment in the control group aiming to normalise hemodynamic variables and BP. RESULTS: From three to six months follow-up after RDN, SVRI decreased with a median of -611 dyn*s*m2/cm5 [IQR -949 to -267] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with a median of -11 mmHg [IQR -21 to -3] (p = 0.02). In the same period, SVRI in the control group was reduced with -674 dyn*s*m2/cm5 [IQR -1,309 to -340] (p < 0.01), while supine mean BP decreased with -15 mmHg [IQR -29 to -6] (p = 0.01). Thus, hemodynamic variables and BP in the two groups normalised in parallel. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic denervation lowers BP by reducing systemic vascular resistance of similar size as in the control group with careful individual selection of antihypertensive drugs and dose titration.

The randomised Oslo study of renal denervation vs. Antihypertensive drug adjustments: efficacy and safety through 7 years of follow-up.

PURPOSE: The blood pressure (BP) lowering effect of renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) in treatment-resistant hypertension shows variation amongst the existing randomised studies. The long-term efficacy and safety of RDN require further investigation. For the first time, we report BP changes and safety up to 7 years after RDN, compared to drug adjustment in the randomised Oslo RDN study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, defined as daytime systolic ambulatory BP ≥135 mmHg after witnessed intake of ≥3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic, were randomised to either RDN (n = 9) or drug adjustment (n = 10). The initial primary endpoint was the change in office BP after 6 months. The RDN group had their drugs adjusted after 1 year using the same principles as the Drug Adjustment group. Both groups returned for long-term follow-up after 3 and 7 years. RESULTS: The decrease in office BP and ambulatory BP (ABPM) after 6 months did not persist, but gradually increased in both groups. From 6 months to 7 years follow-up, mean daytime systolic ABPM increased from 142 ± 10 to 145 ± 15 mmHg in the RDN group, and from 133 ± 11 to 137 ± 13 mmHg in the Drug Adjustment group, with the difference between them decreasing. In a mixed factor model, a significantly different variance was found between the groups in daytime systolic ABPM (p = .04) and diastolic ABPM (p = .01) as well as office diastolic BP (p<.01), but not in office systolic BP (p = .18). At long-term follow-up we unveiled no anatomical- or functional renal impairment in either group. CONCLUSIONS: BP changes up to 7 years show a tendency towards a smaller difference in BPs between the RDN and drug adjustment patients. Our data support RDN as a safe procedure, but it remains non-superior to intensive drug adjustment 7 years after the intervention.

Directly observed therapy prior to ambulatory blood pressure measurement (DOT-HTN) in uncontrolled hypertensive patients - Effect on blood pressure, safety and patient perception.

Aims: Non-adherence to medication is a key challenge in treatment of hypertensive patients. Directly Observed Therapy prior to ambulatory blood pressure measurement (DOT-HTN) is relatively new in hypertension research and knowledge about its use and patients' perception of such control is warranted. We aimed to investigate DOT-HTN in relation to blood pressure control, procedural safety and patients' perception. Methods and results: Twenty patients with uncontrolled hypertension (daytime systolic ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) ≥135 mm Hg) were randomized to intervention with DOT-HTN and a visual analogue scale (VAS) assessment if they found DOT-HTN problematic (10 cm = very problematic), or to standard ABPM. They were followed for 2-4 weeks. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Despite no difference in daytime systolic ABPM (p = 0.67) two patients were suggested to be non-adherent after DOT-HTN with reductions in daytime systolic ABPM of 18 and 22 mm Hg, respectively. No post DOT-HTN adverse reactions were reported. VAS assessment indicated that the patients had no problem being controlled (VAS median 0.30 cm (0.0-2.6)), however interesting comments and observed behaviour questioned the reliability of the patient-reported VAS in 38% of patients. Conclusions: Two of eight patients seemed to be non-adherent after DOT-HTN. Descriptive findings suggested reluctance towards control with DOT-HTN not captured by the VAS assessment. No DOT-related medical adverse-effects were reported.

Adjusted drug treatment is superior to renal sympathetic denervation in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension.

We aimed to investigate for the first time the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) versus clinically adjusted drug treatment in true treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) after excluding patients with confounding poor drug adherence. Patients with apparent TRH (n=65) were referred for RDN, and those with secondary and spurious hypertension (n=26) were excluded. TRH was defined as office systolic BP (SBP) >140 mm Hg, despite maximally tolerated doses of ≥3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. In addition, ambulatory daytime SBP >135 mm Hg after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs was required, after which 20 patients had normalized BP and were excluded. Patients with true TRH were randomized and underwent RDN (n=9) performed with Symplicity Catheter System versus clinically adjusted drug treatment (n=10). The study was stopped early for ethical reasons because RDN had uncertain BP-lowering effect. Office SBP and diastolic BP in the drug-adjusted group changed from 160±14/88±13 mm Hg (±SD) at baseline to 132±10/77±8 mm Hg at 6 months (P<0.0005 and P=0.02, SBP and diastolic BP, respectively) and in the RDN group from 156±13/91±15 to 148±7/89±8 mm Hg (P=0.42 and P=0.48, SBP and diastolic BP, respectively). SBP and diastolic BP were significantly lower in the drug-adjusted group at 6 months (P=0.002 and P=0.004, respectively), and absolute changes in SBP were larger in the drug-adjusted group (P=0.008). Ambulatory BPs changed in parallel to office BPs. Our data suggest that adjusted drug treatment has superior BP lowering effects compared with RDN in patients with true TRH. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01673516.

[Renal sympathetic denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension]. / Renal sympatisk denervering ved terapiresistent hypertensjon.

BACKGROUND: Renal denervation (RDN) has been introduced as a potential new treatment for patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, defined as a blood pressure above 140/90 mm Hg despite treatment with at least three antihypertensive drugs. We present an overview of this type of treatment, describe the method and discuss its possible future uses. METHOD: The review is based on a discretionary selection of relevant articles from our archive, our own experience and a literature search in PubMed. RESULTS: The use of RDN for treatment-resistant hypertension is based on a single randomised study with a total of 104 patients, in which the intervention group experienced a fall in blood pressure of 32/12 mm Hg, while blood pressure in the control group remained unchanged. More than 16,000 patients, particularly in Germany, have been treated on this basis. In the USA, data from a larger randomised study (n = 530) that includes sham surgery are awaited before any decision is made on whether to approve the method for use. INTERPRETATION: Before RDN can become recommended treatment in Norway, more evidence is required that the method lowers blood pressure, and that this reduces morbidity and mortality.

Renal sympathetic denervation in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension after witnessed intake of medication before qualifying ambulatory blood pressure.

It is unknown whether the decline in blood pressure (BP) after renal denervation (RDN) is caused by denervation itself or concomitantly improved drug adherence. We aimed to investigate the BP lowering effect of RDN in true treatment-resistant hypertension by excluding patients with poor drug adherence. Patients with resistant hypertension (n=18) were referred for a thorough clinical and laboratory work-up. Treatment-resistant hypertension was defined as office systolic BP>140 mm Hg, despite maximally tolerated doses of ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic. In addition, ambulatory daytime systolic BP>135 mm Hg was required after witnessed intake of antihypertensive drugs to qualify. RDN (n=6) was performed with Symplicity Catheter System. The mean office and ambulatory BPs remained unchanged at 1, 3, and 6 months in the 6 patients, whereas there was no known change in antihypertensive medication. Two patients, however, had a fall in both office and ambulatory BPs. Our findings question whether BP falls in response to RDN in patients with true treatment-resistant hypertension. Additional research must aim to verify potential BP lowering effect and identify a priori responders to RDN before this invasive method can routinely be applied to patients with drug-resistant hypertension. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01673516.