Chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide for preventing cardiovascular disease in hypertension: Is the case closed?

The optimal diuretic choice [hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or chlorthalidone (CTD)] for the management of hypertension has been an ongoing debate for several years. HCTZ is widely used in the form of single-pill combinations, whereas CTD is a more potent drug vs. HCTZ, especially in reducing nighttime blood pressure (BP), with some indirect evidence suggesting a superiority in terms of cardiovascular (CV) risk reduction. In addition, recent data showed that CTD was safe and effective in terms of BP lowering in predialysis patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease. The Diuretic Comparison Project was the first head-to-head pragmatic, open-label trial that randomly assigned elderly patients with hypertension under HCTZ therapy to continue with HCTZ or to switch to CTD (equivalent doses). Office BP was similar for both groups throughout the study. The trial showed no difference in major CV events or non-cancer-related deaths during a median follow-up of 2.4 years; yet, CTD was associated with a benefit in participants with a previous myocardial infarction or stroke, which might be a chance finding but could also indicate that a high-risk population is more suitable for revealing the impact of slight differences in the 24-hour BP profile in a relatively short-term follow-up. Interestingly CTD vs. HCTZ was associated with higher hypokalemia rates apart from the latter group of patients where there was no difference. Overall, the available data do not confirm the superiority of CTD over HCTZ in general, but this could be questionable in selected patients.

Arterial Hypertension-clinical trials update 2023.

Arterial hypertension is associated with increased morbidity and mortality and research in the field is highly dynamic. This summary reviews the most important clinical trials published in 2022 and early 2023. Findings on new pharmacological approaches to treat resistant hypertension are presented and new knowledge about the optimal timing of the antihypertensive medication intake is discussed. It is focused on optimal blood pressure treatment targets and the problem of treatment and guideline inertia is acknowledged. Information about pregnancy-related hypertension is presented and blood pressure control following percutaneous thrombectomy after ischemic stroke is discussed. Finally, novel clinical data on device-based approaches to treat hypertension are summarized. The hypertension trials update summarizes the most important clincal trials on hypertension research in 2022 and early 2023. CTD - chlorthalidone, CV - cardiovascular, HCT - hydrochlorothiazide, SBP - systolic blood pressure, RDN - renal denervation *depicts systolic blood pressure only.

Effects of chlorthalidone plus amiloride compared with amlodipine on short-term blood pressure variability in individuals with hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of chlortalidone plus amiloride and amlodipine on blood pressure (BP) variability in patients with hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA). METHODS: A randomized, controlled, double-blind trial enrolled men and women aged 40 years or older with a diagnosis of OSA (apnea-hypopnea index 10-40 apneas/h of sleep) confirmed by overnight laboratory polysomnography and systolic BP 140-159 mmHg or diastolic BP 90-99 mmHg. Participants were randomized to receive chlortalidone 25 mg plus amiloride 5 mg daily or amlodipine 10 mg daily for 8 weeks. BP variability was calculated from 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring at baseline and follow-up using the following indices: SD, coefficient of variation, average real variability (ARV), time-rate index, and variability independent of the mean (VIM). RESULTS: The study included 65 patients, with 33 assigned to the chlortalidone plus amiloride group and 32 to the amlodipine group. Participants in both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Short-term BP variability decreased within groups for SD and ARV indexes for 24-hour systolic BP and daytime systolic BP, but statistically significant time*group interactions were found for sleep systolic SD and VIM, with greater reduction in patients treated with amlodipine. CONCLUSION: In brief, our study has shown that the use of chlorthalidone in combination with amiloride and amlodipine produces comparable effects on short-term BP variability in patients with hypertension and OSA. Therefore, our findings suggest that BP variability may not be a significant factor when choosing between these medications for the treatment of hypertension and OSA.

Reduced efficacy of blood pressure lowering drugs in the presence of diabetes mellitus-results from the TRIUMPH randomised controlled trial.

