
Patients with difficult to control hypertension typically require 2 or more agents to achieve goal blood pressure (BP) levels. Fixed‐dose combination therapies with lower doses generally are well tolerated and more effective than higher‐dose monotherapy. The authors performed prespecified and post hoc subgroup analyses of 2 double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of amlodipine and valsartan, alone and in combination, in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Patients were randomized to amlodipine (study 1: 2.5 or 5 mg/d; study 2: 10 mg/d), valsartan (study 1: 40, 80, 160, or 320 mg/d; study 2: 160 or 320 mg/d), combination therapy across the same dose ranges, or placebo. Analyses were performed on changes from baseline in mean sitting systolic and diastolic BP and the occurrence of adverse events in specific subgroups of patients (ie, those with stage 2 hypertension [post hoc], the elderly [65 years or older], and blacks [both prespecified]). Amlodipine + valsartan combination therapy was associated with greater BP‐lowering effects in the subgroups compared with each respective monotherapy and placebo. These findings were consistent with the primary efficacy analysis results from the overall study populations. Combination regimens were generally well tolerated by all patient subgroups.
Male, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Age Factors, Black People, Tetrazoles, Blood Pressure, Valine, Middle Aged, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Double-Blind Method, Research Design, Hypertension, Humans, Valsartan, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Amlodipine, Antihypertensive Agents, Aged
Male, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Age Factors, Black People, Tetrazoles, Blood Pressure, Valine, Middle Aged, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Double-Blind Method, Research Design, Hypertension, Humans, Valsartan, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Amlodipine, Antihypertensive Agents, Aged
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 81 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
