Key result
Patients treated with a free-equivalent combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin had an 88% higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to those receiving a fixed-dose combination (HR 1.88).
Why the study?
Clinical outcomes of fixed-dose combination versus free-equivalent combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin in concurrent hypertension and dyslipidemia remained unknown.
Does a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared to a free-equivalent combination in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia?
Cohort (n=1,756)
Does a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared to a free-equivalent combination in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia?
In patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia, a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin significantly improved cardiovascular outcomes compared to taking the medications as separate pills.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Free combinations warrant caution in practice; leaves open adherence effects on MACE in broader cohorts.
Hypertension and dyslipidemia are important risk factors for cardiovascular disease. However, the clinical outcomes of fixed-dose combination (FDC) versus free-equivalent combination (FEC) of amlodipine and atorvastatin in the treatment of concurrent hypertension and dyslipidemia remain unknown. In this study, we included patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia, without previously established cardiovascular disease, and treated with either FDC or FEC of amlodipine and atorvastatin were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan and follow-up for 5 years. By using 1:1 propensity score matching, a total of 1756 patients were enrolled in this study. The composite of major adverse cardiovascular events, including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and coronary revascularization, occurred more frequently in the FEC group than in the FDC group (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 2.5). Although the all-cause mortality did not differ (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.59), the FEC group developed increased MI, stroke, and coronary revascularization (hazard ratio, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.07 to 7.68; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.74; and hazard ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.26 to 4.69, respectively). Furthermore, as an unexpected result, a higher risk to develop new-onset diabetes mellitus was observed with FEC regimens (hazard ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0). In conclusion, although the all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups, the FDC regimen of amlodipine and atorvastatin improved clinical outcomes when compared to FEC in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and dyslipidemia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Hypertension and dyslipidemia (n=1,756). Fixed-dose combination (FDC) of amlodipine and atorvastatin vs. Free-equivalent combination (FEC) of amlodipine and atorvastatin was evaluated on Composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularization (HR 1.88 (FEC vs FDC), 95% CI 1.42 to 2.5, p=<0.001). Patients treated with a free-equivalent combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin had an 88% higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to those receiving a fixed-dose combination (HR 1.88).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: