Conversion from sustained-release to immediate-release calcium entry blockers: Outcome in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension

Daniel E. Hilleman, Syed M. Mohiuddin, B. D. Lucas, B. Shinn, G. N. Elsasser

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We evaluated 110 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95 to 110 mmHg) whose blood pressure was initially controlled on monotherapy with once-daily sustained-release calcium entry blockers; these patients were then switched to their respective immediate-release formulations TID. The study group consisted of 35 patients on diltiazem controlled delivery (CD) switched to immediate-release diltiazem, 41 patients on nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) switched to immediate-release nifedipine, and 34 patients on verapamil sustained-release (SR) switched to immediate-release verapamil. Outcome evaluation included a pair-wise comparison of the following during treatment with both formulations: blood pressure control, need for additional hypertensive agents, side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy. Blood pressure was controlled in 94% of patients switched from diltiazem CD to immediate- release diltiazem; 6% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects and compliance were not significantly different between groups. Blood pressure was controlled in 78% of patients switched from nifedipine GITS to immediate-release nifedipine; 22% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy were significantly different between groups. Side effects increased from 32% on nifedipine GITS to 58% on immediate-release nifedipine; and compliance decreased from 93% on nifedipine GITS to 76% on immediate-release nifedipine (P

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1002-1010
Number of pages9
JournalClinical Therapeutics
Volume15
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

Nifedipine
Hypertension
Calcium
Diltiazem
Blood Pressure
Compliance
Verapamil
Antihypertensive Agents
Therapeutics
Costs and Cost Analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology

Cite this

Conversion from sustained-release to immediate-release calcium entry blockers : Outcome in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. / Hilleman, Daniel E.; Mohiuddin, Syed M.; Lucas, B. D.; Shinn, B.; Elsasser, G. N.

In: Clinical Therapeutics, Vol. 15, No. 6, 1993, p. 1002-1010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c0a7ac545d7b46e39cf3d24a27f32ff8,
title = "Conversion from sustained-release to immediate-release calcium entry blockers: Outcome in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension",
abstract = "We evaluated 110 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95 to 110 mmHg) whose blood pressure was initially controlled on monotherapy with once-daily sustained-release calcium entry blockers; these patients were then switched to their respective immediate-release formulations TID. The study group consisted of 35 patients on diltiazem controlled delivery (CD) switched to immediate-release diltiazem, 41 patients on nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) switched to immediate-release nifedipine, and 34 patients on verapamil sustained-release (SR) switched to immediate-release verapamil. Outcome evaluation included a pair-wise comparison of the following during treatment with both formulations: blood pressure control, need for additional hypertensive agents, side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy. Blood pressure was controlled in 94{\%} of patients switched from diltiazem CD to immediate- release diltiazem; 6{\%} of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects and compliance were not significantly different between groups. Blood pressure was controlled in 78{\%} of patients switched from nifedipine GITS to immediate-release nifedipine; 22{\%} of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy were significantly different between groups. Side effects increased from 32{\%} on nifedipine GITS to 58{\%} on immediate-release nifedipine; and compliance decreased from 93{\%} on nifedipine GITS to 76{\%} on immediate-release nifedipine (P",
author = "Hilleman, {Daniel E.} and Mohiuddin, {Syed M.} and Lucas, {B. D.} and B. Shinn and Elsasser, {G. N.}",
year = "1993",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "1002--1010",
journal = "Clinical Therapeutics",
issn = "0149-2918",
publisher = "Excerpta Medica",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conversion from sustained-release to immediate-release calcium entry blockers

T2 - Outcome in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension

AU - Hilleman, Daniel E.

AU - Mohiuddin, Syed M.

AU - Lucas, B. D.

AU - Shinn, B.

AU - Elsasser, G. N.

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - We evaluated 110 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95 to 110 mmHg) whose blood pressure was initially controlled on monotherapy with once-daily sustained-release calcium entry blockers; these patients were then switched to their respective immediate-release formulations TID. The study group consisted of 35 patients on diltiazem controlled delivery (CD) switched to immediate-release diltiazem, 41 patients on nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) switched to immediate-release nifedipine, and 34 patients on verapamil sustained-release (SR) switched to immediate-release verapamil. Outcome evaluation included a pair-wise comparison of the following during treatment with both formulations: blood pressure control, need for additional hypertensive agents, side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy. Blood pressure was controlled in 94% of patients switched from diltiazem CD to immediate- release diltiazem; 6% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects and compliance were not significantly different between groups. Blood pressure was controlled in 78% of patients switched from nifedipine GITS to immediate-release nifedipine; 22% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy were significantly different between groups. Side effects increased from 32% on nifedipine GITS to 58% on immediate-release nifedipine; and compliance decreased from 93% on nifedipine GITS to 76% on immediate-release nifedipine (P

AB - We evaluated 110 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95 to 110 mmHg) whose blood pressure was initially controlled on monotherapy with once-daily sustained-release calcium entry blockers; these patients were then switched to their respective immediate-release formulations TID. The study group consisted of 35 patients on diltiazem controlled delivery (CD) switched to immediate-release diltiazem, 41 patients on nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) switched to immediate-release nifedipine, and 34 patients on verapamil sustained-release (SR) switched to immediate-release verapamil. Outcome evaluation included a pair-wise comparison of the following during treatment with both formulations: blood pressure control, need for additional hypertensive agents, side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy. Blood pressure was controlled in 94% of patients switched from diltiazem CD to immediate- release diltiazem; 6% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects and compliance were not significantly different between groups. Blood pressure was controlled in 78% of patients switched from nifedipine GITS to immediate-release nifedipine; 22% of patients required additional antihypertensive agents. Side effects, compliance, and cost of therapy were significantly different between groups. Side effects increased from 32% on nifedipine GITS to 58% on immediate-release nifedipine; and compliance decreased from 93% on nifedipine GITS to 76% on immediate-release nifedipine (P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027746013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027746013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8111798

AN - SCOPUS:0027746013

VL - 15

SP - 1002

EP - 1010

JO - Clinical Therapeutics

JF - Clinical Therapeutics

SN - 0149-2918

IS - 6

ER -