Telmisartan-Induced Myotoxicity in Patients with Essential Hypertension.

Drug-related muscular adverse effects are relatively common among certain groups of drugs, such as statins and steroids. However, these adverse effects are less well-known for angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). It is proposed that telmisartan and irbesartan may cause myotoxicity via increased Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor gamma (PPAR-gamma) activity. Herein, we present two hypertensive patients in whom telmisartan-induced myotoxicity was observed. Therefore, physicians should be aware that telmisartan, along with some other ARBs, can also cause myopathy. Possible drug-drug interactions should be considered in cases of concomitant prescription of these agents with other myopathic drugs.

Acute quadruple extremity compartment syndrome due to angio-oedema after polypharmacy overdose including olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan and vildagliptin.

This case report describes a rare manifestation of acute compartment syndrome (ACS) involving all four extremities, precipitated by angio-oedema in a middle-aged woman who consumed an overdose of multiple medications: nifedipine, azelnidipine, amlodipine besylate, olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan, esaxerenone and vildagliptin. She presented with haemodynamic instability, necessitating intubation. Despite stabilising haemodynamic parameters within 24 hours, she manifested escalating extremity oedema. At 52 hours after ingestion, mottled skin was observed, along with necrotic alterations in the swollen hands and compartment pressures exceeding 30 mm Hg in all extremities. ACS was diagnosed, leading to fasciotomies. The aetiology is postulated to be drug-induced angio-oedema, possibly intensified by the concurrent overdose of olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan and vildagliptin, each of which has a risk of angio-oedema even at standard dosages. This scenario is a very rare case caused by drug-induced angio-oedema, which underscores the importance of vigilant monitoring to detect ACS in patients with progressing limb oedema.

Development of a highly sensitive and green first-derivative synchronous fluorescence spectroscopic method for the simultaneous quantification of telmisartan and rosuvastatin: Greenness metric assessment and application to a pharmacokinetic study in rats.

Hypertension and hyperlipidemia frequently coexist and are correlated with elevated cardiovascular adverse outcomes. Fixed dose combination tablets containing antihypertensive and antihyperlipidemic drugs have the potential to improve patient compliance. Telmisartan and rosuvastatin fixed dose combination tablet has been recently formulated. This study provided the first fluorescence spectroscopic method for simultaneously quantifying telmisartan and rosuvastatin in tablet dosage form and plasma. The native fluorescence spectra of telmisartan and rosuvastatin completely overlapped, making direct measurement unachievable. However, through the implementation of synchronous fluorescence measurements of telmisartan and rosuvastatin at a Δλ = 60, distinct narrow bands were observed at 358 nm and 375 nm, respectively. Regrettably, the challenge of overlapping remained unresolved. Nevertheless, by converting these synchronous spectra into first-order spectra, the problem of overlapping was completely resolved. This conversion also allowed for the selective quantification of telmisartan and rosuvastatin at 374 nm and 358 nm, respectively. The validity of this method was confirmed in accordance with ICH guidelines, yielding satisfactory results in terms of the validation characteristics. The method demonstrated linear relationships between the response and the studied drugs concentrations in working range of 50-1000 ng/mL for telmisartan and 100-2000 ng/mL for rosuvastatin. The described methodology was applied for the pharmacokinetic study of telmisartan and rosuvastatin in rat plasma after a single oral dose of 4 mg/kg telmisartan and 50 mg/kg rosuvastatin. Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed a moderate drug-drug interaction between the two drugs, which was not considered to be clinically significant. Moreover, the described method was assessed in terms of sensitivity and environmental sustainability against three previously documented methods. The comparison effectively underscores the supremacy of the proposed technique over the documented techniques.

A Case of Trauma-Related Angioedema of the Airway in a Patient on an Angiotensin Receptor Blocker.

BACKGROUND Angioedema is non-pitting edema that occurs in the deep layers of the skin and subcutaneous tissue due to vascular leakage of plasma resulting from 1 of 2 major pathophysiological processes: mast cell-mediated angioedema and bradykinin-mediated angioedema. While it is a well-recognized adverse reaction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the association of angioedema with angiotensin receptor blockers is relatively less studied. Direct local trauma, although rarely, has been suggested to induce angioedema under certain conditions. We present a unique case of direct, local, trauma-related angioedema in a patient on an angiotensin receptor blocker. CASE REPORT The patient, an 83-year-old woman on telmisartan for hypertension, hit her neck against the edge of a chair during a fall. Shortly thereafter, she developed progressive airway compromise due to airway angioedema, as noted on direct laryngoscopy. A contrast CT scan of the neck also noted edema of the periglottic and supraglottic regions. She required intravenous corticosteroid administration and intubation in the emergency room and was successfully extubated 3 days after admission. She had no prior history of angioedema or allergy. We hypothesize that increased levels of circulatory bradykinin in the setting of telmisartan, combined with a local release of bradykinin from trauma, was the main pathophysiologic cause of the angioedema. CONCLUSIONS This case report highlights the rare and often forgotten adverse reaction of angioedema with use of angiotensin receptor blockers and confirms the finding of local trauma as a possible trigger.

Efficacy and safety of standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg in primary hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter phase 3 trial.

The authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and characteristics of patients who respond well to standard dose triple combination therapy including chlorthalidone 25 mg with telmisartan 80 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg in hypertensive patients. This is a multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, randomized trial. Patients are randomized to triple combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 12.5 mg, TEL/AML/CHTD group) or dual combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg, TEL/AML group) treatment and then dose up titration to TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg and TEL80/AML5, respectively. The primary endpoint is the change of mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) at week 8. A Target BP achievement rate, a response rate, and the safety endpoints are also evaluated. Total 374 patients (mean age = 60.9 ± 10.7 years, male = 78.3%) were randomized to the study. The baseline MSSBPs/diastolic BPs were 149.9 ± 12.2/88.5 ± 10.4 mm Hg. After 8 weeks treatment, the change of MSSBPs at week 8 are -19.1 ± 14.9 mm Hg (TEL/AML/CHTD) and -11.4 ± 14.7 mm Hg (TEL/AML) (p < .0001). The achievement rates of target BP (53.8% vs. 37.8%, p = .0017) and responder rate (54.8% vs. 35.6%, p = .0001) at week 8 were significantly higher in TEL/AML/CHTD. There are no serious adverse event and no one discontinued medication due to adverse event. Among the TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg treatment group, patients of female or age ≥ 65 years old showed higher rate of target BP achievement than relatively young male. (61.4 vs. 46.8%, p = .042) Our study showed standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg is efficacious and safe in treatment of primary hypertension. Target BP achievement with triple therapy would be facilitated in female or old age.

Effect of Telmisartan on Walking Performance in Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: The TELEX Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) have reduced lower extremity perfusion, impaired lower extremity skeletal muscle function, and poor walking performance. Telmisartan (an angiotensin receptor blocker) has properties that reverse these abnormalities. Objective: To determine whether telmisartan improves 6-minute walk distance, compared with placebo, in patients with lower extremity PAD at 6-month follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 2 US sites and involving 114 participants. Enrollment occurred between December 28, 2015, and November 9, 2021. Final follow-up occurred on May 6, 2022. Interventions: The trial randomized patients using a 2 × 2 factorial design to compare the effects of telmisartan plus supervised exercise vs telmisartan alone and supervised exercise alone and to compare telmisartan alone vs placebo. Participants with PAD were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: telmisartan plus exercise (n = 30), telmisartan plus attention control (n = 29), placebo plus exercise (n = 28), or placebo plus attention control (n = 27) for 6 months. The originally planned sample size was 240 participants. Due to slower than anticipated enrollment, the primary comparison was changed to the 2 combined telmisartan groups vs the 2 combined placebo groups and the target sample size was changed to 112 participants. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the 6-month change in 6-minute walk distance (minimum clinically important difference, 8-20 m). The secondary outcomes were maximal treadmill walking distance; Walking Impairment Questionnaire scores for distance, speed, and stair climbing; and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning score. The results were adjusted for study site, baseline 6-minute walk distance, randomization to exercise vs attention control, sex, and history of heart failure at baseline. Results: Of the 114 randomized patients (mean age, 67.3 [SD, 9.9] years; 46 were women [40.4%]; and 81 were Black individuals [71.1%]), 105 (92%) completed 6-month follow-up. At 6-month follow-up, telmisartan did not significantly improve 6-minute walk distance (from a mean of 341.6 m to 343.0 m; within-group change: 1.32 m) compared with placebo (from a mean of 352.3 m to 364.8 m; within-group change: 12.5 m) and the adjusted between-group difference was -16.8 m (95% CI, -35.9 m to 2.2 m; P = .08). Compared with placebo, telmisartan did not significantly improve any of the 5 secondary outcomes. The most common serious adverse event was hospitalization for PAD (ie, lower extremity revascularization, amputation, or gangrene). Three participants (5.1%) in the telmisartan group and 2 participants (3.6%) in the placebo group were hospitalized for PAD. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with PAD, telmisartan did not improve 6-minute walk distance at 6-month follow-up compared with placebo. These results do not support telmisartan for improving walking performance in patients with PAD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02593110.

