Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Bone Miner Metab ; 38(1): 86-98, 2020 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31420748

ABSTRACT

Absorption of oral immediate-release (IR) risedronate tablets is reduced by food intake, thus a delayed-release (DR) tablet has been developed to overcome the necessity of taking IR tablets under fasting conditions. This randomized, double-blind, phase II/III study compared efficacy and safety of risedronate IR once-daily (QD) and DR once-monthly (QM) tablets in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis. Patients received 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD, or 25 or 37.5 mg DR on awakening, following breakfast, or 30 min after breakfast, QM for 12 months. Primary endpoint was non-inferiority in mean percent change from baseline to end of study (month 12, last observation carried forward [M12, LOCF]) in mean lumbar spine (L2-L4) bone mineral density (BMD) between risedronate IR on awakening and DR following breakfast. Mean percent changes in (L2-L4) BMD at M12, LOCF were 5.07% (IR at awakening, n = 190), 3.36% (25 mg DR following breakfast, n = 194), and 4.11% (37.5 mg DR following breakfast, n = 181). Mean percent change in (L2-L4) BMD was numerically lower in the DR following breakfast groups versus the respective on awakening and 30 min after breakfast DR groups. Overall incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were comparable between groups. In the DR groups, 1.5-4.0% of patients reported TEAEs potentially associated with acute-phase reactions versus 0% in the IR group. In this study, non-inferiority could not be declared for 37.5 or 25 mg DR following breakfast QM (p = 0.1346 or p = 0.6711, respectively) versus 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD.


Subject(s)
Asian People , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Risedronic Acid/therapeutic use , Aged , Biomarkers/metabolism , Bone Density/drug effects , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Bone Remodeling/drug effects , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Male , Osteoporosis/complications , Patient Compliance , Risedronic Acid/adverse effects , Risedronic Acid/pharmacology , Spinal Fractures/complications , Treatment Outcome
2.
Clin Ther ; 36(5): 711-21, 2014 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24742498

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the management of hypertension recommend using drugs with different mechanisms of action in antihypertensive regimens that include simple single-pill fixed-dose combination (FDC) products. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of the FDC of azilsartan (AZI) and amlodipine besylate (AML) with those of AZI monotherapy and AML monotherapy in Japanese patients with grade 1 to 2 essential hypertension. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. After receiving placebo during a 4-week run-in period in a single-blind manner, patients were randomized to receive 1 of the following 5 treatments for 8 weeks: FDC containing AZI 20 mg and AML 5 mg (AZI/AML 20/5 mg), FDC containing AZI 20 mg and AML 2.5 mg (AZI/AML 20/2.5 mg), AZI 20 mg, AML 5 mg, or AML 2.5 mg once daily in a fasting or fed state. The primary end point was the change from baseline (week 0) in the seated trough diastolic blood pressure at week 8 (last observation carried forward [LOCF]), and the secondary end point was the change from baseline in the seated trough systolic blood pressure at week 8 (LOCF). Tolerability was assessed based on adverse events, vital signs, and physical examination findings. RESULTS: Of the 800 patients who provided informed consent, 603 were randomized to receive AZI/AML 20/5 mg (150 patients), AZI/AML 20/2.5 mg (151 patients), AZI 20 mg (151 patients), AML 5 mg (75 patients), or AML 2.5 mg (76 patients). The mean baseline systolic/diastolic blood pressure was 160.7/100.3 mm Hg. The mean change from baseline in seated blood pressure at week 8 (LOCF) was -35.3/-22.3 mm Hg in the AZI/AML 20/5 mg group and -31.4/-19.2 mm Hg in the AZI/AML 20/2.5 mg group, indicating a reduction significantly greater than that in corresponding monotherapy groups (-21.5/-13.9 mm Hg in the AZI 20 mg group, -26.4/-15.5 mm Hg in the AML 5 mg group, and -19.3/-11.6 mm Hg in the AML 2.5 mg group; p < 0.0001 for all contrast tests). No remarkable difference was found in the incidences of adverse events, vital signs, and physical examination findings among the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that the FDC of AZI/AML 20/5 mg and 20/2.5 mg exhibited greater antihypertensive effects compared with each monotherapy. The FDC of AZI/AML had a similar safety profile to that of each monotherapy and was tolerable to Japanese patients with grade 1 to 2 essential hypertension. JAPAN PHARMACEUTICAL INFORMATION CENTER REGISTRATION: Japic CTI-111606.


Subject(s)
Amlodipine/administration & dosage , Antihypertensive Agents/administration & dosage , Benzimidazoles/administration & dosage , Hypertension/drug therapy , Oxadiazoles/administration & dosage , Aged , Amlodipine/therapeutic use , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Asian People , Benzimidazoles/therapeutic use , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination/adverse effects , Essential Hypertension , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oxadiazoles/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...