Patient adherence and the choice of antihypertensive drugs: focus on lercanidipine

Figures & data

Table 1 Studies comparing adherence rates of different antihypertensive drugs

Studya	n	Outcome (persistence)	AT-II blockers	ACE-inhibitors	Calcium antagonists	Beta-blockers	Diuretics
Blooms 1998	21,723	1-year persistence	64%	58%	50%	43%	38%
Caro 1999	22,918	4.5-year persistence	neb	53%	47%	49%	40%
Morgan 2004	82,824	1-year persistence	56%	56%	52%	54%	49%
Polluzzi 2005	6,043	3-year persistence*	52%	43%	39%	47%	23%
Simons 2008	48,690	33-month persistence	84%	84%	72%	ne	ne

a All theses studies are retrospective.

b not evaluated.

Table 2 Large trials having evalauted the tolerability and efficacy of lercanidipine therapy in daily clinical practice

Study (year)a	n	Type	Medication	Duration	Peripheral edema (%)
LAURA study 2006	3175	Open label, non-comparative	Lercanidipine 10–20 mg/day	6 months	5.1
TOLERANCE study 2008	650	Observational	Lercanidipine 20 mg vs amlodipine 10 mg or nifedipine GITS 60 mg	2 months	39.7 vs 57.3
Burnier 2007	2199	Observational, non-interventional	Lercanidipine 10 mg/20 mg; mono, step on, or substitution therapy	2 months	0.6–3
ELYPSE 2002	9059	Observational	Lercanidipine 10 mg	3 months	1.2
COHORT 2002	828	Prospective, randomized, double blind	Lercanidipine 10 mg vs amlodipine 5 mg vs lacidipine 2 mg	12 months	9 vs 19 vs 4

a Studies were selected by performing a Pubmed query with “lercanidipine”, “adherence”, “compliance” and “tolerability” as search terms.

Table 3 Lercanidipine and its efficacy in combination therapy

Study	Pts (n)	Hypertensive patient category	Type of study	Treatment	Duration	Mean blood pressure (BP) difference (mmHg)	Remarks
Agrawal 2006	174	Diabetes type 1 or 2 (age 18–80)	Randomized double blind	Enalapril 20 mg + lercanidipine add-on vs enalapril 20 mg + hydrochlorothiazide add-on	20 weeks	−9.3 vs −7.4
Cleophas 2001	34	Diabetes type 2	Open label	ACE-inhibitor + lercanidipine vs ACE-inhibitor + metoprolol	6 months	−6 ± 10
Grandi 2008	24	Never treated hypertension	Randomized pilot study	Ramipril + candesartan vs ramipril + lercanidipine	6 months	−13.3 vs −12.3	Less ventricular remodeling in lercanidipine group
Puig 2007	75	Elderly (aged 60–85)	Randomized double blind	Lercanidipine 10 mg vs enalapril20 mg vs combination of the two vs placebo	4 months	−5.0 vs −5.9 vs −16.9 compared with placebo
Poncelet 2004 AGATE study	756	Age > 65 vs age < 65	Open study	Lercanidipine alone (10–20 mg) or lercanidipine in combination (not specified)	6 weeks	−8 to −11
Guillen 2003	1562	Never treated hypertension	Observational, prospective	Lercanidipine alone; enalapril20 mg added after 1 month if BP was not controlled (38%)	6 months	Systolic BP −25.4 and diastolic BP −13.6

BloomBS1998Continuation of initial antihypertensive medication after 1 year of therapyClin Ther20671819737827

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

CaroJJSpeckmanJLSalasM1999Effect of initial drug choice on persistence with antihypertensive therapy: the importance of actual practice dataCMAJ1604169934342

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

MorganSGYanL2004Persistence with hypertension treatment among community-dwelling BC seniorsCan J Clin Pharmacol1126773

 Google Scholar

PoluzziEStrahinjaPVargiuA2005Initial treatment of hypertension and adherence to therapy in general practice in ItalyEur J Clin Pharmacol61603916082539

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

SimonsLAOrtizMCalcinoG2008Persistence with antihypertensive medication: Australia-wide experience 2004–6Med J Aust188224718279129

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

BurnierMGasserUE2007Efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine in patients with hypertension: results of a Phase IV study in general practiceExpert Opin Pharmacother822152317927478

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

AgrawalRMarxAHallerH2006Efficacy and safety of lercanidipine versus hydrochlorothiazide as add-on to enalapril in diabetic populations with uncontrolled hypertensionJ Hypertens241859216331117

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

CleophasTJvan OuwekerkBMvan der MeulenJ2001Diabetics with hypertension not controlled with ACE-inhibitors: alternate therapiesAngiology524697511515986

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

GrandiAMSolbiatiFLauritaE2008Effects of dual blockade of reninangiotensin system on concentric left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension: a randomized, controlled pilot studyAm J Hypertens21231718174880

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

PuigJGCalvoCLuurilaO2007Lercanidipine, enalapril and their combination in the treatment of elderly hypertensive patients: placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover study with four ABPMJ Hum Hypertens219172417581601

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

PonceletPRibsteinJGoullardL2004Efficacy and acceptability of lercanidipine are not age dependent in patients with essential hypertension: the AGATE studyAnn Cardiol Angeiol5312330

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

GuillenVGAbellanJLlisterriJL2003Efficacy and safety of lercanidipine in combination with enalapril in HBP. Preliminary results of ZANYCONTROL study groupAm J Hypertens16115A

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar