ArticleHigh blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension2012
Fixed-dose combination therapy in hypertension: cons.
Article in High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of single-pill combination therapy on adherence, blood pressure control, and clinical outcomes: a rapid evidence assessment of recent literature.Journal of hypertension · 2020Pooled it
- Fixed-dose combination pharmacologic therapy to improve hypertension control worldwide: Clinical perspective and policy implications.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Fixed-Dose Combinations for Pain in Older Adults.Drugs & aging · 2024Review
- Does the Polypill Improve Patient Adherence Compared to Its Individual Formulations? A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2020Review
- Fixed-dose combination antihypertensive medications, adherence, and clinical outcomes: A population-based retrospective cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- Comparison of therapy persistence for fixed versus free combination antihypertensives: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2016Article
- How does prescribing for antihypertensive products stack up against guideline recommendations? An Australian population-based study (2006-2014).British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Article
- Antihypertensive Combination Treatment: State of the Art.Current hypertension reports · 2015Review
- Single-pill combinations: a therapeutic option or necessity for vascular risk treatment?Journal of drug assessment · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of antihypertensive therapy is to reduce the risk associated with blood pressure elevation. Although the choice of first-line drug therapy may exert some effects on different long-term cardiovascular endpoints, randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses demonstrated that blood pressure reduction per se is the primary determinant in primary and secondary prevention. Numerous analyses carried out over the last years have repeatedly shown that many patients require the combination of two or more drugs to reach the recommended level of blood pressure control. Within this context, combination therapy with separate agents or fixed-dose combination pills offers an attractive ability to lower blood pressure more quickly, decrease adverse effects and reach blood pressure target. It is not clear whether fixed combinations of antihypertensive agents in a single tablet provide a greater benefit than the corresponding components given separately. In other words, it is not clear if the use of fixed combinations translates into a clearly improved blood pressure control and cardiovascular prevention in clinical practice. Fixed-dose combinations may simplify the treatment regimen by reducing the number of pills and may be attractive for many hypertensive patients. However, single-pill (fixed) drug combinations have some disadvantages: (i) branded fixed combinations may be more expensive than equivalent free combinations; (ii) the duration of action of individual components may not be equivalent, and this may not justify a single daily dosing of the combination; and (iii) the use of fixed combinations implies less flexibility in modifying the doses of individual components and the exposure of patients to unnecessary therapy. Moreover, should a patient develop side effects to one component, the entire combination should be discontinued and replaced by free drugs. The following three types of fixed-dose tablets have been recently proposed to give additional flexibility: (i) tablet manufactured so that each of the two drugs is placed at opposite ends of the tablet with a drug-free (inactive) layer placed in between; (ii) tablet with the combination of drugs at each end with the inactive zone in between; and (iii) tablet divided into discrete, separate segments (the two drugs are combined uniformly), which provides benefits for initial close titration and dosage adjustments. Currently, none of the fixed-dose tablets available on the market have these characteristics and, consequently, are unable to be broken to allow sufficient flexibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22867089What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.