Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35250308›Full record

ArticleIntegrated blood pressure control2022

Effects of Single Pill Combinations Compared to Identical Multi Pill Therapy on Outcomes in Hypertension, Dyslipidemia and Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention: The START-Study.

Thomas Wilke, Burkhard Weisser, Hans-Georg Predel, Roland Schmieder, Sven Wassmann, Anton Gillessen, Jörg Blettenberg, Ulf Maywald, Olaf Randerath, Sabrina Mueller and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrated blood pressure control, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas WilkeInstitut für Pharmakoökonomie und Arzneimittellogistik (IPAM)/Institute for Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Logistics, Wismar, Germany.
Burkhard WeisserInstitute of Sports Science, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Hans-Georg PredelInstitute of Cardiology and Sports Medicine, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.
Roland SchmiederDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Sven WassmannFaculty of Medicine, Cardiology Pasing, Munich and University of the Saarland, Homburg/Saar, Germany.
Anton GillessenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Herz-Jesu-Hospital, Münster, Germany.
Jörg BlettenbergPractice Dr. J. Blettenberg, Lindlar, Germany.
Ulf MaywaldAOK PLUS - The Health Insurance for Sachsen und Thüringen; GB Medicines/Remedies, Dresden, Germany.
Olaf RanderathMedical Department, APONTIS PHARMA GmbH & Co.KG, Monheim, Germany.
Sabrina MuellerIngress-Health HWM GmbH, Wismar, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4889-3058
Michael BöhmClinic for Internal Medicine III, University Clinic of Saarland, Saarland University, Homburg/Saar, Germany.
Saarland University · DEWismar University of Applied Sciences · DEChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEGerman Sport University Cologne · DESaxon Academy of Sciences and Humanities in Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimCurrent guidelines for the treatment of arterial hypertension (AH) or cardiovascular (CV) prevention recommend combination drug treatments with single pill combinations (SPC) to improve adherence to treatment. We aimed to assess whether the SPC concept is clinically superior to multi pill combination (MPC) with identical drugs. METHODS AND

resultsIn an explorative study, we analyzed anonymized claims data sets of patients treated with CV drugs for hypertension and/or CV disorders who were insured by the German AOK PLUS statutory health fund covering 01/07/2012-30/06/2018. Patients at age ≥18 years who received either a SPC or MPC with identical drugs were followed for up to one year. A one to one propensity score matching (PSM) was applied within patient groups who started identical drug combinations, and results were reported as incidence rate ratios (IRRs) as well as hazard ratios (HRs). After PSM, data from 59,336 patients were analyzed. In 30 out of 56 IRR analyses, superiority of SPC over MPC was shown. In 5 out of 7 comparisons, the HR for the composite outcome of all-cause death and all-cause hospitalizations was in favor of the SPC regimen (SPC versus MPC): valsartan/amlodipine: HR=0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.91, p ≤ 0.001); candesartan/amlodipine: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65-0.90, p = 0.001); valsartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide: HR=0.68 (95% CI: 0.61-0.74, p ≤ 0.001); ramipril/amlodipine: HR=0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.83, p ≤ 0.001); acetylsalicylic acid (ASA)/atorvastatin/ramipril: HR=0.64 (95% CI: 0.47-0.88, p = 0.005).

conclusionSPC regimens are associated with a lower incidence of CV events and lower all-cause mortality in clinical practice. SPC regimens should generally be preferred to improve patient's prognosis.

Indexed as

adherencecardiovascular outcomesclinical practicemortalityprognosissingle pill

Identifiers

PMID35250308
PMCPMC8893154
OpenAlexW4214734315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.