Epidemiology of paediatric chronic heart failure in Germany-A population-based analysis.

AIMS: Paediatric chronic heart failure (CHF) is associated with significant morbidity. The aim of this study was to describe paediatric CHF epidemiology in Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of anonymized healthcare claims data in the InGef database. This database includes longitudinal data from a representative sample of the German population of approximately 4.8 million insured members. We included individuals <18 years from 2016 to 2021. CHF was defined by ≥2 diagnoses in different quarters of the year as inpatient or outpatient, using ICD-10-GM codes I50.- or P29.0. The number of eligible children in the database was 674 462 in 2016 and 660 692 in 2021. Prevalence of CHF per 100 000 children was 20.6 [95% confidence interval (CI), 17.3-24.3] in 2016 and 19.4 (95% CI, 16.2 to 23.0) in 2021. Incidence per 100 000 children was 9.6 (95% CI, 7.4 to 12.3) in 2016 and 7.6 (95% CI, 5.6 to 10.0) in 2021 for newly diagnosed CHF. All-cause hospitalizations occurred in 47.3% to 57.7% of children with CHF per year. Up to 6.3% of children with CHF were hospitalized, coded primarily for heart failure. Mortality of children with CHF was <5 death per year in the studied population. In 128 children with CHF in 2021, the most common ICD-coded comorbidities were congenital malformations of cardiac septa (57.8%), atrial septal defect (44.5%), congenital malformations of the great arteries (43.0%) and ventricular septal defect (32.0%). Coded treatment modalities for paediatric CHF in 2021 included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (18.8%), beta-blockers (17.2%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (14.8%) and surgical procedures (13.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This representative cohort study reveals a relatively high incidence proportion. Approximately half of the children with CHF are hospitalized annually while mortality is low.

Trends and consequences of lipoprotein(a) testing: Cross-sectional and longitudinal health insurance claims database analyses.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Our goal was to characterize patients undergoing Lp(a) testing and to assess the impact of Lp(a) testing on treatment changes and subsequent ASCVD events. METHODS: A cross-sectional and a longitudinal claims data analysis were performed on 4 million patient records in Germany. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 4 years. RESULTS: In 2015 and 2018, 0.25% and 0.34% of patients were tested, respectively. Testing was more frequent in younger women in the overall population, and in men in the ASCVD population. Patients tested for Lp(a) had more comorbidities and higher ASCVD risk compared to matched control patients. ASCVD hospitalizations were more frequent prior to the first Lp(a) test (5.55 vs 1.42 per 100/person-years). The mortality rate of the Lp(a)-tested cohort and the control group was similar. Mortality was lower in patients with prior ASCVD and Lp(a) testing compared to matched controls with prior ASCVD and no Lp(a) test (2.30 vs 3.64 per 100/person-years, p <0.001). Patients with Lp(a) test received more laboratory examinations and cardiovascular medications and had more visits with specialized physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Lp(a) testing is rarely performed even in patients with very high cardiovascular risk. Patients tested for Lp(a) have more comorbidities and a higher ASCVD risk. Lp(a) testing is associated with more intensive preventive treatment and with positive effects on clinical outcomes and survival. The data support the value of Lp(a) measurements to characterize ASCVD risk and to improve ASCVD prevention.

Heart failure signs and symptoms, hospital referrals, and prescription patterns in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in primary care and cardiologist settings in Germany.

AIMS: The aim of this paper was to analyse heart failure (HF) signs and symptoms, hospital referrals, and prescription patterns in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) in primary care and cardiology settings in Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective cohort study of electronic medical records identified 1263 adults (aged ≥18 years) in the German IMS® Disease Analyzer database who were prescribed sac/val during 2016 and had at least 6 months of data following sac/val initiation. Clinical characteristics were collected during the 12 months before the first recorded sac/val prescription (index date) and 6 months post-index. Details of sac/val dose and prescription patterns were also recorded in the 6 months post-index. HF signs, symptoms, and all-cause hospital referrals were evaluated for 90 days pre-index and 30-120 days post-index. Most patients (62%) were prescribed the lowest sac/val dose of 24/26 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) at index; only 14% of patients initiated on 24/26 mg or 49/51 mg b.i.d. were up-titrated to the 97/103 mg b.i.d. target dose during the 6 months post-index, while 6% of patients initiated on either 49/51 mg or 97/103 mg b.i.d. were stably down-titrated. Evaluation of prescription patterns in relation to clinical characteristics did not clearly explain the reluctance to up-titrate in the majority of patients. More patients experienced HF signs or symptoms or all-cause referrals to hospital during the 90 days pre-index than during the 30-120 days post-index. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients receiving sac/val are not up-titrated, contrary to recommendations of the EU summary of product characteristics; this is not fully explained by patients' clinical characteristics. Further research is required to understand the reasons for clinician inertia.

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition versus individualized RAAS blockade: design and rationale of the PARALLAX trial.

AIMS: Although the effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and cardiovascular death has been evaluated, its effects on functional capacity in patients with HF and ejection fraction (EF) >40% has yet to be determined. In addition, no prior studies have compared sacubitril/valsartan with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. We sought to compare the effect of ARNI to background-medication-based individualized comparators (BMICs) on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), functional capacity [6 min walk distance (6MWD)], symptoms, and quality of life [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)] in patients with HF and EF >40% in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: PARALLAX is a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind multicentre clinical trial in patients with chronic symptomatic HF with EF >40%, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV symptoms, elevated natriuretic peptides, and evidence of structural heart disease. Eligible patients are randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs. BMIC for cardiovascular and related co-morbidities. BMIC includes (i) enalapril, (ii) valsartan, and (iii) placebo depending on the type of medical therapy prior to enrolment. The primary endpoints are the change in plasma NT-proBNP concentration from baseline to 12 weeks and the change from baseline in 6MWD distance at 24 weeks. The secondary endpoints assess quality of life and symptom burden. CONCLUSIONS: PARALLAX will determine if sacubitril/valsartan compared with standard medical therapy for co-morbidities improves NT-proBNP levels, exercise capacity, quality of life, and symptom burden in HF patients with EF >40%.

Real-world treatment patterns of sacubitril/valsartan: a longitudinal cohort study in Germany.

AIMS: To analyse real-world treatment patterns of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) using data from a pharmacy database in Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective cohort study of 26 191 adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) in the IMS® longitudinal prescriptions database in Germany who were dispensed sac/val from January 2016 to June 2017 was conducted. The analysis included sac/val dose titration assessed in the 6 months from first sac/val prescription; prescriptions of concomitant cardiovascular medications in the 6 months pre- and post-index and compliance and persistence during 12 months post-index. Two-thirds of patients were prescribed the lowest sac/val dose of 50 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) at index and up-titration during the first 6 months was attempted in 41% of these patients. Ten percent of patients prescribed 200 mg b.i.d. at index had to be stably down-titrated; among patients prescribed 50 or 100 mg b.i.d. at index that were up-titrated, > 80% remained on the higher dose. Overall, the mean daily diuretic dose decreased by 25% after initiation of sac/val. High compliance and persistence rates were observed across sac/val doses, increasing with higher sac/val dose at index. Prior dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker had only minor impact on first sac/val dose, compliance and persistence. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients prescribed sac/val are not initiated on the recommended dose nor up-titrated as recommended by the EU Summary of Product Characteristics. Initiation of sac/val was associated with high persistence and compliance and a dose reduction of diuretics. Barriers to up-titration must be explored.