We investigated whether diabetes mellitus (DM) affects the efficacy of a low-dose triple combination pill and usual care among people with mild-moderate hypertension. TRIUMPH (TRIple pill vs Usual care Management for Patients with mild-to-moderate Hypertension) was a randomised controlled open-label trial of patients requiring initiation or escalation of antihypertensive therapy. Patients were randomised to a once-daily low-dose triple combination polypill (telmisartan-20mg/amlodipine-2.5 mg/chlorthalidone-12.5 mg) or usual care. This analysis compared BP reduction in people with and without DM, both in the intervention and control groups over 24-week follow-up. Predicted efficacy of prescribed therapy was calculated (estimation methods of Law et al.). The trial randomised 700 patients (56 ± 11 yrs, 31% DM). There was no difference in the number of drugs prescribed or predicted efficacy of therapy between people with DM and without DM. However, the observed BP reduction from baseline to week 24 was lower in those with DM compared to non-diabetics in both the triple pill (25/11 vs 31/15 mmHg, p ≤ 0.01) and usual care (17/7 vs 22/11 mmHg, p ≤ 0.01) groups, and these differences remained after multivariable adjustment. DM was a negative predictor of change in BP (ß-coefficient -0.08, p = 0.02). In conclusion, patients with DM experienced reduced efficacy of BP lowering therapies as compared to patients without DM, irrespective of the type of BP lowering therapy received.

Management of hypertension in advanced kidney disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study was to present recent developments in pharmacotherapy of hypertension in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). RECENT FINDINGS: In the AMBER trial, compared with placebo, the potassium-binder patiromer mitigated the risk of hyperkalaemia and enabled more patients with uncontrolled resistant hypertension and stage 3b/4 CKD to tolerate and continue spironolactone treatment; add-on therapy with spironolactone provoked a clinically meaningful reduction of 11-12 mmHg in unattended automated office SBP over 12 weeks of follow-up. In the BLOCK-CKD trial, the investigational nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid-receptor-antagonist (MRA) KBP-5074 lowered office SBP by 7-10 mmHg relative to placebo at 84 days with a minimal risk of hyperkalaemia in patients with advanced CKD and uncontrolled hypertension. The CLICK trial showed that the thiazide-like diuretic chlorthalidone provoked a placebo-subtracted reduction of 10.5 mmHg in 24-h ambulatory SBP at 12 weeks in patients with stage 4 CKD and poorly controlled hypertension. SUMMARY: Enablement of more persistent spironolactone use with newer potassium-binding agents, the clinical development of novel nonsteroidal MRAs with a more favourable benefit-risk profile and the recently proven blood pressure lowering action of chlorthalidone are three therapeutic opportunities for more effective management of hypertension in high-risk patients with advanced CKD.

Design of a pragmatic clinical trial embedded in the Electronic Health Record: The VA's Diuretic Comparison Project.

BACKGROUND: Recent US guidelines recommend chlorthalidone over other thiazide-type diuretics for the treatment of hypertension based on its long half-life and proven ability to reduce CVD events. Despite recommendations most clinicians prescribe hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) over chlorthalidone (CTD). No randomized controlled data exist comparing these two diuretics on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: The Diuretic Comparison Project (DCP) is a multicenter, two-arm, parallel, Prospective Randomized Open, Blinded End-point (PROBE) trial testing the primary hypothesis that CTD is superior to HCTZ in the prevention of non-fatal CVD events and non-cancer death. Patients with hypertension taking HCTZ 25 or 50 mg were randomly assigned to either continue their current HCTZ or switch to an equipotent dose of CTD. The primary outcome is time to the first occurrence of a composite outcome consisting of a non-fatal CVD event (stroke, myocardial infarction, urgent coronary revascularization because of unstable angina, or hospitalization for acute heart failure) or non-cancer death. The trial randomized 13,523 patients at 72 VA medical centers. The study is conducted by a centralized research team with site procedures embedded in the electronic health record and all data collected through administrative claims data, with no study related visits for participants. The trial will have 90% power to detect an absolute reduction in the composite event rate of 2.4%. RESULTS: Enrollment ended in November 2021. There are 4128 participting primary care providers and 16,595 patients individually consented to participate, 13,523 of whom were randomized. CONCLUSIONS: DCP should provide much needed evidence as to whether CTD is superior to HCTZ in preventing cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02185417 [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02185417].

Fixed-dose Combination of Metoprolol, Telmisartan, and Chlorthalidone for Essential Hypertension in Adults with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Phase III Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of metoprolol, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone in patients with essential hypertension and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who showed inadequate response to dual therapy. METHODS: In this phase III, open-label, multicenter study, 254 adults with stable CAD having uncontrolled hypertension despite being treated with FDC of metoprolol (25/50 mg) and telmisartan (40 mg) were included. Patients received either of the following FDC for 24 weeks: metoprolol (25 mg), telmisartan (40 mg), and chlorthalidone (12.5 mg) (FDC1; n = 139) or metoprolol (50 mg), telmisartan (40 mg), and chlorthalidone (12.5 mg) (FDC2; n = 115) tablets once daily. The FDCs were developed using the novel Wrap Matrix™ platform technology. Primary endpoint assessed the mean change in seated diastolic blood pressure (SeDBP) and seated systolic blood pressure (SeSBP) from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary efficacy endpoints included proportion of patients achieving < 90 mmHg SeDBP (SeDBP responder) and < 140 mmHg SeSBP (SeSBP responder) at weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24. Safety was assessed throughout the study. RESULTS: A total of 243 (95.70%) patients completed study. The mean change in BP from baseline (FDC1, 155/96 mmHg; FDC2, 165/98 mmHg) to week 24 (FDC1, 128/82 mmHg; FDC2, 131/83 mmHg) was statistically significant (both groups p < 0.0001). Within FDC1 and FDC2, the mean change from baseline to week 24 in SeDBP (82.60 mmHg and 83.09 mmHg) and SeSBP (128.07 mmHg and 131.29 mmHg) was statistically significant (both groups p < 0.0001). At week 24, in FDC1, 80.15% and 84.73% were SeDBP and SeSBP responders, respectively; in FDC2, 79.46% and 74.11% were SeDBP and SeSBP responders, respectively. No serious adverse events or deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Triple FDCs of metoprolol, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone were considered effective and well tolerated in patients with hypertension who respond inadequately to dual therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2016/11/007491.

The increasing prevalence of hypertension in India requires immediate attention. To adequately manage blood pressure and ensure compliance to medications, innovative treatment options involving combination therapy with three or more drugs to treat hypertension need to be explored. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) of three antihypertension drugs, viz., metoprolol, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone, were tested in Indian patients who could not respond adequately to dual treatment. The rationale behind using a combination of three drug types was to take advantage of the complementary actions of each drug class for an enhanced treatment effect. The two variants of FDCs were tested in 254 adults with the most common form of heart disease, i.e., stable coronary artery disease. Changes in seated diastolic and systolic blood pressure (SeDBP and SeSBP) were measured to assess the effectiveness of the FDC. The mean changes in SeDBP and SeSBP were statistically significant by the end of the study, i.e., it determined that results are not explainable by chance alone. A greater proportion of patients (range 74­84%) achieved their target BPs with the FDC used in the study. The FDC variants were well tolerated without any reports of serious adverse events or deaths. Overall, this triple combination therapy option was effective and considered safe to be administered to hypertensive Indian adults with stable coronary artery disease who did not respond adequately to dual antihypertension therapy.

Monotherapy treatment with chlorthalidone or amlodipine in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT).

This post hoc analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) examined the performance of chlorthalidone (C) versus amlodipine (A) monotherapies. ANOVA was used to analyze the differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) response between C and A. Logistic regression was used to examine monotherapy failure (adding a second antihypertensive agent or switching to a different antihypertensive agent) rates. Four hundred ninety-one participants were treated with C monotherapy (n = 210, mean dose = 22 mg/day) or A monotherapy (n = 281, mean dose = 7 mg/day). There was a significant difference in mean SBP reduction between the C and A monotherapies at the third visit (higher reduction with A, adjusted p = .018). Unadjusted analysis showed a higher failure with C in the standard treatment group. Although the average SBP at failure was higher and above the 140 mm Hg cutoff that indicated monotherapy failure with A (142.60) compared with C (138.40), more participants on C failed despite having SBP below the 140 cutoff. This was probably due to decisions made by the investigative teams to change the antihypertensive regimen, because, in their opinion, the clinical picture required it. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, C had higher failure than A only in the standard treatment group (1.64 odds ratio [OR], 95% CI 1.06-2.56, p = .028). A sub-analysis including participants who had never used antihypertensive treatment before randomization had similar results (2.57 OR, 95% CI 1.34-5.02, p = .004). Overall, in SPRINT chlorthalidone was associated with higher monotherapy failure than amlodipine in the standard treatment group because of decisions of the investigative teams.

Porous and highly responsive cross-linked ß-cyclodextrin based nanomatrices for improvement in drug dissolution and absorption.

AIMS: Aim of the study was to enhance the solubility of Chlorthalidone by developing beta-cyclodextrin cross-linked hydrophilic nanomatrices. MAIN METHODS: Nine different formulations were fabricated by free radical polymerization technique. All formulations were characterized through different studies. FTIR spectroscopy of unloaded and loaded nanomatrices was processed to determine compatibility of constituents and that of the drug with the system. Surface morphology of the nanomatrices was studied by SEM. The size of the optimized formulation was determined by zeta sizer. Swelling, in-vitro release and solubility studies were carried out in different media and results of in-vitro release profiles of nanomatrices and commercially available tablet of Chlorthalidone were compared. For determination of biocompatibility, toxicity studies were proclaimed in rabbits. KEY FINDINGS: Main peaks of corresponding functional groups of individual constituents and that of drug were depicted in FTIR spectra of unloaded and loaded nanomatrices. Porous and fluffy structure was visualized through SEM images. Particle size of the optimized formulation was in the range of 175 ± 5.27 nm. Percent loading of optimized formulation showed the best result. Comparing the in-vitro drug release profiles of nanomatrices and commercially available tablet, the results of the synthesized nanomatrices were quite satisfactory. Solubility profiles were also high as compared to the drug alone. Moreover, toxicity studies confirmed that nanomatrices were biocompatible and no sign of any toxic effect was found. SIGNIFICANCE: We concluded that our developed nanomatrices had successfully enhanced the solubility of Chlorthalidone and can also be used for other poorly aqueous soluble drugs.

Combining angiotensin receptor blockers with chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide - which is the better alternative? A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a disease with significant clinical and socio-economic consequences. The reduction in cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients treated for hypertension is directly related to the magnitude of blood pressure reduction. Diuretics have proven useful for the prevention of cardiovascular complications in addition to a long history of safety and efficacy. The main aim for this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of the combination of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and chlorthalidone (CTLD) to the combination of ARB and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in patients with hypertension. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted through electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsyInfo, Cochrane, eLIBRARY.ru, http://ClinicalTrials.gov and http://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu in July 2020 to identify studies that investigate the effect of the combination of angiotensin receptor blocker with chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide on the systolic and diastolic blood pressure in patients with hypertension. Changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) expressed as a weighted mean difference (WMD) were our primary outcomes. The random-effects method was chosen as the primary analysis and results were presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity analysis was performed and bias was assessed. RESULTS: Our search returned 2745 titles. Of them, 51 full-text articles remained to be subjected to assessment. Comparisons of ARB/HCTZ versus ARB showed changes in BP of -6.89 (-8.09, -5.69) mmHg for systolic BP and - 3.67 (-4.15, -3.19) mmHg for diastolic BP. For the ARB/CTLD versus ARB/HCTZ comparison changes were - 6.30 (-7.30, -5.29) mmHg for systolic BP and - 3.57 (-4.17, 2.98) mmHg for diastolic BP. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests a small but significant favor for CTLD in blood pressure control when compared to HCTZ. We believe it should be considered as a valuable alternative for HCTZ and an option for fixed dose combinations with an ARB although further research is required.

Genome Wide Analysis Approach Suggests Chromosome 2 Locus to be Associated with Thiazide and Thiazide Like-Diuretics Blood Pressure Response.

Chlorthalidone (CTD) is more potent than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in reducing blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive patients, though both are plagued with BP response variability. However, there is a void in the literature regarding the genetic determinants contributing to the variability observed in BP response to CTD. We performed a discovery genome wide association analysis of BP response post CTD treatment in African Americans (AA) and European Americans (EA) from the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses-2 (PEAR-2) study and replication in an independent cohort of AA and EA treated with HCTZ from the PEAR study, followed by a race specific meta-analysis of the two studies. Successfully replicated SNPs were further validated in beta-blocker treated participants from PEAR-2 and PEAR for opposite direction of association. The replicated and validated signals were further evaluated by protein-protein interaction network analysis. An intronic SNP rs79237970 in the WDR92 (eQTL for PPP3R1) was significantly associated with better DBP response to CTD (p = 5.76 × 10-6, ß = -15.75) in the AA cohort. This SNP further replicated in PEAR (p = 0.00046, ß = -9.815) with a genome wide significant meta-analysis p-value of 8.49 × 10-9. This variant was further validated for opposite association in two ß-blockers treated cohorts from PEAR-2 metoprolol (p = 9.9 × 10-3, ß = 7.47) and PEAR atenolol (p = 0.04, ß = 4.36) for association with DBP. Studies have implicated WDR92 in coronary artery damage. PPP3R1 is the regulatory subunit of the calcineurin complex. Use of calcineurin inhibitors is associated with HTN. Studies have also shown polymorphisms in PPP3R1 to be associated with ventricular hypertrophy in AA hypertensive patients. Protein-protein interaction analysis further identified important hypertension related pathways such as inositol phosphate-mediated signaling and calcineurin-NFAT signaling cascade as important biological process associated with PPP3R1 which further strengthen the potential importance of this signal. These data collectively suggest that WDR92 and PPP3R1 are novel candidates that may help explain the genetic underpinnings of BP response of thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics and help identify the patients better suited for thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics compared to ß-blockers for improved BP management. This may further help advance personalized approaches to antihypertensive therapy.

Chlorthalidone Is Superior to Potassium Citrate in Reducing Calcium Phosphate Stones and Increasing Bone Quality in Hypercalciuric Stone-Forming Rats.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of genetic hypercalciuric stone-forming rats parallels that of human idiopathic hypercalciuria. In this model, all animals form calcium phosphate stones. We previously found that chlorthalidone, but not potassium citrate, decreased stone formation in these rats. METHODS: To test whether chlorthalidone and potassium citrate combined would reduce calcium phosphate stone formation more than either medication alone, four groups of rats were fed a fixed amount of a normal calcium and phosphorus diet, supplemented with potassium chloride (as control), potassium citrate, chlorthalidone (with potassium chloride to equalize potassium intake), or potassium citrate plus chlorthalidone. We measured urine every 6 weeks and assessed stone formation and bone quality at 18 weeks. RESULTS: Potassium citrate reduced urine calcium compared with controls, chlorthalidone reduced it further, and potassium citrate plus chlorthalidone reduced it even more. Chlorthalidone increased urine citrate and potassium citrate increased it even more; the combination did not increase it further. Potassium citrate, alone or with chlorthalidone, increased urine calcium phosphate supersaturation, but chlorthalidone did not. All control rats formed stones. Potassium citrate did not alter stone formation. No stones formed with chlorthalidone, and rats given potassium citrate plus chlorthalidone had some stones but fewer than controls. Rats given chlorthalidone with or without potassium citrate had higher bone mineral density and better mechanical properties than controls, whereas those given potassium citrate did not. CONCLUSIONS: In genetic hypercalciuric stone-forming rats, chlorthalidone is superior to potassium citrate alone or combined with chlorthalidone in reducing calcium phosphate stone formation and improving bone quality.

Hydrochlorothiazide vs chlorthalidone, indapamide, and potassium-sparing/hydrochlorothiazide diuretics for reducing left ventricular hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Left ventricular hypertrophy develops in 36%-41% of hypertensive patients and independently predicts cardiovascular events and total mortality. Moreover, drug-induced reduction in left ventricular mass (LVM) correlates with improved prognosis. The optimal thiazide-type diuretic for reducing LVM is unknown. Evidence regarding potency, cardiovascular events, sodium, and potassium suggested the hypothesis that "CHIP" diuretics (CHlorthalidone, Indapamide, and Potassium-sparing diuretic/hydrochlorothiazide [PSD/HCTZ]) would reduce LVM more than HCTZ. Systematic searches of five databases were conducted. Among the 38 randomized trials, a 1% reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) predicted a 1% reduction in LVM, P = 0.00001. CHIP-HCTZ differences in reducing LVM differed across trials (ie, heterogeneity), making interpretation uncertain. However, among the 28 double-blind trials, heterogeneity was undetectable, and HCTZ reduced LVM (percent reduction [95% CI]) by -7.3 (-10.4, -4.2), P < 0.0001. CHIP diuretics surpassed HCTZ in reducing LVM: chlorthalidone -8.2 (-14.7, -1.6), P = 0.015; indapamide -7.5 (-12.7, -2.3), P = 0.005; and all CHIP diuretics combined -7.7 (-12.2, -3.1), P < 0.001. The comparison of PSD/HCTZ with HCTZ had low statistical power but favored PSD/HCTZ: -6.0 (-14.1, +2.1), P = 0.149. Thus, compared to HCTZ, CHIP diuretics had twice the effect on LVM. CHIP diuretics did not surpass HCTZ in reducing systolic or diastolic blood pressure: -0.3 (-5.0, +4.3) and -1.6 (-5.6, +2.4), respectively. The strength of evidence that CHIP diuretics surpass HCTZ for reducing LVM was high (GRADE criteria). In conclusion, these novel results have demonstrated that CHIP diuretics reduce LVM 2-fold more than HCTZ among hypertensive patients. Although generally related to LVM, blood pressure fails to explain the superiority of CHIP diuretics for reducing LVM.

Whole Transcriptome Sequencing Analyses Reveal Molecular Markers of Blood Pressure Response to Thiazide Diuretics.

Thiazide diuretics (TD) are commonly prescribed anti-hypertensives worldwide. However, <40% of patients treated with thiazide monotherapy achieve BP control. This study uses whole transcriptome sequencing to identify novel molecular markers associated with BP response to TD. We assessed global RNA expression levels in whole blood samples from 150 participants, representing patients in the upper and lower quartile of BP response to TD from the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR) (50 whites) and from PEAR-2 (50 whites and 50 blacks). In each study cohort, we performed poly-A RNA-sequencing in baseline samples from 25 responders and 25 non-responders to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or chlorthalidone. At FDR adjusted p-value < 0.05, 29 genes were differentially expressed in relation to HCTZ or chlorthalidone BP response in whites. For each differentially expressed gene, replication was attempted in the alternate white group and PEAR-2 blacks. CEBPD (meta-analysis p = 1.8 × 10-11) and TSC22D3 (p = 1.9 × 10-9) were differentially expressed in all 3 cohorts, and explain, in aggregate, 21.9% of response variability to TD. This is the first report of the use of transcriptome-wide sequencing data to identify molecular markers of antihypertensive drug response. These findings support CEBPD and TSC22D3 as potential biomarkers of BP response to TD.

Hemorrheologic effect of diuretics in the control of blood pressure in the hypertensive patient / Efecto hemorreológico de los diuréticos en el control de la presión arterial en el paciente hipertenso

Background: Diuretics are the first choice as an antihypertensive, because of its efficacy and cost, however its mechanism of action is not well understood. The aim of this work was to analyze the hemorrheological effect of the diuretics as vasodilators in patients with newly diagnosed arterial hypertension. Methods: Patients with hypertension were given diet and exercise recommendations and 25 mg of chlorthalidone per day were prescribed; Hemoglobin/hematocrit, viscosity, and basal nitric oxide (ON) were determined at 15 and 45 days and compared with healthy subjects. Results: We included 28 patients with average age of 48 years old; systolic blood pressure in the treated patients decreased from baseline at 15 days from 130 to 119 mm Hg and at 114 mmHg at 15 to 45 days; diastolic blood pressure decreased from baseline at 15 days from 103 to 97 mm Hg, and at 93 mmHg at 15 to 45 days. The hematocrit increased in both men and women with a statistical significance of the baseline period at 15 days, after that, it remained without significative changes. The viscosity increased similarly to the hematocrit, which conditioned the ON elevation. Conclusions: The increase in hematocrit due to diuretic caused an increase in blood viscosity, which led to an increase in nitric oxide, resulting in lower blood pressure.

Introducción: Los diuréticos son la primera elección como antihipertensivo por su eficacia y costo, sin embargo su mecanismo de acción no está bien esclarecido. El objetivo de este trabajo fue analizar el efecto hemorreológico del diurético como vasodilatador en pacientes con hipertensión arterial de reciente diagnóstico. Métodos: A los pacientes con hipertensión arterial se les dieron recomendaciones de dieta, ejercicio y se prescribió 25 mg de clortalidona al día; se determinaron hemoglobina/hematocrito, viscosidad y óxido nítrico (ON) basal, a los 15 y 45 días y se compararon con sujetos sanos. Resultados: Se incluyeron 28 pacientes, con edad promedio de 48 años; la presión arterial sistólica en los pacientes tratados descendió de la cifra basal a los 15 días de 130 a 119 mmHg, y a 114 mmHg de los 15 a los 45 días; la presión arterial diastólica descendió de la basal a los 15 días de 103 a 97 mmHg, y a 93 mmHg de los 15 a los 45 días . El hematocrito se incrementó en ambos géneros, con significancia estadística del período basal a los 15 días de tratamiento, posteriormente permaneció sin cambios. La viscosidad se incrementó de forma similar al hematocrito, lo que condicionó elevación del ON. Conclusiones: El incremento del hematocrito debido al diurético causó elevación de la viscosidad sanguínea, lo que condujo a incremento del óxido nítrico, repercutiendo en el descenso de la presión arterial.

Effectiveness of chlorthalidone/amiloride versus losartan in patients with stage I hypertension: results from the PREVER-treatment randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy of a chlorthalidone/amiloride combination pill with losartan, during initial management of stage I hypertension. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 655 participants were followed for 18 months in 21 Brazilian academic centers. Trial participants were adult volunteers aged 30-70 years with stage I hypertension (BP 140-159 or 90-99 mmHg) following 3 months of a lifestyle intervention. Participants were randomized to 12.5/2.5 mg of chlorthalidone/amiloride (N = 333) or 50 mg of losartan (N = 322). If BP remained uncontrolled after 3 months, study medication dose was doubled, and if uncontrolled after 6 months, amlodipine (5 and 10 mg) and propranolol (40 and 80 mg twice daily) were added as open-label drugs in a progressive fashion. At the end of follow-up, 609 (93%) participants were evaluated. RESULTS: The difference in SBP during 18 months of follow-up was 2.3 (95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 3.3) mmHg favoring chlorthalidone/amiloride. Compared with those randomized to diuretic, more participants allocated to losartan had their initial dose doubled and more of them used add-on antihypertensive medication. Levels of blood glucose, glycosilated hemoglobin, and incidence of diabetes were no different between the two treatment groups. Serum potassium was lower and serum cholesterol was higher in the diuretic arm. Microalbuminuria tended to be higher in patients with diabetes allocated to losartan (28.5 ±â€Š40.4 versus 16.2 ±â€Š26.7 mg, P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Treatment with a combination of chlorthalidone and amiloride compared with losartan yielded a greater reduction in BP. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00971165.

Negative effects of chlorthalidone on sympathetic nervous system and insulin resistance in hypertensive patients may be avoided with spironolactone: further studies are still needed.

Chlorthalidone is commonly used for blood pressure control in hypertensive patients. However, it increases sympathetic nervous system activity and insulin resistance. Both conditions are related with an elevated number of complications and worsen patients' prognosis. Recently has been demonstrated that these adverse effects are avoided with spironolactone administration. Mechanisms to explain increasing sympathetic nervous activity and insulin resistance with chlorthalidone, but not with spironolactone are unclear and under investigation. It should be necessary to continue medical investigation on this field with long-term studies, a larger number of patients and associated comorbidities. The aim should be to establish whether the association of both drugs could be an effective and safety choice to be implemented extensively in clinical practice. That possibility could represent a new alternative for patients' management.

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of azilsartan medoxomil with or without chlorthalidone during and after 8 months of treatment for hypertension.

A phase 3, 26-week, open-label, titrate-to-target study (n=418) assessed the safety of azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) alone and with chlorthalidone (CLD), followed by a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled reversal phase with change in clinic diastolic blood pressure (DBP) as the primary endpoint. Target blood pressure (BP) was <140/90 mm Hg (<130/80 mm Hg with diabetes/chronic kidney disease). AZL-M was initiated at 40 mg once a day (QD), force-titrated to 80 mg at week 4. CLD 25 mg QD could be added (weeks 8-22), if required, to reach target, followed by additional antihypertensives from week 12. At the end of the open-label phase, mean change in systolic BP (SBP)/DBP from baseline was -23/-16 mm Hg. The most common adverse events, irrespective of treatment, were dizziness (8.9%) and headache (7.2%). Serious AEs were reported in eight patients (1.9%). Consecutive creatinine elevations ≥50% with values exceeding the upper limit of normal (ULN) were reported in nine (2.2%) patients. All returned to below the 50% threshold; most also returned to below the ULN after drug discontinuation. Mean DBP was maintained through the reversal phase in patients receiving AZL-M, but increased with placebo (difference: -7.8 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval, -9.8 to -5.8; P<.001). AZL-M alone or with CLD showed good long-term safety and stable BP improvements in a titrate-to-target approach. BP improvements caused by AZL-M therapy were safely reversible upon AZL-M withdrawal.

Comparing clinical effectiveness and drug toxicity with hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone using two potency ratios in a managed care population.

This study compared the clinical effectiveness and drug toxicity of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide. Electronic health records and claims data were used to identify patients initially prescribed chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide. A total of 214 patients prescribed chlorthalidone 25 mg were matched with 428 patients prescribed hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (1:1 potency ratio) and 214 patients prescribed hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg (1:2 potency ratio). Mean systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure values at least 30 days after initial prescription were lower with chlorthalidone (132.2/74 mm Hg) compared with hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (137.0/77.5 mm Hg) and hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg (138.6/78.5 mm Hg) (P<.05 for all comparisons). Goal systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure values were achieved in a higher percentage of patients prescribed chlorthalidone (45.0%/78.3%) than with either hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (32.1%/63.9%) or hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg (32.8%/68.9%) (P<.05 for all comparisons). Mean serum potassium was 3.94 mEq/L with chlorthalidone 25 mg, 4.13 mEq/L with hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (P<.01 vs chlorthalidone), and 3.96 mEq/L with hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg. These findings indicate that chlorthalidone 25 mg is associated with a better antihypertensive response than hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg or 50 mg, without clinically significant differences in serum potassium.