Key result
Eplerenone matches irbesartan for 6-month ambulatory blood pressure reduction in obese hypertension.
Why the study?
Little is known about the impact of aldosterone blockade using eplerenone as first-line therapy in obese patients with hypertension.
Does an eplerenone-based first-line antihypertensive strategy reduce mean ambulatory blood pressure compared to an irbesartan-based strategy at 6 months in obese hypertensive patients?
RCT (n=198)
Open-label
Stratified randomization (according to age, gender, initial office BP levels and eGFR)
Yes
Does an eplerenone-based first-line antihypertensive strategy reduce mean ambulatory blood pressure compared to an irbesartan-based strategy at 6 months in obese hypertensive patients?
In obese hypertensive patients, a first-line eplerenone-based antihypertensive strategy is non-inferior to an irbesartan-based strategy for reducing ambulatory blood pressure at 6 months, with similar medication burden and renal safety.
Does not support eplerenone over irbesartan as first-line therapy in obesity-related hypertension; challenges the hypothesis that mineralocorticoid receptor antagonism offers superior BP lowering here.
Objective The pathophysiology of hypertension in obese patients is complex and multifactorial. Obesity is significantly associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The relationship between obesity and hypertension is well described. However, little is known about the impact of aldosterone blockade using eplerenone in hypertensive obese patients as first line therapy. Purpose The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy between eplerenone-based strategy and irbesartan-based strategy in obese hypertensive individuals, regarding BP reduction. Methods HEBRO (antiHypertensive treatment with Eplerenone vs. iBesartan in hypeRtensive Obese patients) is a prospective, randomized, open-labeled, multicenter trial that enrolled 198 hypertensive patients aged 30 to 75 years old, with obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) and arterial hypertension established by both office and ambulatory BP measurements. Patients were stratified randomized (according to age, gender, initial office BP levels and eGFR) to either 25mg eplerenone bd (99 pts) or 150mg irbesartan od (99 pts). At 2 months and 4 months up-titration with amlodipine 5mg and indapamide 1.5mg respectively was taken place when mean ambulatory BP (ABPM) was over 130/80mmHg. The primary endpoint is the difference in mean ambulatory BP measurements at 6-months follow-up period. Results At baseline, there were no significant differences regarding gender (men 50.5%), age (55.5±10.14 years), BMI (34.18±3.45 kg/m2), renal function (mean eGFR 85.67±16.11 mL/min/1.73m²) and diabetes mellitus (13.6%). Initial office BP was 146.2/91.9 mmHg ± 10.4/9.1 in the irbesartan arm vs. 148.1/92.0 mmHg ± 9.5/9.4 in the eplerenone arm, p=0.168 and p=0.918 respectively) and initial ABPM 137.7/83.3 mmHg ± 9.2/7.6 in the irbesartan arm vs. 140.9/84.8 mmHg ± 9.9/9.1 in the eplerenone arm, p=0.02 and p=0.205 respectively). At 6 months, mean ambulatory BP reduction was -17.5/-9.6 mmHg ± 12.0/6.7 in the irbesartan vs. -19.0/-9.0 mmHg ± 12.6/8.2 in the eplerenone arm, p=0.463 and p=0.611 respectively. At 6 months, the number of antihypertensive drugs was 1.8 ± 0.8 vs 1.9 ± 0.8, p=0.164. Conclusion At 6 months, eplerenone-based antihypertensive strategy is non-inferior compared to irbesartan-based strategy regarding reducing ABPM, under the same number of antihypertensive medications, accompanied by no difference in safety and renal function preservance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iliakis et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Arterial hypertension and obesity (n=198). Eplerenone vs. Irbesartan 150 mg once daily (with identical up-titration protocol) was evaluated on Difference in mean ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM) reduction at 6 months (p=0.463 (SBP) and 0.611 (DBP)). Eplerenone was non-inferior to irbesartan for 6-month ambulatory BP reduction in obese hypertensive patients (-19.0/-9.0 vs -17.5/-9.6 mmHg; p=0.463 and p=0.611).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: