Back to Journals » Vascular Health and Risk Management » Volume 5

Randomized study to compare valsartan ± HCTZ versus amlodipine ± HCTZ strategies to maximize blood pressure control

Authors Dion Zappe, Cheraz Cherif Papst, Philippe Ferber, et al.

Published 22 October 2009 Volume 2009:5 Pages 883—892


Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Dion Zappe1, Cheraz Cherif Papst2, Philippe Ferber3, On behalf of the PROMPT investigators

1Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA; 2Novartis Pharma Ag, Basel, Switzerland; 3Roche Pharmaceuticals, Basel, Switzerland

Objective: Delays in achieving blood pressure (BP) control may increase morbidity and mortality in patients with hypertension. Thus, deciding which antihypertensive agent to use and at what dosage, in addition to determining when to initiate combination therapy and which agents to combine, is important for achieving BP control.

Methods: This randomized, double-blind, 14-week study was conducted to compare the efficacy and tolerability of various doses of valsartan ± hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) versus amlodipine ± HCTZ for maximizing BP control in 1,285 patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Patients with stage 1 hypertension and naïve to antihypertensive therapy (33.9%) started valsartan 160 mg or amlodipine 5 mg. Treatment-naïve patients with stage 2 hypertension (13.5%) or those uncontrolled on current antihypertensive monotherapy (52.6%) started valsartan 160 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg or amlodipine 10 mg. At weeks 4, 8, and 11, patients not achieving BP control were up-titrated (maximum: valsartan 320 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, amlodipine 10 mg/HCTZ 25 mg).

Results: At study end, 78.8% of patients on valsartan ± HCTZ were controlled (BP < 140/90 mmHg) and still on study medication versus 67.8% on amlodipine ± HCTZ (P < 0.0001). Amlodipine-treated patients had a higher incidence of peripheral edema (22.4% vs 2.2%) and associated discontinuations (7.3% vs <1%). Initiating therapy earlier with valsartan/HCTZ, rather than  titrating monotherapy to its maximum dose before adding a second agent, was superior to amlodipine monotherapy or amlodipine ± HCTZ for achieving BP control, and avoided excessive treatment adjustments and maintained tolerability.

Keywords: efficacy, hydrochlorothiazide, hypertension, combination therapy, titration, tolerability

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF] 


Readers of this article also read:

Management of high-risk popliteal vascular blunt trauma: clinical experience with 62 cases

Ali Pourzand, Bassir A Fakhri, Ramin Azhough, et al

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2010, 6:613-618

Published Date: 14 July 2010

Heart rate control with adrenergic blockade: Clinical outcomes in cardiovascular medicine

David Feldman, Terry S Elton, Doron M Menachemi, et al

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2010, 6:387-397

Published Date: 24 May 2010

Low use of statins and other coronary secondary prevention therapies in primary and secondary care in India

Krishna K Sharma, Rajeev Gupta, Aachu Agrawal, et al

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2009, 5:1007-1014

Published Date: 20 November 2009

Endothelial repair capacity and apoptosis are inversely related in obstructive sleep apnea

Sanja Jelic,  David J Lederer, Tessa Adams, et al.

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2009, 5:909-920

Published Date: 3 November 2009

Diabetes mellitus: a prothrombotic state. Implications for outcomes after coronary revascularization

Clarissa Cola, Salvatore Brugaletta, Victoria Martín Yuste, Bieito Campos, Dominick J Angiolillo, Manel Sabaté

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2009, 5:101-119

Published Date: 11 January 2009