Abstract:Background: Current hypertension guidelines recommend combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor blocker with a calcium-channel blocker or thiazide diuretic as initial antihypertensive therapy in patients with monotherapy uncontrolled hypertension. However, to what extent these two different combinations are comparable in blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy and safety remains under investigation, especially in the Chinese population. We investigated the BP-lowering efficacy and safety of the amlodipine/benazepril and benazepril/hydrochlorothiazide dual therapies in Chinese patients. Methods: In a multi-center, randomized, actively controlled, parallel-group trial, we enrolled patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension from July 2018 to June 2021 in 20 hospitals and community health centers across China. Of the 894 screened patients, 560 eligible patients were randomly assigned to amlodipine/benazepril 5/10 mg (n = 282) or benazepril/hydrochlorothiazide 10/12.5 mg (n = 278), with 213 and 212 patients, respectively, who completed the study and had a valid repeat ambulatory BP recording during follow-up and were included in the efficacy analysis. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to 24 weeks of treatment in 24-h ambulatory systolic BP. Adverse events including symptoms and clinically significant changes in physical examinations and laboratory findings were recorded for safety analysis. Results: In the efficacy analysis (n = 425), the primary outcome, 24-h ambulatory systolic BP reduction, was - 13.8 ± 1.2 mmHg in the amlodipine/benazepril group and - 12.3 ± 1.2 mmHg in the benazepril/hydrochlorothiazide group, with a between-group difference of - 1.51 (p = 0.36) mmHg. The between-group differences for major secondary outcomes were - 1.47 (p = 0.18) in 24-h diastolic BP, - 2.86 (p = 0.13) and - 2.74 (p = 0.03) in daytime systolic and diastolic BP, and - 0.45 (p = 0.82) and - 0.93 (p = 0.44) in nighttime systolic and diastolic BP. In the safety analysis (n = 560), the incidence rate of dry cough was significantly lower in the amlodipine/benazepril group than in the benazepril/hydrochlorothiazide group (5.3% vs 10.1%, p = 0.04). Conclusions: The amlodipine/benazepril and benazepril/hydrochlorothiazide dual therapies were comparable in ambulatory systolic BP lowering. The former combination, compared with the latter, had a greater BP-lowering effect in the daytime and a lower incidence rate of dry cough. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03682692. Registered on 18 September 2018.

Randomized, Double-blind Study to Compare the Antihypertensive Effects of HYZZAR Versus COZAAR in Mild to Moderate Hypertension

Clinical Study of Olmesartan/hydrochlorothiazide Compound Tablet in Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertensive Patients Who Did Not Reach Goal with Olmesartan

Efficacy and Safety of the Compound of Candesartan Cilexetial and Hydrochlorothiazide in Patients with Essential Hypertension

[A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study Comparing a Fixed Dose Combination of Telmisartan 80 Mg Plus Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 Mg to Telmisartan 80 Mg in Chinese Hypertensive Patients Who Failed to Respond Adequately to Telmisartan 80 Mg].

Effects of Atenolol and Diltiazem-Sr on Quality of Life in the Hypertensive Patients

Telmisartan and Hydrochlorothiazide Antihypertensive Treatment in High Sodium Intake Population: a Randomized Double-Blind Trial

OS 03-08 EFFICACY OF TELMISARTAN 40 MG (T40) AND HYDROCHLOROTHIAZIDE 25 MG (H25) MONOTHERAPY IN HIGH SODIUM INTAKE PATIENTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE HYPERTENSION (THAT STUDY): A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLINDED PARALLEL CONTROLLED TRIAL.

Therapeutic Efficacy of Valsartan and Valsartan/hctz in Mild to Moderate Hypertensive Patients

A Comparison of Initial Treatment with Losartan/hctz Versus Losartan Monotherapy in Chinese Patients with Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension.

[Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan Medoxomil Versus Losartan Potassium in Chinese Patients with Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension].

The Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Valsartan in Treatment of Patients with Essential Hypertensive

Efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil in the treatment of hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PS 17-77 A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND AND DOUBLE-DUMMY, MULTIPLE-DOSE, POSITIVE AND PARALLEL COMPARATIVE, MULTICENTER CLINICAL TRIAL OF ALLISARTAN EVALUATE EFFICACY AND SAFETY IN PATIENTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION

Effect on Blood Pressure Control of Switching from Valsartan Monotherapy to Losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in Asian Patients with Hypertension: Results of a Multicentre Open-Label Trial

Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696) Compared with Olmesartan in Elderly Asian Patients (≥65 Years) with Systolic Hypertension.

Effect Different Medicine on Serum Uric Acid in Patients with Hypertension

Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan Medoxomil-Amlodipine Besylate Tablet in Chinese Patients with Essential Hypertension: A Prospective, Single-Arm, Multi-Center, Real-World Study

[The Clinical Efficiency and Safety of Bisoprolol Hydrochlorothiazide in Patients with Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension].

Comparison of two single-pill dual combination antihypertensive therapies in Chinese patients: a randomized, controlled trial

Efficacy and Effectiveness of Valsartan/amlodipine and Valsartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide in Hypertension: Randomized Controlled Versus Observational Studies

Clinical Observation on efficacy and safety of Telmisartan hydrochlorothiazide and Telmisartan in patients with Mild to Moderate Essential hypertension