Medicine-Induced Acute Kidney Injury Findings from Spontaneous Reporting Systems, Sequence Symmetry Analysis and a Case-Control Study with a Focus on Medicines Used in Primary Care.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care provides an opportunity to prevent community acquired, medicine or drug-induced acute kidney injury. One of the barriers to proactive prevention of medicine-induced kidney injury in primary care is the lack of a list of nephrotoxic medicines that are most problematic in primary care, particularly one that provides a comparison of risks across medicines. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to consolidate evidence on the risks associated with medicines and acute kidney injury, with a focus on medicines used in primary care. METHOD: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify published studies of all medicines associated with acute kidney injury identified from spontaneous report data. For each medicine positively associated with acute kidney injury, as identified from spontaneous reports, we implemented a sequence symmetry analysis (SSA) and a case-control design to determine the association between the medicine and hospital admission with a primary diagnosis of acute kidney injury (representing community-acquired acute kidney injury). Administrative claims data held by the Australian Government Department of Veterans' Affairs for the study period 2005-2019 were used. RESULTS: We identified 89 medicines suspected of causing acute kidney injury based on spontaneous report data and a reporting odds ratio above 2, from Japan, France and the US. Spironolactone had risk estimates of 3 or more based on spontaneous reports, SSA and case-control methods, while furosemide and trimethoprim with sulfamethoxazole had risk estimates of 1.5 or more. Positive association with SSA and spontaneous reports, but not case control, showed zoledronic acid had risk estimates above 2, while candesartan telmisartan, simvastatin, naproxen and ibuprofen all had risk estimates in SSA between 1.5 and 2. Positive associations with case-control and spontaneous reports, but not SSA, were found for amphotericin B, omeprazole, metformin, amlodipine, ramipril, olmesartan, ciprofloxacin, valaciclovir, mycophenolate and diclofenac. All with the exception of metformin and omeprazole had risk estimates above 2. CONCLUSION: This research highlights a number of medicines that may contribute to acute injury; however, we had an insufficient sample to confirm associations of some medicines. Spironolactone, furosemide, and trimethoprim with sulfamethoxazole are medicines that, in particular, need to be used carefully and monitored closely in patients in the community at risk of acute kidney injury.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose antihypertensive combination of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone: A randomized, double-blind, parallel, phase II trial.

The aim of this clinical trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose triple combinations of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone in patients with essential hypertension. After a 2-week placebo run-in period, 176 patients were randomized to seven treatment groups (placebo, quarter-dose combination, third-dose combination, half-dose combination, amlodipine 5 mg, amlodipine 10 mg, and telmisartan 80 mg) and administered the assigned study drug orally for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the mean sitting systolic blood pressure (BP) (MSSBP) at Week 8. The MSSBP and mean sitting diastolic BP in the quarter-dose and half-dose groups were significantly lower compared to the placebo and amlodipine 5 mg groups, with similar BP-lowering effects observed compared to the amlodipine 10 mg and telmisartan 80 mg groups. However, the third-dose group showed significant BP improvement only compared to the placebo group. A similar pattern was observed for the control rate of hypertension and response rates. Additional analysis was conducted after correcting for gender and age effects, and, as a result, the third-dose group showed similar results with regard to the BP-lowering effect as the quarter-dose and half-dose groups. In terms of safety, no special adverse events and clinically significant results were noted, and all dose groups of the triple combination are considered safe for use in essential hypertension patients. The current findings indicated that low-dose triple combination of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone over 8 weeks effectively improved the BP-lowering effect in patients with essential hypertension without any safety concerns.

Telmisartan as an add-on treatment for dogs with refractory idiopathic epilepsy: a nonrandomized, uncontrolled, open-label clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect on seizure frequency of add-on telmisartan treatment in dogs with refractory idiopathic epilepsy. ANIMALS: 11 client-owned dogs with idiopathic epilepsy and ≥ 2 generalized seizures/mon that were currently being treated with ≥ 2 antiepileptic drugs. PROCEDURES: Telmisartan was administered at a dosage of 0.25 to 1 mg/kg, PO, every 12 hours for 4 to 16 months. Seizure frequencies before and during telmisartan treatment were recorded. RESULTS: 10 dogs completed the 4-month treatment protocol. One dog was excluded owing to a transient increase in serum creatinine concentration; no adverse effects of telmisartan were observed in the remaining 10 dogs. A reduction in seizure frequency greater than an estimated expected placebo effect of 30% was evident in 7 of the 10 dogs. Long-term (12 to 16 months) follow-up information was available for 6 dogs, of which 4 had a further reduction in seizure frequency. Differences in seizure frequency were not statistically significant. No significant difference was found in serum phenobarbital concentration throughout the treatment period in the 7 dogs that were tested. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Telmisartan has the potential to reduce seizure frequency when administered as an add-on antiepileptic drug in dogs with refractory idiopathic epilepsy. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial is needed to determine the true efficacy of telmisartan. On the basis of our results, a sample size of 54 dogs with refractory idiopathic epilepsy would be needed.

Diarrhea and angiotensin II receptor blockers: Is there any difference between the different drugs?

Diarrhea is an adverse drug reaction (ADR) widely reported with olmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB). Isolated case reports described this ADR with other ARBs. The present study was performed to investigate if, among the different ARBs, some drugs are more at risk of diarrhea than others. Using VigiBase®, the WHO pharmacovigilance database, we performed a disproportionality analysis (case/noncase study). Cases were reports with the MedDRA PT term « diarrhea ¼ and noncases all other reports registered during the same period in Vigibase® from April 6, 1995 to December 31, 2020. After comparison of ARBs and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), the main analysis was a comparison of the diarrhea reporting risk between each ARB and the seven other ARBs. Results are reported as reporting odds ratio (ROR) adjusted on age, gender, exposure to antihypertensive, and antidiabetic drugs with their 95% confidence interval. Among the 22,429,334 deduplicated reports registered in VigiBase® during the study period, 73,507 involved ARBs, including 2119 diarrhea. The reporting risk of diarrhea was higher with ARBs than with ACEIs (ROR = 2.06 (1.55-2.17)). Diarrhea with ARBs mainly occurred in females with a mean age of 65 years. After exclusion of olmesartan (to minimize a notoriety bias), two ARBs were significantly associated with diarrhea: eprosartan (ROR = 1.93 (1.32-2.72) and telmisartan (ROR = 1.41 (1.23-1.62) but not the six others. The present study found first that diarrhea is more frequently reported with ARBs than with ACEIs and second that the risk of diarrhea differs according to the different ARBs. Diarrhea with ARBs is not a class effect.

Telmisartan (and/or nitrosamine) - induced occult melanoma: first reported case in world literature.

Introduction: The known connections between the terms 'sartans' and 'melanoma' has grown recently in the clinical field, suggesting that the relationship between these concepts is very likely to be significant, rather than hypothetical or unfeasible. This is because: 1) the presence of angiotensin receptors in melanoma tissue, melanocytes and skin is a known fact; 2) the influence of sartans on the processes of melanogenesis has already been presented in recent published scientific papers; 3) key in vitro studies have shown that angiotensin receptor blockers (sartans) could potentiate carcinogenesis in the direction of melanoma and metastases; and 4) clinical examples of the occurrence of melanoma after starting therapy with sartans have become numerous and difficult to ignore.Areas covered: We report the first case of occult melanoma in an 87-year-old Bulgarian patient, this manifested in the form of a solitary metastasis on the left arm, which occurred after long-term therapy with telmisartan.Expert opinion: The fact that nitrosamines have a proven carcinogenic effect and are the cause of heterogeneous neoplasms shows that they have the potential to be possible melanoma triggers. The multifactorial pathogenesis of melanoma could certainly be clarified after the 'crystallization' of this currently serious issue.

Telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide-induced nevus-associated cutaneous melanoma: first report in the medical literature.

Introduction: The treatment of hypertension with certain groups of drugs may be problematic, particularly because certain drugs are capable of potentiating carcinogenesis. The presence of various receptors or components of the renin - angiotensin system in the skin, and particularly in melanocytes, determines the possible influence on this tissue by the so-called angiotensin receptor blockers or sartans. Thiazide diuretics can further influence the processes of carcinogenesis in all forms of skin cancer - melanocytic and non-melanocytic.Areas covered: We present a 67-year-old patient treated for a period of 3 years with a combined preparation containing Telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide 80 mg/12.5 mg. Within 2 years, the patient observed the rapid development of a nevus that progressed to melanoma and was subsequently identified histopathologically as nevus-associated cutaneous melanoma with a 0.6 mm thickness, Clark IV. Following surgical treatment, no tumor progression has occurred to date. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a patient who developed a nevus-associated cutaneous melanoma after combination therapy with generic sartan and hydrochlorothiazide.Expert opinion: We discuss the diverse but mutually potentiating pro-carcinogenic effects of this class of agents, potentially leading to the development of cutaneous melanoma.

Telmisartan Exacerbates Cisplatin-Induced Nephrotoxicity in a Mouse Model.

Cisplatin (CDDP; cis-diamine dichloroplatinum)-induced nephrotoxicity is the main reason for dose limitations, which can reduce the efficacy of cancer treatment. Lower blood pressure and administration of renin angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors have been reported as factors that exacerbate CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity; however, the detailed mechanisms remain unknown and the results of previous studies are conflicting. In this study, we examined the influence of various hypotensive drugs, including RAS inhibitors and calcium channel blockers, on CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity in BALB/c mice. The mice were divided into nine groups: (1) CDDP group (15 mg/kg CDDP), (2) AML group (5 mg/kg amlodipine), (3) ENA group (2.5 mg/kg enalapril), (4) telmisartan (TEL) group (10 mg/kg telmisartan), (5) LOS group (10 mg/kg losartan), (6) CDDP + AML group, (7) CDDP + ENA group, (8) CDDP + TEL group, and (9) CDDP + LOS group. Nephrotoxicity was evaluated by measuring serum creatinine (CRE) and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels. In addition, the kidney sections were stained with Masson's trichrome and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated deoxyuridine triphosphate nick-end labeling (TUNEL) to assess the renal fibrosis area and apoptotic area. Serum CRE and BUN levels were increased in the CDDP + ENA, CDDP + LOS, and CDDP + TEL groups compared to those in the CDDP alone group, and the CDDP + AML group showed an increasing trend. However, there was no correlation between ∆CRE or ∆BUN levels and ∆ systolic blood pressure. The CDDP + TEL group showed a significant increase in the renal fibrosis area. These results suggest that exacerbation of CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity is not correlated with systolic blood pressure but is associated with administration of RAS inhibitors, particularly TEL.

Telmisartan-induced sprue-like enteropathy: a case report.

A possible case of sprue-like enteropathy (SLE) induced by the use of telmisartan is reported. Telmisartan is an angiotensin-receptor II blocker (type 1) used for the treatment of hypertension. Several cases of SLE associated with olmesartan and other drugs of the same group have been reported. In all cases, SLE resolved following therapy withdrawal. We describe the case of an 80-year-old woman who presented with diarrhoea and abdominal pain. In the past 5 years she had been treated with telmisartan 40 mg once a day for hypertension, so we hypothesised that symptoms might be caused by telmisartan. After treatment discontinuation, diarrhoea disappeared. Three causality algorithms were applied and revealed a possible or likely causal relationship. At present, the patient remains asymptomatic. There is a causal relationship between the use of telmisartan and SLE. This association should be taken into account by physicians when prescribing and reviewing drug therapies.

Pioglitazone and PPAR-γ modulating treatment in hypertensive and type 2 diabetic patients after ischemic stroke: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) modulating treatment may have cardiovascular benefits in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients after ischemic stroke (IS). However, whether there are additional benefits from intensive PPAR-γ modulating treatments in Asian patients with T2DM and hypertension (HTN) after IS remains unknown. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2013, patients admitted due to IS were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. Patients with T2DM and HTN using angiotensin receptor blockers were further included. Eligible patients were divided into two groups: (1) pioglitazone and (2) non-pioglitazone oral anti-diabetic agent groups. Propensity score matching (1:2) was used to balance the distribution of baseline characteristics, stroke severity and medications. The primary outcome was recurrent IS. Subgroup analysis for recurrent IS in pioglitazone and/or telmisartan users, the trend of IS risks across different PPAR-γ intensity treatments, and dose-dependent outcomes across different pioglitazone possession ratios were further studied. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and p < 0.1 for clinical outcomes and interaction of subgroup analyses, respectively. RESULTS: There were 3190 and 32,645 patients in the pioglitazone and non-pioglitazone groups. Patients of the pioglitazone group had a lower risk of recurrent IS (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval 0.84-0.99). Pioglitazone was also associated with reduced recurrent IS in patients who also used telmisartan (p for interaction = 0.071). A graded correlation was found a borderline significant trend between the intensity of PPAR-γ therapy and following IS (p = 0.076). The dose-dependent outcome also showed that a borderline significant trend that higher pioglitazone possession ratio was associated with a lower risk of recurrent IS (p = 0.068). CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that the use of pioglitazone in type 2 diabetic and hypertensive IS patients is associated with fewer recurrent IS events in an Asian population. Concurrent telmisartan use or a higher pioglitazone possession ratio may have a trend of increased pleiotropic effects, which could possibly be related to higher PPAR-γ effects. Future studies are warranted to confirm or refute the clinical effects and the possible mechanism of more intensive PPAR-γ-modulating treatments.

Effects of azilsartan compared with telmisartan on insulin resistance in patients with essential hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus: An open-label, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on non-clinical data, it is expected that azilsartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, will help improve insulin resistance in addition to its hypotensive action. The present study is aimed to explore the effect of azilsartan compared to telmisartan on insulin sensitivity in hypertensive patients in the clinical setting. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group exploratory study was conducted in Japan. We randomized adult patients (≥20 years old) with grade I or II essential hypertension and coexisting type 2 diabetes (1:1) to receive either oral azilsartan (20 mg/day;17 patients) or telmisartan (40 mg/day;16 patients) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the homeostasis model assessment ratio of insulin resistance (HOMA-R) from the baseline at the end of the treatment period. We also evaluated its safety and efficacy on other diabetes-related variables and blood pressure. FINDINGS: The mean changes in HOMA-R at the end of treatment were 0.22 (95% CI, -1.09-1.52) in the azilsartan group and -0.23 (95% CI, -0.72-0.27) in the telmisartan group. We found no clinically remarkable changes between the groups in diabetes-related variables such as fasting blood glucose, fasting insulin, HbA1c (NGSP), HOMA-ß, or 1,5-anhydroglucitol. Reductions in clinic systolic and diastolic blood pressure were observed at week 4 and the reduced levels were maintained throughout the treatment period in both groups. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed. Only one drug-related TEAE (mild decrease in blood pressure) was reported in one patient in the azilsartan group. CONCLUSION: Neither azilsartan nor telmisartan had any clinically remarkable effects on insulin resistance parameters when administered for 12 weeks to patients with grade I or II essential hypertension and coexisting type 2 diabetes mellitus. Azilsartan (20 mg/day) and telmisartan (40 mg/day) exerted comparable antihypertensive effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02079805.

