Oral lixivaptan effectively increases serum sodium concentrations in outpatients with euvolemic hyponatremia.

Hyponatremia is the most common electrolyte disorder in clinical practice. Its incidence increases with age and it is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Recently, the vaptans, antagonists of the arginine vasopressin pathway, have shown promise for safe treatment of hyponatremia. Here we evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oral lixivaptan, a selective vasopressin V2-receptor antagonist, for treatment of nonhospitalized individuals with euvolemic hyponatremia (sodium less than 135 mmol/l) in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study. About half of the 206 patients were elderly in a chronic care setting. Of these patients, 52 were given a placebo and 154 were given 25-100 mg per day lixivaptan, titrated based on the daily serum sodium measurements. Compared with placebo (0.8 mmol/l), the serum sodium concentration significantly increased by 3.2 mmol/l from baseline to day 7 (primary efficacy endpoint) with lixivaptan treatment. A significantly greater proportion of patients that received lixivaptan achieved normal serum sodium (39.4%) by day 7 relative to placebo (12.2%). Overall, lixivaptan was considered safe and well-tolerated. Thus, oral lixivaptan can be safely initiated in the outpatient setting and effectively increases serum sodium concentrations in outpatients with euvolemic hyponatremia.

Abrogation of postprandial triglyceridemia with dual PPAR α/γ agonist in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

AIMS: Lowering postprandial lipemia may mitigate cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetic dyslipidemia. This study was aimed to investigate whether saroglitazar suppresses postprandial lipemia in patients with diabetes and dyslipidemia. METHODS: This was a 12-week, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study of saroglitazar in patients with diabetes and dyslipidemia. Thirty patients were randomized (1:1) to receive saroglitazar 4 mg or placebo orally once daily with metformin for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in plasma triglyceride (TG) area under the curve (AUC) on a standardized 8-h fat tolerance test. RESULTS: Thirty participants were randomized for interventions and eventually data of 19 participants qualified for per protocol analyses. Mean (SD) age in saroglitazar was 53.1 (8.8) years and 54.9 (7.7) years in placebo group. After 12 weeks, saroglitazar significantly lowered postprandial TG-AUC by - 458.3 (144.0) (- 25.7%, 95% CI - 765.1 to - 151.4) versus an increase of + 10.9 (157.9) (+ 0.5%, 95% CI - 325.6 to 347.3) mg/dL h in placebo group (P < 0.05). Saroglitazar lowered postprandial TG incremental AUC versus placebo: - 329.4 (89.9) (- 59%) versus + 80.4 (99.4) (+ 10%) mg/dL h (P < 0.05). HbA1c (%) decreased by - 0.36 (0.42) in the saroglitazar group as compared to an increase of + 1.26 (0.46) (P < 0.05) with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The saroglitazar treatment significantly improved postprandial TGs in people with diabetic dyslipidemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry of India; trial Registration No.: CTRI/2015/06/005845 and Date of registration: June 02, 2015.

Management of hypertension with the fixed combination of perindopril and amlodipine in daily clinical practice: results from the STRONG prospective, observational, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Current clinical guidelines recognize that the use of more than one agent is necessary to achieve target BP in the majority of patients. The ASCOT-BPLA trial demonstrated that the free combination of amlodipine and perindopril effectively controlled BP and was better than a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist (beta-blocker)/diuretic combination in reducing total mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a fixed combination of perindopril and amlodipine in the clinical setting. STUDY DESIGN: The STRONG (SafeTy & efficacy analysis of coveRsyl amlodipine in uncOntrolled and Newly diaGnosed hypertension) study was a prospective, observational, multicenter trial. SETTING: This was a naturalistic, real-world, clinic-based, outpatient study involving 336 general practitioners/primary care physicians in 65 cities in India. PATIENTS: Adults aged 40-70 years with newly diagnosed/untreated stage 2 hypertension (BP >/=160/100 mmHg), hypertension uncontrolled with monotherapy (BP >140/90 mmHg), or hypertension inadequately managed with another combination therapy. INTERVENTION: Fixed combination perindopril 4 mg/amlodipine 5 mg once daily for 60 days. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE: The primary outcomes were the mean change in BP from baseline and the proportion of patients achieving adequate BP control (180 mmHg at baseline (newly diagnosed: n = 50; uncontrolled on monotherapy: n = 53; inadequately managed on combination therapy: n = 58), BP was reduced by 63.2 +/- 32.5/29.0 +/- 21.9 mmHg (p < 0.0001) at day 60. The fixed combination was safe and well tolerated. All 1175 patients completing the 60-day study (94%) adhered to their treatment regimen. CONCLUSION: Fixed combination perindopril/amlodipine was found to be an effective and well tolerated antihypertensive treatment, with an excellent rate of treatment adherence in the clinical setting. Fixed combination perindopril/amlodipine is expected to be useful in the management of hypertension in primary healthcare, with a positive impact on treatment adherence.

Comparative clinical trial of S-pantoprazole versus racemic pantoprazole in the treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of S-pantoprazole (20 mg once a day) versus racemic pantoprazole (40 mg once a day) in the treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: This multi-centre, randomized, double-blind clinical trial consisted of 369 patients of either sex suffering from GERD. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either one tablet (20 mg) of S-pantoprazole once a day (test group) or 40 mg racemic pantoprazole once a day (reference group) for 28 d. Patients were evaluated for reduction in baseline on d 0, GERD symptom score on d 14 and 28, occurrence of any adverse effect during the course of therapy. Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy was performed in 54 patients enrolled at one of the study centers at baseline and on d 28. RESULTS: Significant reduction in the scores (mean and median) for heart burn (P < 0.0001), acid regurgitation (P < 0.0001), bloating (P < 0.0001), nausea (P < 0.0001) and dysphagia (P < 0.001) was achieved in both groups on d 14 with further reduction on continuing the therapy till 28 d. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients showing improvement in acid regurgitation and bloating on d 14 and 28 (P = 0.004 for acid regurgitation; P = 0.03 for bloating) and heart burn on d 28 (P = 0.01) between the two groups, with a higher proportion in the test group than in the reference group. Absolute risk reductions for heartburn/acid regurgitation/bloating were approximately 15% on d 14 and 10% on d 28. The relative risk reductions were 26%-33% on d 14 and 15% on d 28. GI endoscopy showed no significant difference in healing of esophagitis (P = 1) and gastric erosions (P = 0.27) between the two groups. None of the patients in either group reported any adverse effect during the course of therapy. CONCLUSION: In GERD, S-pantoprazole (20 mg) is more effective than racemic pantoprazole (40 mg) in improving symptoms of heartburn, acid regurgitation, bloating and equally effective in healing esophagitis and gastric erosions. The relative risk reduction is 15%-33%. Both drugs are safe and well tolerated.

S-amlodipine--the 2007 clinical review.

S-amlodipine is the only vaso-active enantiomer of amlodipine. This article reviews the published data in nearly 5000 patients. Randomised controlled trials of S-amlodipine at half the dose of racemate in the treatment of hypertension, have shown it to be as effective as racemic amlodipine. The postmarketing surveillance studies (n = 4089) of S-amlodipine confirmed its antihypertensive efficacy and showed that the incidence of peripheral oedema is negligible with S-amlodipine compared to racemic amlodipine. Further, the patients with peripheral oedema who were switched over from racemic amlodipine to S-amlodipine resolved their oedema associated with the racemate, while sustaining the blood pressure control. Subgroup analyses showed S-amlodipine to be effective and safe in elderly hypertensives and isolated systolic hypertension patients. A clinical study in normotensive angina patients confirmed the anti-anginal efficacy of S-amlodipine at half the dose of racemate. Fixed-dose combinations of S-amlodipine with atenolol and S-amlodipine with hydrochlorothiazide have been shown to be effective and well tolerated in clinical practice. In the light of its efficacy and favourable tolerability profile, S-amlodipine used alone or in combination with other antihypertensive or anti-anginal drugs, is a valuable treatment option in the management of hypertension and angina.