scholarly journals A ramipril versus ramipril/amlodipin fix kombináció egyéves perzisztenciája hypertoniás betegekben

2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (42) ◽  
pp. 1669-1673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gábor Simonyi ◽  
Tamás Ferenci
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Fixed Dose Combination ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Hypertensive Patients ◽  
Persistence Rate ◽  
Dose Combination ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

Abstract: Introduction: In the treatment of hypertension avoiding adverse cardiovascular complications to achieve target blood pressure is essential. The appropriate drug selection, and if necessary to change to combination therapy, patients adherence is important which may help fixed dose combination. Aim: The aim of the authors was to investigate the one year adherence of the ramipril and ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination in hypertensive patients. Method: Prescriptions database of the National Health Insurance Fund in Hungary on pharmacy-claims was analysed between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013. The authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for ramipril monotherapy and fixed dose combinations of ramipril/amlodipine prescribed for the first time in hypertensive patients who have not received similar drugs in the previous year. To model the adherence, the apparatus of survival analysis was used, where “survival” was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied: a generalized linear model was estimated with complementary log-log link function with the kind of drug being the only explanatory variable. Results: 92,546 patients met the inclusion criteria. During the trial period, ramipril therapy or ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination was started in 82,251 and 10,295 patients, respectively. One year persistence rate in patients with ramipril was 30% and 54% in patients with ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy. Considering only the 360-day study period, the mean duration of persistence was 189.9 days in patients on ramipril and 270.6 days on ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy. The hazard of discontinuation was more than twofold higher during treatment with ramipril compared with the use of the ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy (HR = 2.11 [95% CI: 2.05–2.17], p<0,001). Conclusions: There is a significant difference between the one year persistence of ramipril and ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy in hypertension. The result demonstrated that ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy has a better one year persistence rate. When the next step is necessary to achieve target blood pressure, ramipril/amlodipine fixed dose combination therapy is preferable. Orv Hetil. 2017; 158(42): 1668–1673.

scholarly journals A ramipril/amlodipin és a lisinopril/amlodipin fix kombinációk a terápiahűség tükrében

2016 ◽  
Vol 157 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
Gábor Simonyi ◽  
Tamás Ferenci
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Antihypertensive Therapy ◽  
Target Blood Pressure ◽  
Fixed Dose Combination ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Dose Combination ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

Introduction: Patient’s adherence has a great significance to reach target blood pressure values. The risk of cardiovascular adverse events decreases when patients are on target blood pressure. Aim: The aim of the authors was to investigate the one-year persistence of the ramipril/amlodipine and lisinopril/amlodipine fixed dose combination in hypertensive patients. Method: National Health Insurance Found prescriptions database of Hungary on pharmacy-claims between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 was analyzed. The authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for fixed dose combinations of ramipril and amlodipine, and lisinopril and amlodipine prescribed for the first time, for the therapeutic indication of hypertension. Patients have not received antihypertensive therapy with similar active substances during one year before the study. To model the persistence, the apparatus of survival analysis was used, where “survival” was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied: a generalized linear model was estimated with complementary log-log link function with the kind of drug being the only explanatory variable. Results: During the study period, fixed dose combination antihypertensive therapy with ramipril plus amlodipine and lisinopril plus amlodipine was started in 10,449 and 20,276 patients, respectively. One-year persistence rate in patients taking ramipril and amlodipine as a fixed dose combination was 54%, whereas 36% in those on the fixed lisinopril and amlodipine combination. Considering only the 360-day study period, the mean duration of persistence was 271 days in patients on the ramipril based and 211 days on lisinopril based fixed dose combination. Analyzing persistence on treatment with these combinations showed that the actual rate of discontinuation was about twice higher during treatment with the lisinopril and amlodipine fixed dose combination compared with the use of the ramipril and amlodipine fixed dose combination (hazard ratio = 1.79, p<0.001). Conclusions: There is a significant difference between the one-year persistence of ramipril plus amlodipine and lisinopril plus amlodipine fixed dose combination in patients with hypertension. The result demonstrated that ramipril and amlodipine fixed dose combination has a favourable patients’ adherence as compared to lisinopril and amlodipine fixed dose combination. Orv. Hetil., 2016, 157(1), 30–34.

scholarly journals A perindopril/amlodipin szabad és fix kombinációk egyéves terápiahűsége

2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (36) ◽  
pp. 1421-1425
Author(s):  
Gábor Simonyi ◽  
Tamás Ferenci ◽  
Mihály Medvegy ◽  
Roland Gasparics ◽  
Ervin Finta
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Antihypertensive Therapy ◽  
Patient Adherence ◽  
Fixed Dose Combination ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk Reduction ◽  
Pharmacy Claims ◽  
Dose Combination ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

Abstract: Introduction: In management of hypertension patient adherence is one of the most important factors. In hypertension the cardiovascular risk reduction can be reached only by prolonged and effective pharmacotherapy. Aim: To evaluate the persistence of one-year treatment of free and fixed-dose combination of perindopril/amlodipine in hypertension. Method: Information from the National Health Insurance of Hungary prescriptions database on pharmacy claims between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 was analysed. Authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for free and fixed-dose combination of perindopril/amlodipine, prescribed for the first time for hypertension. Patients have not received antihypertensive therapy with similar active substances during the one year before. Apparatus of survival analysis was used, where “survival” was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied. Results: 109,248 patients met the inclusion criteria. Combination antihypertensive therapy with perindopril/amlodipine was started with a free or a fixed-dose combination of these agents in 19,365 and 89,883 patients, respectively. One year persistence rate in patients taking perindopril/amlodipine as a free combination was 27.15%, whereas it was 46.89% in those on the fixed-dose combination. Mean duration of persistence was 177.6 days in patients on the perindopril/amlodipine free, whereas 245.7 days on fixed-dose combination. Actual rate of discontinuation was approximately twice higher with the treatment of free, compared with the use of the fixed-dose combination (hazard ratio =1.94 [95% CI: 1.91–1.98], p<0.001). Orv Hetil. 2017; 158(36): 1421–1425.

scholarly journals Az atorvastatin/amlodipin fix kombináció versus az atorvastatinterápia a terápiahűség tükrében

2016 ◽  
Vol 157 (11) ◽  
pp. 425-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gábor Simonyi ◽  
Tamás Ferenci
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Fixed Dose Combination ◽  
Combination Method ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Pharmacy Claims ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Atorvastatin Therapy ◽  
Dose Combination ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

Introduction: Hypertension and dyslipidemia are modifiable cardiovascular risk factors. In Hungary hypertension and dyslipidemia are quite frequent conditions. The patients’ adherence is very important factor to reach the targets. Aim: The aim of the authors was to investigate the one-year persistence of the atorvastatin therapy and atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination. Method: National Health Insurance Found prescriptions database of Hungary on pharmacy claims between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 was analyzed. The authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination and atorvastatin prescribed for the first time. Patients did not receive similar drugs for one year before the study. To model the persistence, the apparatus of survival analysis was used, where “survival” was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied: a generalized linear model was estimated with complementary log-log link function with the kind of drug being the only explanatory variable. Results: During the trial period, atorvastatin and atorvastatin plus amlodipine fixed dose combination was started in 192,579 and 24,433 patients, respectively. One year persistence rate in patients with atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination was 43%, and 21% in patients with atorvastatin therapy. The 360-days-restricted study period, the mean duration of persistence was 221.4 (SE: 0.894) days in patients on atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination and 153.0 days (SE: 0.297) in those on atorvastatin regimen. The hazard of discontinuation was almost twofold higher during treatment with atorvastatin therapy compared with the use of the atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination (hazard ratio = 1.85, p<0.0001). Conclusions: There is a significant difference between the one-year persistence of atorvastatin therapy and atorvastatin plus amlodipine fixed dose combination. The result demonstrate that atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination is favourable to reach double goals on blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol. Orv. Hetil., 2016, 157(11), 425–429.

scholarly journals A metformin-monoterápia és a szitagliptin/metformin fix kombináció egyéves perzisztenciája

2016 ◽  
Vol 157 (16) ◽  
pp. 618-622
Author(s):  
Gábor Simonyi ◽  
Tamás Ferenci
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Dose Combination ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Type 2 Diabetic Patients ◽  
Metformin Monotherapy ◽  
Dose Combination ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Type 2 Diabetic

Introduction: In treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus it is important to reach glycaemic targets. The elements of this are the adequate diet and the patient’s adherence to medication. Aim: The aim of the authors was to investigate the one year persistence of the metformin monotherapy and sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination in type 2 diabetic patients. Method: National Health Insurance Found prescriptions database of Hungary on pharmacy-claims between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 was analyzed. The authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for metformin monotherapy and fixed dose combinations of sitagliptin/metformin prescribed for the first time. Patients have not received similar drugs one year previous to study. To model the persistence, the apparatus of survival analysis was used, where “survival” was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied: a generalized linear model was estimated with complementary log-log link function with the kind of drug being the only explanatory variable. Results: During the trial period, metformin monotherapy or sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination was started in 63,386 and 10,039 patients, respectively. One year persistence rate in patients with metformin monotherapy was 30%, and 58% in patients with sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination. Considering only the 360-day study period, the mean duration of persistence was 173.4 days in patients on metformin monotherapy and 261.9 days on sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination. The hazard of discontinuation was more than twofold higher during treatment with metformin monotherapy compared with the use of the sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination (hazard ratio = 2.267, p<0.001). Conclusions: There is a significant difference between the one year persistence of metformin monotherapy and sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination in type 2 diabetic patients. The result demonstrated sitagliptin/metformin fixed dose combination has a favourable patients’ adherence as compared to metformin monotherapy. Orv. Hetil., 2016, 157(16), 618–622.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document