Association of Low-Dose Triple Combination Therapy With Therapeutic Inertia and Prescribing Patterns in Patients With Hypertension: A Secondary Analysis of the TRIUMPH Trial.
Amlodipine
/ administration & dosage
Antihypertensive Agents
/ administration & dosage
Blood Pressure
/ drug effects
Chlorthalidone
/ administration & dosage
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Drug Prescriptions
Drug Therapy, Combination
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Hypertension
/ drug therapy
Male
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Telmisartan
/ administration & dosage
Treatment Outcome
Journal
JAMA cardiology
ISSN: 2380-6591
Titre abrégé: JAMA Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101676033
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2020
01 11 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
7
2020
medline:
3
2
2021
entrez:
28
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies are being increasingly recommended for initial or early management of patients with hypertension, as they reduce treatment complexity and potentially reduce therapeutic inertia. To investigate the association of antihypertensive triple drug FDC therapy with therapeutic inertia and prescribing patterns compared with usual care. A post hoc analysis of the Triple Pill vs Usual Care Management for Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension (TRIUMPH) study, a randomized clinical trial of 700 patients with hypertension, was conducted. Patients were enrolled from 11 urban hospital clinics in Sri Lanka from February 2016 to May 2017; follow-up ended in October 2017. Data were analyzed from September to November 2019. Once-daily FDC antihypertensive pill (telmisartan, 20 mg; amlodipine, 2.5 mg; and chlorthalidone, 12.5 mg) or usual care. Therapeutic inertia, defined as not intensifying therapy in those with blood pressure (BP) above target, was assessed at baseline and during follow-up visits. Prescribing patterns were characterized by BP-lowering drug class and treatment regimen potency. Predictors of therapeutic inertia were assessed with binomial logistic regression. Of the 700 included patients, 403 (57.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 56 (11) years. Among patients who did not reach the BP target, therapeutic inertia was more common in the triple pill group compared with the usual care group at the week 6 visit (92 of 106 [86.8%] vs 124 of 194 [63.9%]; P < .001) and week 12 visit (81 of 90 [90%] vs 116 of 179 [64.8%]; P < .001). At the end of the study, 221 of 318 patients in the triple pill group (69.5%) and 182 of 329 patients in the usual care group (55.3%) reached BP targets. Among those who received treatment intensification, the increase in estimated regimen potency was greater in the triple pill group compared with the usual care group at baseline (predicted mean [SD] increase in regimen potency: triple pill, 15 [6] mm Hg; usual care, 10 [5] mm Hg; P < .001), whereas there were no significant differences at the week 6 or at week 12 visit. Clinic systolic BP level was the only consistent predictor of treatment intensification during follow-up. During follow-up, there were 23 vs 54 unique treatment regimens per 100 treated patients in the triple pill vs usual care groups, respectively (P < .001). Triple pill FDC therapy was associated with greater rates of therapeutic inertia compared with usual care. Despite this, triple pill FDC therapy substantially simplified prescribing patterns and improved 6-month BP control rates compared with usual care. Further improvements in hypertension control could be achieved by addressing therapeutic inertia among the minority of patients who do not achieve BP control after initial FDC therapy. ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12612001120864.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32717045
pii: 2768739
doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.2739
pmc: PMC7376473
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antihypertensive Agents
0
Amlodipine
1J444QC288
Chlorthalidone
Q0MQD1073Q
Telmisartan
U5SYW473RQ
Banques de données
ANZCTR
['ACTRN12612001120864']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1219-1226Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Arch Intern Med. 2007 Jan 22;167(2):141-7
pubmed: 17242314
Lancet. 2017 Sep 16;390(10100):1345-1422
pubmed: 28919119
JAMA. 2018 Aug 14;320(6):566-579
pubmed: 30120478
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Feb 15;205:147-156
pubmed: 26736090
BMJ. 2009 May 19;338:b1665
pubmed: 19454737
J Hypertens. 2004 Dec;22(12):2379-86
pubmed: 15614033
BMJ. 2014 May 27;348:g3318
pubmed: 24868083
Hypertension. 2018 Jun;71(6):e13-e115
pubmed: 29133356
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 17;8(8):e022317
pubmed: 30121609
Am Heart J. 2014 Feb;167(2):127-32
pubmed: 24439972
Lancet. 2019 Aug 24;394(10199):613-615
pubmed: 31327567
JAMA. 2017 Jan 10;317(2):165-182
pubmed: 28097354
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2006 Dec;8(12):865-72
pubmed: 17170612
Hypertension. 2009 Apr;53(4):646-53
pubmed: 19237683
JAMA. 2013 Sep 4;310(9):918-29
pubmed: 24002278
Cardiol Clin. 2010 Nov;28(4):609-22
pubmed: 20937445
Semergen. 2013 Jan-Feb;39(1):3-11
pubmed: 23517891
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2015 Jul;22(7):920-30
pubmed: 24676715
J Hypertens. 2013 Aug;31(8):1702-13
pubmed: 23743804
J Hypertens. 2013 Aug;31(8):1537-8
pubmed: 23822927
N Engl J Med. 2019 Sep 19;381(12):1114-1123
pubmed: 31532959
Eur Heart J. 2018 Sep 1;39(33):3021-3104
pubmed: 30165516
Hypertension. 2006 Mar;47(3):345-51
pubmed: 16432045
Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 2018 Jun;12(6):169-174
pubmed: 29546816
J Hum Hypertens. 2009 Mar;23(3):151-9
pubmed: 18784735
Circulation. 2019 Nov 26;140(22):1776-1778
pubmed: 31765254