Abstract
This study was designed to compare the clinical efficacy of two calcium channel blocker–based combination therapies with an angiotensin receptor blocker in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. A 16-week, double-blind, parallel-arm, randomized clinical trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of controlled release nifedipine (nifedipine CR) plus valsartan vs. that of amlodipine plus valsartan. The primary endpoint was the target blood pressure achievement rate. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to nifedipine CR–based or amlodipine-based treatment groups. Patients were examined every 4 weeks to determine whether the blood pressure had reached the target level. When the target level was not achieved, the drug regimen was changed; when the target blood pressure was achieved, the same study medication was continued. A total of 505 patients were enrolled in the study (nifedipine CR group: 245 cases; amlodipine group: 260 cases). After 16 weeks of treatment, blood pressure was significantly reduced in both groups, but to a larger extent in the nifedipine CR group than in the amlodipine group (p<0.01). The target blood pressure achievement rate was also significantly higher in the nifedipine CR group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of drug-related adverse events between the groups. These results indicate that the nifedipine CR–based combination therapy was superior to the amlodipine-based therapy for decreasing blood pressure and achieving the target blood pressure in patients with essential hypertension.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Kannel WB, Casteili WP, McNamara PM, McKee PA, Feinleib M : Role of blood pressure in the development of congestive heart failure. The Framingham Study. N Engl J Med 1972; 287: 781–787.
MacMahon S, Peto R, Cutler J, et al: Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 1, Prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias. Lancet 1990; 335: 765–774.
Flack J, Neaton J, Grimm R, et al, for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group: Blood pressure and mortality among men with prior myocardial infarction. Circulation 1995; 92: 2437–2445.
Medical Research Council Working Party : MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: principal results. BMJ 1985; 291: 97–104.
Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al, for the HOT Study Group: Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomized trial. Lancet 1998; 351: 1755–1762.
Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, Hebert P, Fiebach NH, Eberlein KA : Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, Short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet 1990; 335: 827–838.
Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration : Effects of different blood-pressure–lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospective-designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet 2003; 362: 1527–1535.
Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. JAMA 2003; 289: 2560–2572.
Whitworth JA, World Health Organization, International Society of Hypertension Writing Group: 2003 World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society of Hypertension (ISH) statement on management of hypertension. J Hypertens 2003; 21: 1983–1992.
Guidelines Committee : 2003 European Society of Hypertension–European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens 2003; 21: 1011–1053.
Staessen JA, Li Y, Thijs L, Wang J : Blood pressure reduction and cardiovascular prevention: an update including the 2003–2004 secondary prevention trials. Hypertens Res 2005; 28: 385–407.
Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines Subcommittee for the Management of Hypertension : Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension for General Practitioners. Hypertens Res 2001; 24: 613–634.
Mori H, Ukai H, Yamamoto H, et al: Current status of antihypertensive prescription and associated blood pressure control in Japan. Hypertens Res 2006; 29: 143–151.
Hasebe N, Kikuchi K : Controlled release nifedipine and candesartan low-dose combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension: NICE Combi (Nifedipine and Candesartan Combination) Study. J Hypertens 2005; 23: 445–453.
Fujikawa K, Hasebe N, Kikuchi K : Cost-effectiveness analysis of hypertension treatment: controlled release nifedipine and candesartan low-dose combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension—NICE Combi (Nifedipine and Candesartan Combination) Study—. Hypertens Res 2005; 28: 585–591.
Saruta T : The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2004). Nippon Rinsho 2005; 63: 952–958.
World Health Organization : The World Health Report 2002: Risks to Health 2002. Geneva, World Health Organization.
Van den Hoogen PCW, Feskens EJM, Nagelkerke NJD, Menotti A, Nissinen A, Kromhout D, for the Seven Countries Study Research Group: The relation between blood pressure and mortality due to coronary heart disease among men in different parts of the world. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1–8.
Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, et al: Impact of high-normal pressure on the risk of cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 1291–1297.
The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators : Effects of an angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 145–153.
Progress Collaborative Group: Randomised trial of a perindopril based regimen on blood pressure lowering among 6105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Lancet 2001; 358: 1033–1041.
Staessen JA, Fagard R, Thijs L, et al, The Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial Investigators : Randomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Lancet 1997; 350: 757–764.
Mancia G, Brown M, Castaigne A, et al: INSIGHT. Outcomes with nifedipine GITS or co-amilozide in hypertensive diabetics and nondiabetics in intervention as a goal in hypertension (INSIGHT). Hypertension 2003; 41: 431–436.
Lubsen J, Wagener G, Kirwan BA, de Brouwer S, Poole-Wilson PA : Effect of long-acting nifedipine on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with symptomatic stable angina and hypertension: the ACTION trial. J Hypertens 2005; 23: 641–648.
Dahlöf B, Sever PS, Poulter NR, et al: 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.
Minami J, Numabe A, Andoh N, et al: Comparison of once-daily nifedipine controlled-release with twice-daily nifedipine retard in the treatment of essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 57: 632–639.
Sato H, Yamamoto M, Fu L : Effects of nifedipine-controlled release tablet on heart rate and the autonomic nervous system in patients with ischemic heart disease. Jpn J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2004; 35: 15–18.
Iimura O, Kikuchi K, Shimamoto K, et al: Effects of nisoldipine on sympathetic activity, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and water-sodium-calcium metabolism in patients with essential hypertension. Arzneim-Forsch/Drug Res 1989; 39: 710–714.
Byyny RL, Shannon T, Schwartz LA, Rotolo C, Jungerwirth S : Efficacy and safety of nifedipine coat-core versus amlodipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: comparison of 24-hour mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 1997; 2: 77–84.
Zidek W, Spiecker C, Knaup G, Steindl L, Breuer HWM : Compariosn of the efficacy and safety of nifedipine coat-core versus amlodipine in the treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Clin Ther 1995; 17: 686–700.
Testa MA, Turner RR, Simonson DC, Krafcik MB, Calvo C, Luque-Otero M : Quality of life and calcium channel blockade with nifedipine GITS versus amlodipine in hypertensive patients in Spain. J Hypertens 1998; 16: 1839–1847.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saito, I., Saruta, T. & , ADVANCE-Combi Study Group*. Controlled Release Nifedipine and Valsartan Combination Therapy in Patients with Essential Hypertension: The Adalat CR and Valsartan Cost-Effectiveness Combination (ADVANCE-Combi) Study. Hypertens Res 29, 789–796 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1291/hypres.29.789
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1291/hypres.29.789
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2019)
Hypertension Research (2019)
-
Effectiveness of combination therapy with nifedipine GITS: a prospective, 12-week observational study (AdADOSE)
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (2015)
-
Long-term safety and efficacy of high-dose controlled-release nifedipine (80 mg per day) in Japanese patients with essential hypertension
Hypertension Research (2015)
-
Chapter 5. Treatment with antihypertensive drugs
Hypertension Research (2014)
-
Antihypertensive medication versus health promotion for improving metabolic syndrome in preventing cardiovascular events: a success rate-oriented simulation study
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (2011)