Early insights into the characteristics and evolution of clinical parameters in a cohort of patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide early insights into sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) prescription patterns and the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients prescribed sac/val in primary care and cardiology settings in Germany. METHODS: The study used electronic medical records from the German IMS® Disease Analyzer database. Patients with ≥1 prescription for sac/val during 1 January-31 December 2016 (n = 1643) were identified and followed up for ≤12 months from first prescription. Patients with ≥1 heart failure (HF) diagnosis during the study period, ≥1 additional HF diagnosis in the full history of the database, and ≥1 prescription for an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker and a ß-blocker during the study period, without a prescription for sac/val (n = 25,264), were included as a reference cohort. Changes in clinical parameters in the 12 months before and after sac/val initiation were investigated and compared with those from the PARADIGM-HF study. RESULTS: The characteristics of patients prescribed sac/val more closely resembled those of patients enrolled in PARADIGM-HF (e.g. younger age, higher proportion of men than women, lower systolic blood pressure) than patients in the reference cohort. Most patients were initiated on the lowest dose of sac/val irrespective of clinical setting. Significant decreases (p < 0.001) in NT-proBNP and glycated haemoglobin levels were observed following sac/val initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients prescribed sac/val had similar baseline demographics and clinical characteristics to those from PARADIGM-HF, and most patients were initiated on the lowest dose. Changes in clinical parameters before and after initiation mirrored findings from the PARADIGM-HF study.

Epidemiology of heart failure in Germany: a retrospective database study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure (HF) is associated with significant healthcare expenditure, morbidity, and mortality. This study investigated the epidemiology of HF in Germany. METHODS: This retrospective study used anonymous healthcare claims data from the German Health Risk Institute on individuals with statutory health insurance. Patients with uninterrupted data from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013 or death (whichever occurred first), and ≥2 recorded HF-related diagnoses in 2011, were included. Patients with newly diagnosed HF were identified. Patients were followed up for 2 years from first diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 3,132,337 eligible patients, 123,925 (55.0% women; mean age 76.2 years) had HF: a prevalence of 3.96%. Of these, 26,368 had newly diagnosed HF: an incidence of 655/100,000 persons at risk. Incidence increased with age and was similar regardless of sex. During follow-up, there were 48,159 hospital admissions among newly diagnosed patients (1.8 hospitalizations/patient/2 years); HF accounted for 6% of these. Additionally, 20,148 patients (16.3%) overall and 5983 newly diagnosed patients (22.7%) died. Most new cases of HF were diagnosed by office-based physicians (63.2%); new cases among hospital inpatients were predominantly diagnosed by internal medicine specialists (70.7%). Overall, 94.0% received their initial prescription for HF treatment from a family practitioner. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence and incidence observed in this representative sample emphasize the burden of HF in Germany. Substantial hospitalization rates and mortality highlight the need for early diagnosis and appropriate treatment, and for close cooperation between physician specialties and healthcare sectors.

Treatment of chronic heart failure in Germany: a retrospective database study.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to treatment guidelines affects outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). We investigated patient pathways and treatment patterns for HF in Germany. METHODS: This retrospective study used anonymous healthcare claims data from the German Health Risk Institute on individuals with statutory health insurance. Patients with uninterrupted data from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013 or death (whichever occurred first), and ≥2 recorded HF-related diagnoses in 2011, were included. Patients with newly diagnosed HF were identified. Use of treatment patterns recommended by the European Society of Cardiology (2008) and German Nationale VersorgungsLeitlinien (2011) guidelines was evaluated. RESULTS: Of 123,925 patients with HF, 21.3% were newly diagnosed. Overall, 63.2% of new HF diagnoses were made in the ambulatory setting; 61.6% of these were made by family practitioners and 14.8% by cardiologists. In the ambulatory setting, family practitioners were primarily responsible for treatment; specialists in internal medicine (70.3% cardiologists) were mainly responsible for performing HF-related technical diagnostics. One-fifth (20.9%) of patients received a New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification; 45.1% of these received a guideline-based treatment pattern. Application of the recommended treatment pattern decreased with advancing disease severity (NYHA class IV: 21.1% application) and older age (≥90 years: 28.3% application). CONCLUSIONS: Family practitioners play a key role in the diagnosis and initial treatment of HF in Germany. A substantial proportion of patients do not receive guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy. These findings should be reflected in the planning of national disease management programmes.

