[Three-component tear substitute as preoperative support in glaucoma surgery]. / Primenenie trekhkomponentnogo slezozamenitelya v meditsinskom soprovozhdenii khirurgii glaukomy.

PURPOSE: This study investigates the effect of preoperative preparation with the three-component tear substitute Stillavit on the outcomes of glaucoma surgery in patients on long-term topical glaucoma therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 63 patients (63 eyes) with glaucoma, among them 30 (30 eyes) were women and 33 (33 eyes) were men. Group 1 consisted of 33 patients (33 eyes) receiving long-term topical antihypertensive therapy with preservatives and tear substitute Stillavit 3 times a day for 1 month as preoperative preparation. Group 2 included 30 patients (30 eyes) receiving similar antihypertensive therapy who were not prescribed preoperative medications. All patients underwent a comprehensive ophthalmological examination and computer tomography of the filtering blebs (FB) on Visante system (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany) before surgery, as well as 1 week, 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: Mean intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation at 6 months postoperatively was significantly higher in the group that did not undergo preoperative preparation with a tear substitute, compared to the group of patients who received the tear substitute Stillavit preoperatively. According to anterior segment optical coherence tomography, a greater number of favorable diffuse FB were noted in the group that received the tear substitute Stillavit in preparation for surgery - 87.9%, while in group 2 (without preparation) - 66.7%. Odds ratio calculation between the two groups revealed that preoperative preparation with the tear substitute Stillavit reduced the odds of IOP elevation to 20 mm Hg or higher at 3 months postoperatively by more than 10 times. CONCLUSION: The use of tear substitute Stillavit in preparation for anti-glaucoma surgery reduces the chances of IOP elevation in the early postoperative period by more than 10 times, which may indicate a reduction in the rate of FB scarring due to the beneficial effect of the drug's components on the precorneal tear film.

Pregnancy Outcomes of Nifedipine Compared With Labetalol for Oral Treatment of Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by type of antihypertensive used in participants of the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of CHAP, an open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment compared with standard care (no treatment unless severe hypertension developed) in pregnant patients with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure 140-159/90-104 mm Hg before 20 weeks of gestation) and singleton pregnancies. We performed three comparisons based on medications prescribed at enrollment: labetalol compared with standard care, nifedipine compared with standard care, and labetalol compared with nifedipine. Although active compared with standard care groups were randomized, medication assignment within the active treatment group was not random but based on clinician or patient preference. The primary outcome was the occurrence of superimposed preeclampsia with severe features, preterm birth before 35 weeks of gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. The key secondary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) neonates. We also compared medication adverse effects between groups. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated with log binomial regression to adjust for confounding. RESULTS: Of 2,292 participants analyzed, 720 (31.4%) received labetalol, 417 (18.2%) received nifedipine, and 1,155 (50.4%) received no treatment. The mean gestational age at enrollment was 10.5±3.7 weeks; nearly half of participants (47.5%) identified as non-Hispanic Black; and 44.5% used aspirin. The primary outcome occurred in 217 (30.1%), 130 (31.2%), and 427 (37.0%) in the labetalol, nifedipine, and standard care groups, respectively. Risk of the primary outcome was lower among those receiving treatment (labetalol use vs standard adjusted RR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; nifedipine use vs standard adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI, 0.71-0.99), but there was no significant difference in risk when labetalol was compared with nifedipine (adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.82-1.18). There were no significant differences in SGA or serious adverse events between participants receiving labetalol and those receiving nifedipine. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in predetermined maternal or neonatal outcomes were detected on the basis of the use of labetalol or nifedipine for treatment of chronic hypertension in pregnancy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02299414.

A Survey of Availability and Affordability of Polypills for Cardiovascular Disease in Selected Countries.

Background: The recent inclusion of polypills-fixed-dose combinations of antihypertensive medicines and a statin with or without aspirin-in the World Health Organization's Essential Medicines List (EML) reiterates the potential of this approach to improve global treatment coverage for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Although there exists extensive evidence on the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of polypills, there has been no research to date assessing the real-world availability and affordability of polypills globally. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey, based on the WHO/Health Action International methodology, in 13 countries around the world. In the surveyed countries, we first ascertained whether any polypill was authorised for marketing and/or included in EMLs and clinical guidelines. In each country, we collected retail and price data for polypills from at least one public-sector facility and three private pharmacies using convenience sampling. Polypills were considered unaffordable if the lowest-paid worker spent more than a day's wage to purchase a monthly supply. Results: Polypills were approved for marketing in four of the 13 surveyed countries: Spain, India, Mauritius and Argentina. None of these countries included polypills in national guidelines, formularies, or EMLs. In the four countries, no surveyed public pharmacies stocked polypills. In the private sector, we identified seven unique polypill combinations, marketed by eight different companies. Private sector availability was 100% in Argentina and Spain. Most combinations (n = 5) identified were in India. Combinations found in India and Spain were affordable in the local context. A lowest-paid government worker would spend between 0.2 (India) and 2.8 (Mauritius) days' wages to pay the price for one month's supply of the polypills. Polypills were likely to be affordable if they were manufactured in the same country. Conclusion: Low availability and affordability of polypills in the public sector suggest that implementation remains poor globally. Context-specific multi-disciplinary health system research is required to understand factors affecting polypill implementation and to design and evaluate appropriate implementation strategies.

Cost-effectiveness of single-pill and separate-pill administration of antihypertensive triple combination therapy: a population-based microsimulation study.

BACKGROUND: Single-pill combination (SPC) of three antihypertensive drugs has been shown to improve adherence to therapy compared with free combinations, but little is known about its long-term costs and health consequences. This study aimed to evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness profile of a three-drug SPC of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, a calcium-channel blocker, and a diuretic vs the corresponding two-pill administration (a two-drug SPC plus a third drug separately) from the Italian payer perspective. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using multi-state semi-Markov modeling and microsimulation. Using the healthcare utilization database of the Lombardy Region (Italy), 30,172 and 65,817 patients aged ≥ 40 years who initiated SPC and two-pill combination, respectively, between 2015 and 2018 were identified. The observation period extended from the date of the first drug dispensation until death, emigration, or December 31, 2019. Disease and cost models were parametrized using the study cohort, and a lifetime microsimulation was applied to project costs and life expectancy for the compared strategies, assigning each of them to each cohort member. Costs and life-years gained were discounted by 3%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 1,000 samples was performed to address parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: Compared with the two-pill combination, the SPC increased life expectancy by 0.86 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-1.14), with a mean cost differential of -€12 (95% CI -9,719-8,131), making it the dominant strategy (ICER = -14, 95% CI -€15,871-€7,113). The cost reduction associated with the SPC was primarily driven by savings in hospitalization costs, amounting to €1,850 (95% CI 17-7,813) and €2,027 (95% CI 19-8,603) for patients treated with the SPC and two-pill combination, respectively. Conversely, drug costs were higher for the SPC (€3,848, 95% CI 574-10,640 vs. €3,710, 95% CI 263-11,955). The cost-effectiveness profile did not significantly change according to age, sex, and clinical status. CONCLUSIONS: The SPC was projected to be cost-effective compared with the two-pill combination at almost all reasonable willingness-to-pay thresholds. As it is currently prescribed to only a few patients, the widespread use of this strategy could result in benefits for both patients and the healthcare system.

Should antihypertensives be administrated at bedtime?

Ongoing monitoring and targeted treatment are important to ensure the best blood-pressure control and thus prevent cardiovascular risks. In this review, we evaluate the findings of four clinical studies investigating the effects of morning versus bedtime dosing of antihypertensives. In three out of four studies, overwhelming results were found favouring bedtime dosing. The same studies have been criticized for mechanistic implausible results and multiple study biases. No harmful effects were reported in relation to bedtime dosing. Thus, antihypertensives can be taken as it is most convenient for the patient.

Extemporaneous combination therapy with nebivolol/ramipril for the treatment of hypertension: a real-world evidence study in Europe.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics and treatment adherence in European adult hypertensive patients starting treatment with the extemporaneous combination of nebivolol and ramipril (NR-EXC). METHODS: Retrospective database analysis of patients receiving NR-EXC treatment across five European countries (Italy, Germany, France, Poland, Hungary) over a period ranging from 3 to 9 years (until 30 June 2020) according to data availability for the different data sources. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and treatment adherence were evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 592,472 patients starting NR-EXC. Most of them were over 60 years of age, with ramipril most commonly prescribed at 5 mg (from 30.0 to 57.2% of patients across the databases). Notable comorbidities included diabetes (19.2%) and dyslipidemia (18.2%). The study population was also highly subjected to polytherapy with antithrombotics, lipid-lowering agents, and other lowering blood pressure agents as the most co-prescribed medications, as resulted from Italian database. Up to 59% of the patients did not request a cardiologic visit during the study period. Adherence to therapy was low in 56.3% of the patients, and it was high only in 11.1% of them. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of nebivolol and ramipril is frequently prescribed in Europe, but adherence to treatment is suboptimal. The transition to a single pill combination could enhance treatment adherence and streamline regimens, potentially leading to significant benefits. Improved adherence not only correlates with better blood pressure control but also reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, underscoring the importance of this development.

Exploring CYP2D6 polymorphisms and angiotensin receptor blocker response in the Bai hypertensive population.

OBJECTIVE: The CYP2D6 enzyme is crucial for the metabolism and disposition of a variety of drugs. This study was conducted to examine the relationship between CYP2D6 gene polymorphisms and the response to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)-based treatment in patients of Chinese Bai ethnicity with hypertension. METHODS: Seventy-two hypertensive adults from the Chinese Bai ethnic group, exhibiting systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥ 90 mmHg, were recruited. Targeted regional sequencing was utilized to genotype single nucleotide polymorphisms in the CYP2D6 gene, aiming to assess their frequency and to evaluate their influence on the therapeutic efficacy of ARB medications. RESULTS: Our research identified nine significant CYP2D6 polymorphisms associated with the efficacy of ARB treatment in the Bai hypertensive cohort. Specifically, patients possessing certain mutant genotype at rs111564371 exhibited substantially greater reductions in SBP and DBP, with P -values of 0.021 and 0.016, respectively, compared to those carrying the wild genotype. Additionally, these mutant genotype at rs111564371 and rs112568578 were linked to approximately 20% higher overall efficacy rates and a 10% increased achievement rate relative to the wild genotype. CONCLUSION: Our research with the Bai hypertensive group shows that certain CYP2D6 polymorphisms significantly influence ARB treatment outcomes. Mutations at rs111564371 led to better blood pressure control ( P -values: 0.021 for SBP, 0.016 for DBP), improving ARB efficacy by appromixately 20% and increasing treatment goal achievement by 10% over the wild-type genotype. STATEMENTS: Our investigation into CYP2D6 polymorphisms within the Bai hypertensive cohort marks a substantial advancement towards personalized healthcare, underscoring the pivotal influence of genetic constitution on the effectiveness of ARB therapy.

The impact of intensive blood pressure management in the post-thrombolysis setting: a real-world observational study.

AIM: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) >180mmHg following stroke thrombolysis has been associated with increased bleeding and poorer outcome. Aiming for the guideline SBP of <180mmHg often leads to SBP overshoot, as treatment is only triggered if this threshold is passed. We tested whether a lower target would result in fewer high SBP protocol violations. METHOD: This is a single-centre, sequential comparison of two blood pressure protocols. Between 2013 and 2017, the guideline-based post-thrombolysis SBP target of <180mmHg was compared with a new protocol aiming for 140-160mmHg. The primary outcome was rate of patients with SBPs >180mmHg. Secondary outcomes included rates of SBP <120 mmHg, antihypertensive infusion use, symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (sICH) and 3-month functional independence (modified Rankin Score [mRS] 0-2). Results were adjusted for age, baseline function and stroke severity using regression analysis. RESULTS: During the 23 months preceding and 18 months following the transition to the new protocol, 68 and 100 patients were thrombolysed respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The odds of one or more SBPs >180mmHg trended lower in the intensive group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-1.17; p=0.14). There was a higher rate of SBPs <120mmHg (aOR 3.09; 95% CI 1.49-6.40; p=0.002) in the intensive BP protocol group. sICH rate and 3-month mRS 0-2 were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The more intensive post-thrombolysis BP protocol was associated with a significant increase in sub-optimally low BP events, with a non-significant trend toward fewer high BP protocol violations and unaffected patient outcomes.

May Measure Month 2022 in Italy: A Focus on Fixed-dose Combination, Therapeutic Adherence, and Medical Inertia in a Nationwide Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension is the main risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Notably, only about half of hypertensive patients manage to achieve the recommended blood pressure (BP) control. Main reasons for the persistence of uncontrolled BP during treatment are lack of compliance on the patients' side, and therapeutic inertia on physicians' side. METHODS: During the global BP screening campaign "May Measure Month" (MMM) (May 1st to July 31st, 2022), a nationwide, cross-sectional, opportunistic study endorsed by the Italian Society of Hypertension was conducted on volunteer adults ≥ 18 years to raise awareness of the health issues surrounding high BP. A questionnaire on demographic/clinical features and questions on the use of fixed-dose single-pills for the treatment of hypertension was administered. BP was measured with standard procedures. RESULTS: A total of 1612 participants (mean age 60.0±15.41 years; 44.7% women) were enrolled. Their mean BP was 128.5±18.1/77.1±10.4 mmHg. About half of participants were sedentary, or overweight/obese, or hypertensive. 55.5% individuals with complete BP assessment had uncontrolled hypertension. Most were not on a fixed-dose combination of antihypertensive drugs and did not regularly measure BP at home. Self-reported adherence to BP medications was similar between individuals with controlled and uncontrolled BP (95% vs 95.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This survey identified a remarkable degree of therapeutic inertia and poor patients' involvement in the therapeutic process and its monitoring in the examined population, underlining the importance of prevention campaigns to identify areas of unsatisfactory management of hypertension, to increase risk factors' awareness in the population with the final purpose of reducing cardiovascular risk.

Physician and patient adherence in hypertension trials: a point of view on an important issue to resolve.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are important sources of evidence that strongly influence guidelines for patient management, including for elevated blood pressure in adults. AREAS COVERED: Critical questions regarding the interpretation of hypertension trial results have recently increased, especially for concerns over methodology. In particular, investigator adherence to the protocol and patient adherence to investigational drugs are often far from optimal. These issues may be ignored or underreported because physicians' behavior during trials is often not monitored and patients' medication adherence is neither measured adequately nor reported or analyzed in the final report or in the publication. This situation may lead to misinterpretations of study results and misevaluations of the safety and efficacy profile of new drugs. In this short review, the problem of measuring, reporting, and analyzing drug adherence in RCTs is discussed and illustrated with several examples in the field of hypertension. EXPERT OPINION: The main conclusion is that drug adherence should always be measured in clinical trials, possibly with more than one method. In addition, prespecified analyses of adherence data should be included in the statistical plan of all trials to improve their overall quality.

Pharmacokinetic Comparison of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Candesartan Cilexetil/Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Versus Co-administration of Individual Formulations in Healthy Participants.

INTRODUCTION: Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, and statins are conventional therapeutic interventions prescribed for cardiovascular diseases. This study aimed at drawing a comparison between the pharmacokinetics and safety of an FDC and the corresponding individual formulations in healthy subjects. METHODS: A randomized, open-label, single-dose, three-sequence, three-period, partially repeated crossover study was conducted with a cohort of healthy volunteers. A 14-day washout period was maintained between each of the three periods. In this study, candesartan cilexetil, amlodipine, and atorvastatin was administered orally as FDCs of 16/10/40 mg in study 1 and 16/5/20 mg in study 2. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) of candesartan, amlodipine, and atorvastatin were estimated as the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the FDC to individual formulations. If the within-subject coefficient of variation (CVwr) of Cmax was greater than 0.3, the bioequivalence (BE) range calculated using the reference-scaled average bioequivalence was used to assess whether the 90% CI was within the BE range. RESULTS: The GMRs (90% CIs) for the AUClast for candesartan and amlodipine were 0.9612 (0.9158-1.0089)/0.9965 (0.9550-1.0397) and 1.0033 (0.9800-1.0271)/1.0067 (0.9798-1.0344), and the GMRs (90% CIs) for Cmax were 0.9600 (0.8953-1.0294)/0.9851 (0.9368-1.0359) and 1.0198 (0.9950-1.0453)/1.0003 (0.9694-1.0321) in studies 1 and 2, respectively. The extended BE ranges calculated from the CVwr of the Cmax of atorvastatin were 0.7814-1.2797 and 0.7415-1.3485, respectively. The GMRs (90% CIs) for the AUClast of atorvastatin were 1.0532 (1.0082-1.1003)/1.0252 (0.9841-1.0680), and the GMRs (90% CIs) for Cmax were 1.0630 (0.9418-1.1997)/0.9888 (0.8792-1.1120) in studies 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Cmax and AUClast values of candesartan cilexetil/amlodipine/atorvastatin 16/10/40 mg and 16/5/20 mg, respectively, were within the BE ranges. There were no clinically significant differences in safety between the two formulations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, study 1: NCT04478097; study 2: NCT04627207.

