Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Comparative efficacy and safety of amlodipine/benazepril combination therapy and amlodipine monotherapy in severe hypertension

Abstract

This multicentre, double-blind, trial in subjects with severe hypertension compared the efficacy and tolerability of two parallel drug regimens: A/B (amlodipine/benazepril: 5/20 or 10/40 mg daily, if necessary) with A (amlodipine: 5 or 10 mg daily, if necessary). The principal dependent variable was the proportion of patients achieving goal blood pressures (BP<140/90 mm Hg or BP<130/80 mm Hg in diabetes or chronic kidney disease) in the two groups within 6 weeks. In the 259 randomized subjects, BP control rates were higher with A/B at 2, 4 and 6 weeks (10.5, 22, and 33.6%, respectively) compared with A (5.7, 16, and 25.8 %, respectively). Corresponding trended BP reductions from baseline at 2, 4 and 6 weeks were about 5 mm Hg greater with A/B (−21±16, −26±17 and −30±17 mm Hg, respectively, compared with A (−16±17, −23±18 and 25±19 mm Hg, respectively, P<0.01). Both regimens were well tolerated; incidences of peripheral oedema at weeks 4 and 6 were similar (A/B: 13 and 20% versus A: 20 and 22%, P=not significant). We conclude that titration of amlodipine and benazepril in single-pill combinations is more effective than titration of amlodipine alone for rapid BP control in patients with severe hypertension.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo Jr JL et al. Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003; 42: 1206–1252.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sever P . New hypertension guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the British Hypertension Society. J Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Syst 2006; 7: 61–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Julius S, Weber MA, Kjeldsen SE, McInnes GT, Zanchetti A, Brunner HR et al. The Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-Term Use Evaluation (VALUE) Trial: outcomes in Patients Receiving Monotherapy. Hypertension 2006; 48: 385–391.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. 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: 2981–2997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jamerson K, Weber MA, Bakris G, Dahlöf B, Pitt B, Shi V et al. Benazepril plus amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 2417–2428.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jamerson KA, Nwose O, Jean-Louis L, Schofield L, Purkayastha D, Baron M . Initial angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/calcium channel blocker combination therapy achieves superior blood pressure control compared with calcium channel blocker monotherapy in patients with stage 2 hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2004; 17: 495–501.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bakris GL, Weir MR, Study of Hypertension and the Efficacy of Lotrel in Diabetes (SHIELD) Investigators. Achieving goal blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes: conventional versus fixed-dose combination approaches. J Clin Hypertens 2003; 5: 202–209.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Weir MR . Incidence of pedal edema formation with dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers: issues and practical significance. J Clin Hypertens 2003; 5: 330–335.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA. The authors wish to acknowledge the support of all participating physicians. The sponsor was responsible for the design and conduct of the study and the collection of its data and its management. The authors were responsible for the conception and planning of the study, the analysis and interpretation of the data, and the preparation, review and final approval of the paper. The authors wish to thank Novartis employee, Kanaka Sridharan, MS. R.Ph, for provided writing and editorial support. All authors have reviewed and approved the submitted paper.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00136851.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J L Izzo Jr.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

JI has received consulting fees from the sponsor. DP, DH and RH are employees of the sponsor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Izzo, J., Purkayastha, D., Hall, D. et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of amlodipine/benazepril combination therapy and amlodipine monotherapy in severe hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 24, 403–409 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2009.80

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2009.80

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links