Evaluation of effectiveness and safety of amlodipine/valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide single-pill combination therapy in hypertensive patients: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of amlodipine/valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide (A + V + H) single-pill combination therapy in the treatment of hypertensive patients in daily practice. DESIGN AND METHODS: This prospective, open-label, observational study, enroled adults for whom their physician considered treatment with the single pill combination as indicated. The observational period per patient was ∼3 months. Results were evaluated using basic descriptive statistical methods. MAIN OUTCOME: Data of 7132 patients were analyzed. At baseline, the mean blood pressure (BP) was 158.8 ± 17.7 mmHg (systolic, sBP) and 91.5 ± 10.7 mmHg (diastolic, dBP). The most common cardiovascular risk factors were positive family history, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. The most commonly used daily doses of A + V + H at study end were 5/160/12.5 mg (30.5%) or 10/160/12.5 mg (33.1%). At the last visit mean BP was 135.0 ± 11.8 mmHg (sBP) and 80.2 ± 7.3 mmHg (dBP). The mean BP reduction at last visit compared with baseline was -23.7 ± 17.5 mmHg (sBP) and -11.3 ± 10.6 mmHg (dBP); 43.5% of the patients reached normalization (BP <140/90 mmHg for non-diabetics or <130/80 mmHg for diabetics) and 71.3% reached therapeutic response (sBP <140 or ≥20 mmHg decrease vs baseline and dBP <90 or ≥10 mmHg decrease vs baseline in non-diabetic patients and sBP <130 mmHg or ≥20 mmHg decrease vs baseline and dBP <80 mmHg or ≥10 mmHg decrease vs baseline in patients with diabetes). Adverse events (AEs) were recorded in 2.3% of the patients, the most frequent being peripheral edema (0.6%) and dizziness (0.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In daily practice, A + V + H single-pill treatment effectively lowered the average BP in patients with essential hypertension and was well tolerated.

Meta-analysis of three observational studies of amlodipine/valsartan in hypertensive patients with additional risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, the effectiveness of amlodipine/valsartan single-pill combination was assessed in hypertensive patients with diabetes, metabolic risk or overweight. METHODS: Data from 12,265 patients treated with amlodipine/valsartan from three studies were analyzed in a meta-analysis. These studies focused on (i) non-diabetic hypertensive patients suffering from abdominal obesity; (ii) hypertensive patients with at least one metabolic risk factor; and (iii) hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The observation periods were 16 weeks for the first two and 24 weeks for the latter cohort. RESULTS: At start of observation, the mean blood pressure was 162.3 mmHg (systolic) and 93.5 mmHg (diastolic). A total of 7.4% of patients were aged ≥ 80 years. At end of the observation, a normalized blood pressure was present in 38.8% of patients. No appreciable differences in blood pressure reduction were evident between the study groups. In both age subgroups (< 80 years and ≥ 80 years) blood pressure reduction was comparable. Tolerability was assessed by treating physicians as "very good" (69.3%) and "good" (27.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In daily practice, treatment of hypertensive patients with additional risk factors with amlodipine/valsartan single-pill combinations is well tolerated and associated with effective reduction of blood pressure.

Pill burden in hypertensive patients treated with single-pill combination therapy--an observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension is a condition which in many cases is treated with more than one drug. Additionally, patients with hypertension often suffer from other concomitant diseases, such as diabetes mellitus or dyslipidemia, which adds to the number of pills that patients need to take (pill burden). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of this pill burden on patients with hypertension in clinical practice in Germany. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, observational study enrolled adult patients for whom their physician considered treatment with a single-pill combination of amlodipine, valsartan, and hydrochlorothiazide as indicated. At the start of the observation period, physicians and patients filled in a respective questionnaire. RESULTS: The questionnaires of 7,101 patients and 905 physicians were analyzed. The survey among the patients showed that the majority of patients felt burdened by the high number of pills to be taken. This was also seen as a potential reason for medication errors. Approximately half of the patients would be willing to make an out-of-pocket payment for reducing the number of pills to half. The results of the physician questionnaire indicate that the physicians were well aware of the set of problems that is generally associated with the high pill burden and that there is a clear willingness to use combination products in order to reduce the pill burden. CONCLUSION: A high number of pills is considered a burden by the patients. This burden increases with the number of pills taken per day.

Effects of the combinations of amlodipine/valsartan versus losartan/hydrochlorothiazide on left ventricular hypertrophy as determined with magnetic resonance imaging in patients with hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is frequently found in patients with arterial hypertension and is associated with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, LVH regression is an important treatment goal. For amlodipine plus valsartan (A/V) no specific study on LVH has been reported to date. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, randomized parallel-group study. Patients with essential hypertension and LVH were randomized to 52-week treatment with A/V 10/160 mg (n = 43) or the active comparator losartan/HCT 100/25 mg (L/H, n = 47). Add-on medication was allowed in case of inadequate blood pressure control. LV parameters were measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and adjudicated in a blinded manner. Study identifiers were NCT00446563 and EudraCT 2006-001977-17. RESULTS: In addition to the study treatment, 35% of patients in the A/V group and 49% in the L/H group received additional antihypertensive medication. Compared to baseline, both treatments reduced measures of LVH significantly after 52 weeks (e.g. LV mass index in the A/V group from 64.7 g/m(2) by -3.5 g/m(2), in the L/H group from 69.1 g/m(2) by -4.4 g/m(2), p < 0.01 for both). LV ejection fraction and LV volumes were not significantly changed by any regimen. A/V and L/H treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Both regimen were effective in reducing LV mass compared to baseline and were well tolerated.

Efficacy and tolerability of aliskiren 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg (± amlodipine 5 mg) in hypertensive patients not controlled by candesartan 32 mg plus HCT 25 mg.

AIMS: The majority of patients with essential hypertension of moderate severity (WHO grade 2) require combination therapy. We aimed to investigate whether the single-pill combination of aliskiren 300 mg and hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) 25 mg (ALIS 300/HCT 25) improves the BP reduction in hypertensive patients not adequately controlled by the free combination of candesartan 32 mg and HCT 25 mg (CAN 32 + HCT 25). METHODS: In an open-label, single-arm study, patients with mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) between 100-109 mmHg at baseline received 4-week treatment with CAN 32 + HCT 25 (Phase 1), followed - in patients whose BP was not controlled - by 4-week treatment with ALIS 300/HCT 25 (Phase 2). The DBP change between weeks 4 and 8 was the primary endpoint. The ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier is NCT00867490. RESULTS: In the 186 patients treated, CAN 32 + HCT 25 reduced systolic BP (SBP)/DBP by 18.9/12.2 mmHg. Those 123 patients with uncontrolled hypertension switched to ALIS 300/HCT 25 experienced a further SBP/DBP reduction of 2.8/3.1 mmHg between week 4 and week 8 (p = 0.0064 and p < 0.0001), and 33.3% achieved DBP normalisation. In 61 patients not controlled after week 8 (SBP ≥ 140 mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg), who participated in an optional study extension, amlodipine 5 mg was added. Triple therapy over 4 weeks decreased SBP/DBP by further 9.2/5.9 mmHg (p < 0.0001 each). Adverse events with suspected drug relationship were noted in 4.3% (Phase 1), 3.3% (Phase 2), and 1.6% (extension) of the patients. Limitations of the study include the open-label, non-randomised approach and short treatment duration across the individual phases. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label, single-arm switch study reflecting clinical practice, patients with moderate hypertension not controlled by the free combination of CAN 32 + HCT 25 achieved a clinically and statistically significant reduction of blood pressure from the single pill combination of ALIS 300/HCT 25, and the optional addition of amlodipine.

Impact of supportive measures on drug adherence in patients with essential hypertension treated with valsartan: the randomized, open-label, parallel group study VALIDATE.

OBJECTIVE: The majority of treated hypertensive patients do not achieve target blood pressure (BP) levels of less than 140/90 mmHg. One key reason is inadequate adherence with the prescribed drug regimen. Dosing regimens are either not executed as prescribed (noncompliance) or patients stop taking the medication (nonpersistence). It has been demonstrated that adherence with angiotensin receptor antagonists such as valsartan is high due to the tolerability profile of this drug class. The present study was designed to evaluate whether drug adherence could further be improved by the use of supportive measures. DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-eight centers were randomized to provide pharmacological treatment with or without a set of supportive measures (e.g. structured physician-patient interaction, printed information about hypertension, reminder stickers, 24 h timer, and home BP measurement device). Two hundred and two patients with grade 1 hypertension (BP at baseline 149.8 +/- 6.2/93.9 +/- 4.4 mmHg) who were either newly diagnosed or who had not been treated for at least 1 year were included in this trial. All patients entered the 34-week treatment phase with valsartan 160 mg daily. Titration to valsartan 160 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was allowed if necessary. Drug adherence was assessed by electronic monitors (Medication Event Monitoring System). RESULTS: Patients treated with a valsartan-based therapy receiving supportive measures as compared with the standard care group demonstrated an initially higher level of adherence with a maximum absolute difference of 7.8% (P = 0.041). This difference did not persist over the observation period but faded with time. In parallel, execution of the dosing regimen (compliance) was also improved in the intervention group during the early months of treatment but this effect also disappeared by the end of the observation period. In contrast, persistence in the two groups slowly but continuously separated over time. Estimated absolute difference in persistence at the end of the 34-weeks study between the two groups was 7.6% (95.9 vs. 88.3%) reflecting a 66% lower hazard of discontinuation in the intervention group (P = 0.073). BP control improved more in patients with the supportive measures. CONCLUSION: Drug adherence improved initially with the use of supportive measures. However, this effect faded with time mainly because of the short-lived improvement in the quality of execution (compliance) achieved. In contrast, a longer lasting effect of the chosen supportive measures on persistence could be demonstrated, which, however, at least under the conditions of the present study, did not translate into a persistent improvement of medication adherence.

Valsartan in combination with lisinopril versus the respective high dose monotherapies in hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria: the VALERIA trial.

OBJECTIVES: Microalbuminuria is known as an independent predictor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and death. The purpose of the VALERIA trial was a comparison of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy of valsartan and lisinopril with valsartan and lisinopril high-dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, interventional, parallel-group study. After a washout/placebo-run-in phase of 3 weeks, 133 patients were randomized to treatment (1: 1:1) with either lisinopril 40 mg, valsartan 320 mg, or a combination of valsartan/lisinopril 320/20 mg for 30 weeks. RESULTS: At baseline, the urine albumin creatinine ratio was similar for the three treatment groups (geometric means, lisinopril 9.6 mg/mmol, valsartan 9.1 mg/mmol, and valsartan/lisinopril 9.5 mg/mmol). After 30 weeks of treatment, the geometric mean urine albumin creatinine ratio had decreased in all three groups by 41, 51, and 62% to 5.7 mg/mmol (lisinopril), 4.5 mg/mmol (valsartan), and 3.6 mg/mmol (valsartan/lisinopril). The decrease for valsartan/lisinopril was statistically significantly greater compared with lisinopril [adjusted ratio 60%, confidence interval (38-94%), P = 0.029]. Normalization of microalbuminuria was greatest with valsartan and valsartan/lisinopril (lisinopril 17%, valsartan 31%, and valsartan/lisinopril 38% of patients) and was statistically significant for lisinopril in contrast with valsartan/lisinopril (P = 0.034). Differences in blood pressure reduction between the groups were not statistically significant. All treatments were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The combination of valsartan and lisinopril provided a significantly better reduction of urine albumin creatinine ratio and more than doubled the rate of patients with normalized urine albumin creatinine ratio compared with lisinopril alone. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.

Effective and safe reduction of blood pressure with the combination of amlodipine 5 mg and valsartan 160 mg in hypertensive patients not controlled by calcium channel blocker monotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: The addition of an angiotensin II receptor blocker to calcium channel blocker-based antihypertensive therapy may be associated with enhanced efficacy and reduced risk of adverse events. METHODS: This 8-week, open-label, single-arm trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of amlodipine and valsartan in patients not responding adequately to treatment with amlodipine or felodipine alone. Patients aged > or =18 years with moderate essential hypertension (defined as mean sitting systolic blood pressure [MSSBP] > or =160 and <180 mmHg) were treated for 4 weeks with once-daily amlodipine 5 mg or felodipine 5 mg. At week 4, patients not adequately responding were treated for an additional 4 weeks with once-daily amlodipine 5 mg plus valsartan 160 mg. Of 214 patients treated for 4 weeks with amlodipine 5 mg or felodipine 5 mg, 181 failed to achieve MSSBP <140 mmHg. These non-responders were treated for an additional 4 weeks with amlodipine 5 mg and valsartan 160 mg. RESULTS: A clinically and statistically significant additional reduction in MSSBP of 13.1 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.4, 14.7; P<0.0001) and a mean sitting diastolic blood pressure of 5.3 mmHg (95% CI: 4.3, 6.3; P<0.0001) were observed. Of patients treated with amlodipine 5 mg and valsartan 160 mg, 51.1% achieved target blood pressure levels (<140/90 mmHg) after 4 weeks. Adverse event rates were low in both treatment phases, and most were mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSION: The combination of amlodipine/valsartan was effective and well tolerated.

Steroid-sparing effect of pimecrolimus cream 1% in children with severe atopic dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if pimecrolimus cream 1% reduces the need for steroids in the long-term management of severe pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: A total of 184 pediatric patients (aged 2-17 years) with a history of severe AD according to Rajka and Langeland were enrolled. Patients were randomized to treatment with pimecrolimus cream or vehicle cream for a 24-week period. Prednicarbate 0.25% was applied as rescue medication. RESULTS: Patients on pimecrolimus required steroids on a mean of 29% of study days, compared with 35% of patients on vehicle (p = 0.1841). On the head and neck only, the respective figures were 10 versus 19% (p = 0.0009). In patients enrolled with acute severe disease (Investigator's Global Assessment > or = 4), steroids were used on 28% of the days in the pimecrolimus group compared to 45% in the control group (p = 0.0024). On the head and neck, steroids were used on 10% of study days with pimecrolimus versus 30% with vehicle (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the need for topical steroids on the head and neck is reduced with pimecrolimus cream 1% in the management of severe pediatric AD according to the definition of Rajka and Langeland.

Detection of H-2 alleles by PCR-RFLP-an alternative to flow cytometry in the screening of transgenic mice.

An increasing number of experimental models is based on well-defined transgenic mice in medical and biological research. Particularly in settings in which transgenic recombinants are used, a fast and reliable method is needed to screen for a defined H-2 background. For this purpose, flow cytometry with specific monoclonal antibodies is the standard procedure. However, epitopes of closely related rodent strains show only minor variations affecting the production of specific discriminating antibodies. Therefore, cross-reactivity of antibodies against specific major histocompatibility complex (MHC) leads to unreliable results in settings with closely related strains. In need of a method with high reliability, we have designed a screening assay based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) to discriminate the MHC class I antigens H-2K(d), -K(b), -K(k), which are sequence variants of the H-2K gene. A part of the mus musculus MHC gene coding for H-2K-covering exons 4 and 5 with MHC-differentiating restriction sites-was amplified. Subsequent restriction digest of the PCR products allows to discriminate the three aforementioned alleles and to identify homozygous as well as heterozygous haplotypes. To distinguish transgenic mice defined by certain MHC backgrounds, the PCR-RFLP method is simple, cost-effective, specific, and reliable and can be used independently or in addition to other methods in any laboratory.

Allogeneic adrenocortical transplantation: glucocorticosteroid-independent immunomodulatory properties of adrenal cortex cells.

BACKGROUND: Hormone substitution for the treatment of adrenocortical insufficiency does not adequately substitute the physiologic circadian secretion of corticosteroids and leads to long-term sequelae and reduced quality of life. The lack of adaptation to physical and psychologic stress situations may lead to life-threatening Addison's crises. Allogeneic transplantation of adrenal cortex could offer an intriguing alternative. Adrenocortical grafts were demonstrated to proliferate and produce corticosteroids in physiologic concentrations after transplantation. METHODS: K -transgenic murine lymphocytes and allogeneic adrenal cortex cells were cocultured in mixed lymphocyte reactions to examine the alloimmune response; lymphocytes from T-cell receptor transgenic mice and normal mice, respectively, served as responder cells. The effects of corticosteroids secreted by adrenocortical cells were antagonized by the steroid receptor antagonist mifepristone, whereas the impact of cell-cell interactions was differentiated with transwell culture systems. RESULTS: Coculture of adrenal cortex cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions markedly suppressed lymphocyte proliferation. Transwell cultures demonstrated that adrenocortical cells exerted their effects by a soluble factor that was only partially antagonized by mifepristone. CONCLUSION: In vitro, the presence of adrenocortical cells potently suppressed allogeneic immune responses. This effect was not exclusively the result of the secretion of corticosteroids, indicating an additional immunomodulatory property of adrenocortical cells.

Transplantation of adrenal tissue fragments in a murine model: functional capacities of syngeneic and allogeneic grafts.

Oral hormone substitution for the treatment of Addison's disease inadequately replaces the physiologic circadian secretion of corticosteroids. Alternative therapeutic approaches are reimplantation of healthy autologous adrenal tissue and allogeneic transplantation (Tx), respectively. The aim of our study was to evaluate the functional capacity of adrenal grafts and the influence of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) on graft survival. Fragmented adrenal glands of wild-type B10.BR (H-2k) and wild-type or ICAM-1-deficient BALB/c (H-2d) mice were transplanted underneath the kidney capsule of adrenalectomized B10.BR mice [complete major histocompatibility complex (MHC) haplotype disparity in the latter]. Postoperatively, the endocrine function of the adrenal grafts was evaluated by the following parameters: (1) survival analysis of the recipients (termination at day 70 after Tx); (2) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction expression analysis of aldosterone synthase (zona glomerulosa-specific) and of 11b-hydroxylase (zona fasciculata-specific); and (3) measurement of basal adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulated serum corticosterone levels. Expression of both enzyme-specific mRNAs was detected in the grafts at any time during the post-Tx period. The adrenal grafts of syngeneic and surviving MHC-disparate mice displayed a similar basal hormone secretion, which was about 60% lower than that in sham-operated animals. In the transplanted mice, ACTH-stimulated corticosterone measurement revealed a 5- to 10-fold decreased functional reserve capacity. ICAM-1 deficiency significantly prolonged the survival of adrenal grafts. Fragmented adrenal grafts are able to maintain physiologic basal corticosterone levels but had markedly reduced reserve capacity. Nevertheless, the results give rise to hopes that autologous or MHC-compatible allogeneic transplantation of adrenal grafts may replace oral hormone substitution in humans.