Extemporaneous combination therapy with nebivolol/valsartan for the treatment of hypertension: a study of real-world evidence in Europe.

OBJECTIVE: To explore real-life use of the extemporaneous combination of nebivolol and valsartan (NV-EXC) in adult hypertensive patients in Europe. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients starting NV-EXC treatment conducted using prescription databases in Italy, Germany, Hungary, and Poland. The selection period during which study patients were identified covered a time span ranging from 3 to 9 years (until 30 June 2020) according to availability of the different data sources. Patient demographics, clinical information, and treatment adherence, measured by proportion of days covered, were evaluated. Additionally, the potential eligibility of Italian patients for the single pill combination (SPC) of nebivolol and valsartan over a one-year period was estimated. RESULTS: The study included 170,682 patients initiating NV-EXC across the databases. Most patients were females (from 51 to 60%) and primarily aged over 60 years. Few patients received prescriptions of both available dosages of valsartan (80 and 160 mg) during follow-up (from 3.2 to 8.5%). Common comorbidities included dyslipidemia (19.2%) and diabetes (19.1%). Around 59.5% of patients did not require cardiologic visits during the study period. Adherence to NV-EXC, as indicated by the Italian database, was low in 53.3% of patients, with only 16.1% showing high adherence. The Italian database revealed 680 prevalent NV-EXC users in 2019, estimating a potential 30,222 adult patients eligible for the nebivolol/valsartan SPC. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of nebivolol and valsartan is frequently prescribed for hypertension, but adherence remains a challenge. A potential nebivolol/valsartan SPC holds promise in enhancing adherence and optimizing therapeutic outcomes for hypertension management.

Phase 1 Study of MK-5475, an Inhaled Soluble Guanylate Cyclase Stimulator, in Participants with Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Purpose: This phase 1 study (NCT04370873) evaluated safety and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of MK-5475 in participants with pulmonary hypertension associated with COPD (PH-COPD). Methods: Eligible participants were 40-80 years old with COPD (FEV1/FVC <0.7; FEV1 >30% predicted) and PH (mean pulmonary arterial pressure ≥25 mmHg). Participants were randomized 2:1 to MK-5475 or placebo via dry-powder inhaler once daily for 7 days in Part 1 (360 µg) or 28 days in Part 2 (380 µg). Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs) and arterial blood oxygenation. Part-2 participants had pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; primary PD endpoint) and pulmonary blood volume (PBV; secondary PD endpoint) measured at baseline and Day 28. A non-informative prior was used to calculate posterior probability (PP) that the between-group difference (MK-5475 - placebo) in mean percent reduction from baseline in PVR was less than -15%. Results: Nine participants were randomized in Part 1, and 14 participants in Part 2. Median age of participants (86.4% male) was 68.5 years (41-77 years); 95.5% had moderate-to-severe COPD. Incidences of AEs were comparable between MK-5475 and placebo: overall (5/14 [36%] versus 5/8 [63%]), drug-related (1/14 [7%] versus 2/8 [25%]), and serious (1/14 [7%] versus 1/8 [13%]). MK-5475 caused no meaningful changes in arterial blood oxygenation or PBV. MK-5475 versus placebo led to numerical improvements from baseline in PVR (-21.2% [95% CI: -35.4, -7.0] versus -5.4% [95% CI: -83.7, 72.9]), with between-group difference in PVR less than -15% and calculated PP of 51%. Conclusion: The favorable safety profile and numerical reductions in PVR observed support further clinical development of inhaled MK-5475 for PH-COPD treatment.

[Topical application of hypotensive drugs for the prevention of intraocular pressure elevation after intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF drugs]. / Mestnoe primenenie gipotenzivnykh preparatov s tsel'yu profilaktiki povysheniya urovnya vnutriglaznogo davleniya posle intravitreal'nykh in"ektsii anti-VEGF-preparatov.

The management protocol for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) involves multiple intravitreal injections (IVI) of anti-VEGF drugs. The ability to reduce the peak intraocular pressure (IOP) rise is greatly important in clinical practice. PURPOSE: This study evaluates the effect of topical hypotensive drugs on the short-term IOP rise after IVI of anti-VEGF drugs in patients with nAMD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The prospective study included 80 patients with newly diagnosed nAMD. Before the start of treatment, the patients were divided into 4 groups of 20 people each: 1st - controls, who received no prophylactic drugs, in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th groups local instillations of one drop of hypotensive drugs brinzolamide 1%, brinzolamide-timolol, brimonidine-timolol were performed in the conjunctival sac twice: 1 day before the injection (at 20:00) and on the day of the injection 2 hours before the manipulation (at 08:00), respectively. IOP was measured in each patient using ICare Pro non-contact tonometer before injection, as well as 1 min, 30 and 60 min after injection. RESULTS: Prophylactic use of hypotensive drugs was associated with a significant decrease in IOP immediately after IVI compared to the same parameter in the 1st group (p<0.001), the maximum decrease in IOP values was observed when using a fixed combination of brimonidine-timolol by 12.1 mm Hg compared to the controls (p<0.001), the combination of brinzolamide-timolol reduced IOP by 8.5 mm Hg (p<0.001), brinzolamide 1% led to the smallest decrease in IOP - by 5.1 mm Hg (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Study patients that received instillations of brimonidine-timolol combination of one drop into the conjunctival sac 1 day before the injection and on the day of the injection showed the maximum decrease in IOP compared to patients of the other groups.

Inhaled treprostinil in pulmonary hypertension associated with COPD: PERFECT study results.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) accompanying COPD (PH-COPD) is associated with worse outcomes than COPD alone. There are currently no approved therapies to treat PH-COPD. The PERFECT study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03496623) evaluated the safety and efficacy of inhaled treprostinil (iTRE) in this patient population. METHODS: Patients with PH-COPD (mean pulmonary arterial pressure ≥30 mmHg and pulmonary vascular resistance ≥4 WU) were enrolled in a multicentre, randomised (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week, crossover study. A contingent parallel design was also prespecified and implemented, based on a blinded interim analysis of missing data. Patients received treatment with iTRE up to 12 breaths (72 µg) 4 times daily or placebo. The primary efficacy end-point was change in peak 6-min walk distance (6MWD) at week 12. RESULTS: In total, 76 patients were randomised, 64 in the original crossover design and 12 in the contingent parallel design; 66 patients received iTRE and 58 received placebo. The study was terminated early at the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring committee based on the totality of evidence that iTRE increased the risk of serious adverse events and suggestive evidence of an increased risk of mortality. The change in 6MWD was numerically worse with iTRE exposure than with placebo exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The risk-benefit observations associated with iTRE in patients with PH-COPD did not support continuation of the PERFECT study. The results of this study do not support iTRE as a viable treatment option in patients with PH-COPD.

Preparation of the new peptide drug ACTY116-loaded in situ forming implants and evaluation of its efficacy in pulmonary arterial hypertension and right ventricular hypertrophy induced by SU5416/hypoxia in mice.

There is a lack of effective therapeutic drugs for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Previous studies have demonstrated the positive cardiovascular system protective effects of the new peptide ACTY116. However, its stability in ordinary aqueous solution injections is poor and its half-life in the body is short, which has hindered the development of preparations. This study aimed to prepare in situ forming implants (ISFIs) of the peptide ACTY116 and investigate its impact on pulmonary arterial hypertension. We prepared ISFIs using NMP/TA as a solvent and PLGA as a polymer. These ISFIs exhibited low viscosity, low toxicity and sustained release properties. In a mouse model of pulmonary hypertension induced by SU5416/hypoxia, both ISFIs and ACTY116 peptides effectively reduced pulmonary hypertension, cardiac hypertrophy and pulmonary blood vessel wall thickness. In conclusion, this study highlights the potential of ACTY116 as a treatment for pulmonary arterial hypertension and suggests that incorporating it into an in-situ gel implant could be a promising option.

Intensive Ambulance-Delivered Blood-Pressure Reduction in Hyperacute Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute stroke, before a distinction can be made between ischemic and hemorrhagic types, is challenging. Whether very early blood-pressure control in the ambulance improves outcomes among patients with undifferentiated acute stroke is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with suspected acute stroke that caused a motor deficit and with elevated systolic blood pressure (≥150 mm Hg), who were assessed in the ambulance within 2 hours after the onset of symptoms, to receive immediate treatment to lower the systolic blood pressure (target range, 130 to 140 mm Hg) (intervention group) or usual blood-pressure management (usual-care group). The primary efficacy outcome was functional status as assessed by the score on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 90 days after randomization. The primary safety outcome was any serious adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 2404 patients (mean age, 70 years) in China underwent randomization and provided consent for the trial: 1205 in the intervention group and 1199 in the usual-care group. The median time between symptom onset and randomization was 61 minutes (interquartile range, 41 to 93), and the mean blood pressure at randomization was 178/98 mm Hg. Stroke was subsequently confirmed by imaging in 2240 patients, of whom 1041 (46.5%) had a hemorrhagic stroke. At the time of patients' arrival at the hospital, the mean systolic blood pressure in the intervention group was 159 mm Hg, as compared with 170 mm Hg in the usual-care group. Overall, there was no difference in functional outcome between the two groups (common odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.15), and the incidence of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. Prehospital reduction of blood pressure was associated with a decrease in the odds of a poor functional outcome among patients with hemorrhagic stroke (common odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.92) but an increase among patients with cerebral ischemia (common odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.60). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, prehospital blood-pressure reduction did not improve functional outcomes in a cohort of patients with undifferentiated acute stroke, of whom 46.5% subsequently received a diagnosis of hemorrhagic stroke. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and others; INTERACT4 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03790800; Chinese Trial Registry number, ChiCTR1900020534.).

Participants' views of ultra-low dose combination therapy for high blood pressure: a mixed-methods study from the QUARTET trial.

Single-pill combination therapy containing four quarter-dose medications for high blood pressure improves BP control compared to monotherapy, however patient-reported acceptance of the quadpill as a treatment strategy remains undescribed. We collected within-trial feedback and interviewed participants from the quadruple ultra-low-dose treatment for hypertension (QUARTET) trial to characterise patient attitudes to this intervention. All trial participants were asked about ease and preference for the quadpill and provided an opportunity to give further comments on the trial at 12 weeks (trial primary endpoint) and 52 weeks extended follow-up. Separately, we used purposive and quota sampling for the semi-structured telephone interviews, with the resultant verbatim transcripts analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Themes were re-evaluated after each successive interview, and at suspected data saturation, an additional interview conducted for confirmation. At 12 weeks follow-up, 502 of 591 (85%) participants responded to acceptability questions, and 359 of 417 (86%) responded at week 52. Most reported the trial capsule easy or very easy to take. From eight sites, 16 participants were interviewed between 5 August 2020 and 19 November 2020. All described a positive experience, preferred once-daily morning dosing and found routine facilitated adherence. Participants valued individual responsibility for adherence, and involvement of the general practitioner in blood-pressure management. Most reported capsule size did not deter adherence but desired a smaller capsule. Participants described a preference for minimising number and dosage of medications, reduced capsule size, and once-daily morning dosing. These findings suggest a preference for single-pill combination therapy for blood pressure lowering.