Safety and efficacy of orally administered telmisartan for the treatment of systemic hypertension in cats: Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Information regarding the efficacy of telmisartan for feline systemic arterial hypertension is limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of PO administered telmisartan solution in hypertensive cats. ANIMALS: Client-owned cats with indirect systolic arterial blood pressure (SBP) of 160-200 mm Hg, based on multiple measurements. METHODS: This multicenter trial consisted a 28-day, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, efficacy phase and a 154-day extended-use telmisartan phase. Hypertensive cats were randomly assigned to receive 1.5 mg telmisartan/kg PO q12h for 14 days, followed by 2 mg telmisartan/kg PO q24h, or equivalent volume of placebo. Systolic blood pressure was measured on days 0, 14, and 28. Change in SBP compared to baseline was calculated for days 14 and 28. Telmisartan efficacy was defined as significant decrease in SBP at day 14 compared to placebo and a clinically relevant (>20 mm Hg) decrease in SBP at day 28. RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty-one cats were included. On day 14, least squares mean (95% confidence interval) SBP decrease was significantly larger in telmisartan-treated (-23.3 mm Hg [-28.2 to -18.3]) versus placebo-treated (-7.5 mm Hg [-13.6 to -1.5]) cats (P = .0005). On day 28, telmisartan treatment resulted in a clinically relevant SBP decrease (-23.9 mm Hg [-27.8 to -20.0]), whereas placebo did not (-11.6 mm Hg [-17.4 to -5.9 mm Hg]). The decrease in SBP persisted over the 6-month trial in telmisartan-treated cats. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Telmisartan significantly decreased SBP to a clinically relevant extent and was well tolerated in hypertensive cats.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Telmisartan/Amlodipine and Rosuvastatin Coadministration in Hypertensive Patients with Hyperlipidemia: A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Study.

PURPOSE: Dyslipidemia and hypertension increase the risk for cardiovascular disease. Combination therapy improves patient compliance. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and tolerability of the combination therapies telmisartan/amlodipine + rosuvastatin, telmisartan/amlodipine, and telmisartan + rosuvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia and hypertension. METHODS: In this Phase III, multicenter, 8-week randomized, double-blind study, participants with hypertension and dyslipidemia (defined as a sitting systolic blood pressure [sitSBP] of ≥140 mm Hg, a low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C] level of ≤250 mg/dL, and a triglyceride level of ≤400 mg/dL) were screened. After a 4-week washout/run-in period involving therapeutic lifestyle changes and telmisartan 80 mg once a day, eligible patients had a sitSBP of ≥140 mm Hg and met the LDL-C level criteria according to the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III cardiovascular disease risk category. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: (1) telmisartan/amlodipine 80/10 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg (TAR group); (2) telmisartan/amlodipine 80/10 mg (TA group); or (3) telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg (TR group). The primary efficacy end points were the percentage changes from baseline in LDL-C in the TAR and TA groups and the mean changes in sitSBP in the TAR and TR groups at week 8 compared to baseline. Continuous variables were compared using the unpaired t test or the Wilcoxon rank sum model, and categorical variables were compared using the χ2 or Fisher exact test. Tolerability was assessed based on adverse events found on physical examination including vital sign measurements, laboratory evaluations, and 12-lead ECG. FINDINGS: A total of 134 patients were enrolled. The least squares mean percentage changes in LDL-C at 8 weeks after administration of the drug compared to baseline were -51.9% (3.0%) in the TAR group and -3.2% (2.9%) in the TA group (P < 0.001). At 8 weeks after baseline, the least squares mean (SE) changes sitSBP were -28.3 (2.4) mm Hg in the TAR group and -10.7 (2.1) mm Hg in the TR group (P < 0.001). The prevalence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 15.0%, 25.0%, and 12.2% in the TAR, TA, and TR groups, respectively; those of adverse drug reactions were 15.0%, 22.7%, and 10.2%. None of the differences in rates were significant among 3 groups. IMPLICATIONS: Triple therapy with TAR can be an effective treatment in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension. The TAR combination has value for hypertensive patients with hyperlipidemia in terms of convenience, tolerability, and efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03566316.

Even Short-Term Telmisartan Treatment Ameliorated Insulin Resistance But Had No Influence on Serum Adiponectin and Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha Levels in Hypertensive Patients with Metabolic Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the effect of short-term telmisartan usage in addition to lifestyle changes such as diet and exercise on insulin resistance, lipid metabolism, and serum adiponectin and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) levels in hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS). METHODS: A total of 36 hypertensive patients with MetS were randomized to telmisartan and control groups in an open-labeled prospective study. RESULTS: There were significant decreases in anthropometric variables of patients according to baseline measurements in both groups at the end of the study. Serum insulin level and insulin resistance assessed by homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance were decreased significantly in the telmisartan group (P = 0.040 and P = 0.034, respectively) compared with the controls, while there was no statistically significant change in the lipid profiles of the two groups. Serum adiponectin level was increased by 19.1% ± 41.7% in the telmisartan group, but intergroup analysis revealed no significant change. There was also no significant change in serum TNF-α level in either group. CONCLUSION: It has been observed that even short-term telmisartan treatment had favorable effects on insulin resistance and glucose metabolism compared with lifestyle changes alone. The fundamental effect of telmisartan treatment on insulin resistance renders it a good therapeutic option for hypertensive patients with MetS.

Efficacy and Safety of Triple Therapy With Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin in Patients With Dyslipidemia and Hypertension: The Jeil Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Fixed-dose combination therapy with telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin is needed in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia for better adherence and cost-effectiveness than free-equivalent combination therapies. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin versus telmisartan plus amlodipine or telmisartan plus rosuvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. METHODS: The Jeil Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin Randomized Clinical Trial (J-TAROS-RCT) was an 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, Phase III clinical trial conducted at 9 hospitals in Korea. After a run-in period of >4 weeks, patients who fulfilled the criteria of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines were eligible for randomization to receive 1 of 3 treatments for 8 weeks: (1) telmisartan/amlodipine 80 mg/10 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg, (2) telmisartan/amlodipine 80 mg/10 mg, or (3) telmisartan 80 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg. The primary end point was efficacy evaluation of combination therapy with telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin by comparing the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) and mean percentage change in LDL-C from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment. Adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs were assessed in all patients. FINDINGS: Among 148 patients, the changes in msSBP from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment were a mean (SD) of -24.41 (2.38) versus -9.31 (2.36) mm Hg in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and telmisartan/rosuvastatin groups, respectively. Significantly more participants achieved the target BP at week 8 in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin group (41 patients [87.2%]) than in the telmisartan/rosuvastatin group (24 [50.0%], P < 0.001). The changes in mean (SD) LDL-C at 8 weeks compared with baseline values were -57.59% (11.59%) versus 6.08% (20.98%) in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and telmisartan/amlodipine groups, respectively. The percentages of patients who achieved the target LDL-C according to their risk factors after 8 weeks of treatment were 97.87% vs 6.12% in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and the telmisartan/amlodipine groups (P < 0.0001), respectively. No significant differences were found in the incidence of overall AEs and adverse drug reactions, and serious AEs were comparable among 3 groups. IMPLICATIONS: Fixed-dose combinations of telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin decreased BP and LDL-C in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. The safety and tolerability profiles of fixed-dose telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin combination therapy were comparable with those of telmisartan plus amlodipine or telmisartan plus rosuvastatin. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03088254.