Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Jun;14(3):112-20.
doi: 10.1097/MBP.0b013e32832a9da7.

Effects of force-titrated valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide versus amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide on ambulatory blood pressure in patients with stage 2 hypertension: the EVALUATE study

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of force-titrated valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide versus amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide on ambulatory blood pressure in patients with stage 2 hypertension: the EVALUATE study

Yves Lacourcière et al. Blood Press Monit. 2009 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Previous studies using the combination of angiotensin-receptor blockers and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) have shown superior ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) reduction in study participants with stage 2 hypertension compared with monotherapy.

Objective: This multicenter, double-blind, parallel group, forced-titration study of individuals with stage 2 hypertension, compared the efficacy of valsartan and amlodipine in combination with HCTZ on ABP reduction.

Methods: After a 2-week washout period, participants (n=482) with mean office sitting systolic BP >or=160 mmHg and <or=200 mmHg were randomized to receive treatment with either valsartan 160 mg (n=241) or amlodipine 5 mg (n=241), force-titrated to a maximum dose of valsartan/HCTZ 320/25 mg or amlodipine/HCTZ 10/25 mg over 6 weeks and continued through week 10. The primary endpoint was change in mean 24-h ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to week 10.

Results: At week 10, changes from baseline in mean office BP were significantly (P<0.0001) decreased by both valsartan/HCTZ (-34.2/-14.2 mmHg) and amlodipine/HCTZ (-34.1/-14.7 mmHg). Changes from baseline in mean 24-h ABP were significantly (P<0.0001) decreased by both valsartan/HCTZ (-21.1/-12.5 mmHg) and amlodipine/HCTZ (-18.1/-9.9 mmHg). However, treatment with valsartan/HCTZ provided significant additional systolic BP (-3.8 mmHg; P=0.0042) and diastolic BP (-2.7 mmHg; P=0.0002) reduction compared with the amlodipine/HCTZ group. The proportion of individuals reaching the office goal BP (<140/80 mmHg) were similar in the valsartan/HCTZ (55.3%) versus amlodipine/HCTZ (54.9%) group, ABP control rates for the recommended ABP goal (<130/80 mmHg) were greater (P=0.0170) in the valsartan/HCTZ group (54.3%) than the amlodipine/HCTZ group (42.7%). Both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusion: On the basis of ABP monitoring but not office measurements, the fixed-dose combination of valsartan/HCTZ is a significantly more effective treatment regimen than amlodipine/HCTZ, with similar tolerability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources