ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy and safety of valsartan and rosuvastatin combination therapy with each treatment alone in hypercholesterolemic hypertensive patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients who met inclusion criteria were randomized to receive 1 of the following 2-month drug regimens: valsartan 160 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg, valsartan 160 mg plus placebo, or rosuvastatin 20 mg plus placebo. The primary efficacy variables were change in sitting diastolic blood pressure (sitDBP) and sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP), and percentage change in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) in the combination, valsartan, and rosuvastatin groups. Adverse events (AEs) during the study were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were screened and 123 of them were finally randomized. Changes of sitDBP by least squares mean (LSM) were -11.1, -7.2, and -3.6 mm Hg, respectively, and was greater in the combination, as compared to both valsartan (p=0.02) and rosuvastatin (p<0.001). Changes of sitSBP by LSM were -13.2, -10.8, and -4.9 mm Hg, and was greater in the combination, as compared to rosuvastatin (p=0.006) and not valsartan (p=0.42). Percentage changes of LDL-C by LSM were -52, -4, and -47% in each group, and was greater in the combination, as compared to valsartan (p<0.001), similar to rosuvastatin (p=0.16). Most AEs were mild and resolved by the end of the study. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with valsartan and rosuvastatin exhibited an additive blood pressure-lowering effect with acceptable tolerability, as compared to valsartan monotherapy. Its lipid lowering effect was similar to rosuvatatin monotherapy.
Subject(s)
Humans , Blood Pressure , Drug Therapy, Combination , Least-Squares Analysis , Rosuvastatin Calcium , ValsartanABSTRACT
La regulación de los ensayos clínicos por el Estado es un proceso en constante cambio y adecuación, cuyo reto actual consiste en salvaguardar la seguridad de los participantes y equilibrar la carga administrativa. El desarrollo y la regulación de los ensayos clínicos en los distintos países varían según la realidad, el contexto, su ejecución nacional o multinacional, condicionando que la regulación puramente nacional resulte insuficiente y se precise conocer parte de la regulación internacional. El objetivo de esta publicación es mostrar una visión global del rol de Estado en la regulación de los ensayos clínicos en distintas realidades. Para ello, se ha realizado una revisión de la regulación en la Unión Europea, Estados Unidos de Norteamérica y algunos países de Latinoamérica, para llegar finalmente al Perú. La tendencia actual en la regulación de los ensayos clínicos, se caracteriza por el incremento en los estándares de calidad, el garantizar la seguridad de los participantes, promover la transparencia, la disminución de los procesos burocráticos y el fortalecimiento de los comités de ética, en el marco de procesos democráticos abiertos, que convoquen e integren a todos los interesados en procesos dinámicos basados en el conocimiento actual y los cambios que se suceden. El reto actual es promover el desarrollo de ensayos clínicos desde el Estado (universidades, centros de investigación, institutos especializados, hospitales, etc.) para los aspectos que el país necesita, incluidos medicamentos huérfanos, enfermedades prevalentes y abandonadas, y el uso terapéutico de los principios activos originarios.
The regulation of clinical trials by the Government is a process of continuous change and adaptation, current challenge is to ensure the safety of participants and get balance of administrative procedures. Development and regulation of clinical trials in different countries vary according to the situation, context national or international execution, determining the insufficiency of national regulation requiring review of international regulation. The aim of this publication is to present a comprehensive overview of the role of Government in the regulation of clinical trials in different realities. It includes a review of the regulation in The European Union, The United States and some Latin American countries and finally the regulation in Peru. Contemporary trends in the regulation of clinical trials, are characterized by increasing standards of quality, ensuring the safety of the participants, promote transparency, lower bureaucratic processes and strengthening ethics IRB committees in the framework of open democratic processes, involving all stakeholders in dynamic processes based on current knowledge and changing tendencies. The challenge is to promote the development of clinical trials from the government institutions (universities, research centers, institutes, hospitals, etc.) priorizing local needs including orphan drugs, prevalent and neglected diseases, and therapeutic use of active components of local native plants.
Subject(s)
Humans , Clinical Trials as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Government , RoleABSTRACT
La participación del Instituto Nacional de Salud como ente rector en la evaluación ética, metodológica y, por consiguiente, a cargo de la aprobación de la ejecución de estudios, data del año 1995. Desde entonces ha existido un gran incremento de ensayos clínicos hasta el 2009, por lo que se realizó un análisis preliminar para evaluar si este incremento ha repercutido en la producción de ensayos clínicos sobre tópicos endémicos o problemas de carga de enfermedad que deben ser investigados y resueltos por los peruanos. Para ello, se realizó una búsqueda en SCOPUS Y MEDLINE, pudiendo identificar 102 ensayos clínicos en humanos, diseñados, ejecutados y realizados en el Perú sobre problemas endémicos o propios del Perú. La apreciación en el tiempo no permite afirmar que haya ocurrido un incremento en paralelo, ni que se hayan incluido a nuevos grupos de investigación o nuevos investigadores, no se investiga sobre problemas endémicos de nuestro país, no se ha realizado por ejemplo ningún ensayo clínico sobre la enfermedad de Carrión, son muy pocos los ensayos clínicos promovidos durante este tiempo por instituciones académicas y de la sociedad civil. Teniendo en cuenta ello, podemos afirmar que no se aprecia una influencia positiva en la generación de ensayos clínicos autóctonos, sobre problemas locales que a los peruanos les corresponde resolver.
The participation of the National Institute of Health as a leader in ethical and methodological assessment and its responsibility to approve the implementation of studies dates back to 1995. Since then, clinical trials have increased significantly until 2009; for this reason, a preliminary analysis was made to assess whether this increase has had an impact in the production of clinical trials on endemic topics or disease burden problems that must be researched and resolved by Peruvian people. For this purpose, a search in SCOPUS and MEDLINE was conducted, with 102 clinical trials in humans found, all of them designed, implemented and carried out in Peru on endemic or domestic health issues. Observation over time does not reveal any parallel increase or the inclusion of new research groups or researchers, no research on endemic problems has been carried out in our country; for example, clinical trials on the Carrions Disease have not been conducted. Very few clinical trials have been promoted during this period by academic institutions and the civil society. Taking this into consideration, we can affirm that there is no positive influence in the generation of native clinical trials on local problems that Peruvian people need to resolve.
Subject(s)
Humans , Biomedical Research , Clinical Trials as Topic , Biomedical Research/methods , PeruABSTRACT
Objective To study the effect of integrated tradition and western medicine on unstable angina.Methods Sixty-six patients with unstable angina were randomized into two groups:control group treated only with routine therapy(n=33) and experiment group treated with routine and jia jian luang gan jian therapy(n=33).The difference of EKG,symptoms and clinic comprehensive evaluation between before treatment and after-3-week-treatment were compared.Results The rate of symptoms and ECG improvement was higher in experiment group than control group(94% vs 73%;73% vs 45%).The difference of clinic comprehensive score between before treatment and after 3 weeks treatment was significantly higher in experiment group.Conclusion The treatment of integrated tradition and western medicine on patients with unstable angina is more effective.