Clinica Cayanga Medical Resources

Clinical Updates


Clinical Updates
Alzheimer's Disease
Arthritis
Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
Depression
Diabetes Mellitus
Dyspepsia
Erectile Dysfunction
Fatty Liver
Gallstone
Hepatitis
Hypertension
Lung Cancer
Mesothelioma
Metabolic Syndrome
Obesity
Prostate Cancer
Stroke
Tinnitus
 
Medical Library
Breaking Medical News
Clinical Tools
Dermatology
Diabetes Corner
Evidence-Based Medicine
Free Medical Books
Free Medical Journal
History Taking and Physical Examination
Medical Journal (popular)
Medical Notes
Medical Organizations
Palm Tools
Medical Physiology (Lecture)
Medical Resources
Medical Search
Online Clinical Calculator
 
 

 

Calcium Channel Blocker (NORVASC) plus ACE inhibitor (ACEON) better than diuretic beta-blocker in high-risk pts with HTN (ASCOT)

 


Clinical question
Are newer antihypertensive medications better at preventing cardiovascular events than older agents in high-risk patients?

Bottom line
In this study, patients with hypertension and at least 3 additional cardiac risk factors have slightly fewer deaths from all causes, slightly fewer strokes, and were slightly less likely to develop diabetes if they were treated with amlodipine plus perindopril than if they were treated with atenolol and bendroflumethiazide. One would need to treat between 60 and 1000 high-risk patients for a median of 5.5 years with amlodipine instead of atenolol to prevent one additional death.

Reference
Dahlof B, Sever PS, Poulter NR, et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;366:895-906.

Study design: Randomized controlled trial (nonblinded)

Setting: Outpatient (any)

Synopsis
The management of hypertension is getting confusing. The Seventh Joint National Commission recommends that most patients with hypertension be managed with a thiazide diuretic. Additionally, the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)* demonstrated conclusively that patients with hypertension are better off when treated with diuretics: patients taking amlodipine did not fare as well. However, a recent systematic review** also showed that atenolol was no more effective than placebo in preventing cardiovascular complications. In the ASCOT study, more than 19,000 patients between the ages of 40 years and 79 years with untreated or inadequately treated hypertension and at least 3 additional cardiac risk factors were randomly assigned (concealed allocation) to open-label amlodipine (Norvasc) or atenolol. Depending on response, the patients were also placed on perindopril (Aceon) or bendroflumethiazide (Corzide). The goal was for blood pressure to be lower than 140/90 (130/80 for patients with diabetes). In reality, the study arms should be considered as combination therapy since in each group, approximately half needed 2 drugs by the second year of the study. The main outcome, assessed via intention to treat, was the combined end point of nonfatal myocardial infarction and fatal coronary artery disease. All study outcomes were evaluated by personnel blinded to allocation. After a median follow-up of 5.5 years, an independent safety monitoring committee halted the trial early because of a small increased mortality in the atenolol-based treatment group (7.7% for amlodipine versus 8.5% for atenolol; number needed to treat = 115; 95% CI, 61-1012). Among the secondary end points, patients in the amlodipine group had fewer strokes (3% vs 4%) and were less likely to develop diabetes (6% vs 8%). There was also a reduction in procedures in the amlodipine group, although this was a post hoc analysis that is probably best used merely to generate additional hypotheses for additional study. Why is it that patients taking amlodipine in the ALLHATwere worse off, but in this study they fared better? Both studies included patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease (ALLHAT patients had 1 cardiac risk factor beyond age and hypertension compared with 3 additional risk factors in ASCOT); ALLHAT, with more than 30,000 patients, was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Pfizer with medications provided by other manufacturers; and ASCOT included patients from the United Kingdom and Scandinavia, while ALLHAT was conducted in North American centers. But I'm not sure any of these explain the differences. Perhaps a better explanation is that since atenolol appears to be no better than placebo in lowering blood pressure or in improving outcomes, ASCOT compares, in essence, 2 active drugs against 1. * ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs. diuretic. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002;288:2981-97. ** Carlberg B, Samuelsson O, Lindholm LH. Atenolol in hypertension: Is it a wise choice? Lancet 2004; 364:1684-89.

 

 

   

Home | Introduction | Scheduling a Visit| Laboratory Work Reaching Us | Map to our Office | About the Doctors

 

 

 ©2005 Clinica Cayanga. All rights reserved.