Ruth Webster

An international randomised placebo-controlled trial of a four-component combination pill ("polypill") in people with raised cardiovascular risk

Background There has been widespread interest in the potential of combination cardiovascular medications containing aspirin and agents to lower blood pressure and cholesterol (‘polypills’) to reduce cardiovascular disease. However, no reliable placebo-controlled data are available on both efficacy and tolerability. Methods We conducted a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial of a polypill (containing aspirin 75 mg, lisinopril 10 mg, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg and simvastatin 20 mg) in 378 individuals without an indication for any component of the polypill, but who had an estimated 5-year cardiovascular disease risk over 7.5%. The primary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), LDL-cholesterol and tolerability (proportion discontinued randomised therapy) at 12 weeks follow-up. Findings At baseline, mean BP was 134/81 mmHg and mean LDL-cholesterol was 3.7 mmol/L. Over 12 weeks, polypill treatment reduced SBP by 9.9 (95% CI: 7.7 to 12.1) mmHg and LDL-cholesterol by 0.8 (95% CI 0.6 to 0.9) mmol/L. The discontinuation rates in the polypill group compared to placebo were 23% vs 18% (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.00, p = 0.2). There was an excess of side effects known to the component medicines (58% vs 42%, p = 0.001), which was mostly apparent within a few weeks, and usually did not warrant cessation of trial treatment. Conclusions This polypill achieved sizeable reductions in SBP and LDL-cholesterol but caused side effects in about 1 in 6 people. The halving in predicted cardiovascular risk is moderately lower than previous estimates and the side effect rate is moderately higher. Nonetheless, substantial net benefits would be expected among patients at high risk. Trial Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12607000099426

A pragmatic randomized trial of a polypill-based strategy to improve use of indicated preventive treatments in people at high cardiovascular disease risk

Background Most individuals at high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk worldwide do not receive any or optimal preventive drugs. We aimed to determine whether fixed dose combinations of generic drugs (‘polypills’) would promote use of such medications. Methods We conducted a randomized, open-label trial involving 623 participants from Australian general practices. Participants had established CVD or an estimated five-year CVD risk of ≥15%, with indications for antiplatelet, statin and ≥2 blood pressure lowering drugs (‘combination treatment’). Participants randomized to the ‘polypill-based strategy’ received a polypill containing aspirin 75 mg, simvastatin 40 mg, lisinopril 10 mg and either atenolol 50 mg or hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg. Participants randomized to ‘usual care’ continued with separate medications and doses as prescribed by their doctor. Primary outcomes were self-reported combination treatment use, systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol. Results After a median of 18 months, the polypill-based strategy was associated with greater use of combination treatment (70% vs. 47%; relative risk 1.49, (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 1.72) p < 0.0001; number needed to treat = 4.4 (3.3 to 6.6)) without differences in systolic blood pressure (−1.5 mmHg (95% CI −4.0 to 1.0) p = 0.24) or total cholesterol (0.08 mmol/l (95% CI −0.06 to 0.22) p = 0.26). At study end, 17% and 67% of participants in polypill and usual care groups, respectively, were taking atorvastatin or rosuvastatin. Conclusion Provision of a polypill improved self-reported use of indicated preventive treatments. The lack of differences in blood pressure and cholesterol may reflect limited study power, although for cholesterol, improved statin use in the polypill group counter-balanced use of more potent statins with usual care.

The Efficacy and Tolerability of ‘Polypills’: Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Background To assess the blood pressure and lipid-lowering efficacy and tolerability of ‘polypills’ used in cardiovascular disease prevention trials. Methodology/Principal Findings Systematic review and meta-analysis. Search strategy: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and PubMed databases were searched for eligible trials. Study inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trials of at least six weeks duration, which compared a ‘polypill’ (that included at least one anti-hypertensive and one lipid-lowering medication) with a placebo (or one active component). Outcome measures: Change from baseline in systolic and diastolic blood pressures, and total and LDL-cholesterol; discontinuation of study medication and reported adverse effects. Of 44 potentially eligible studies, six trials (including 2,218 patients without previous cardiovascular disease) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, ‘polypills’ reduced systolic blood pressure by −9.2 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI): −13.4, −5.0) diastolic blood pressure by −5.0 mmHg (95%CI: −7.4, −2.6), total cholesterol by −1.22 mmol/L (95%CI: −1.60, −0.84) and LDL-cholesterol by −1.02 mmol/L (95%CI: −1.37, −0.67). However, those taking a ‘polypill’ (vs. placebo or component) were more likely to discontinue medication (20% vs 14%) (Odds ratio: 1.5 (95% CI: 1.2, 1.9)). There was no significant difference in reported adverse effects amongst those on a ‘polypill’ (36% vs. 28%) (OR: 1.3 (95%CI: 0.7, 2.5)). There was high statistical heterogeneity in comparisons for blood pressure and lipid-lowering but use of random-effects and quality-effects models produced very similar results. Conclusions/Significance Compared with placebo, the ‘polypills’ reduced blood pressure and lipids. Tolerability was lower amongst those on ‘polypills’ than those on placebo or one component, but differences were moderate. Effectiveness trials are needed to help clarify the status of ‘polypills’ in primary care and prevention strategies.

An Electronic Clinical Decision Support Tool to Assist Primary Care Providers in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Management: Development and Mixed Methods Evaluation

Background Challenges remain in translating the well-established evidence for management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk into clinical practice. Although electronic clinical decision support (CDS) systems are known to improve practitioner performance, their development in Australian primary health care settings is limited. Objectives Study aims were to (1) develop a valid CDS tool that assists Australian general practitioners (GPs) in global CVD risk management, and (2) preliminarily evaluate its acceptability to GPs as a point-of-care resource for both general and underserved populations. Methods CVD risk estimation (based on Framingham algorithms) and risk-based management advice (using recommendations from six Australian guidelines) were programmed into a software package. Tool validation: Data from 137 patients attending a physician’s clinic were analyzed to compare the tool’s risk scores with those obtained from an independently programmed algorithm in a separate statistics package. The tool’s management advice was compared with a physician’s recommendations based on a manual review of the guidelines. Field test: The tool was then tested with 21 GPs from eight general practices and three Aboriginal Medical Services. Customized CDS-based recommendations were generated for 200 routinely attending patients (33% Aboriginal) using information extracted from the health record by a research assistant. GPs reviewed these recommendations during each consultation. Changes in CVD risk factor measurement and management were recorded. In-depth interviews with GPs were conducted. Results Validation testing: The tool’s risk assessment algorithm correlated very highly with the independently programmed version in the separate statistics package (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.999). For management advice, there were only two cases of disagreement between the tool and the physician. Field test: GPs found 77% (153/200) of patient outputs easy to understand and agreed with screening and prescribing recommendations in 72% and 64% of outputs, respectively; 26% of patients had their CVD risk factor history updated; 73% had at least one CVD risk factor measured or tests ordered. For people assessed at high CVD risk (n = 82), 10% and 9%, respectively, had lipid-lowering and BP-lowering medications commenced or dose adjustments made, while 7% newly commenced anti-platelet medications. Three key qualitative findings emerged: (1) GPs found the tool enabled a systematic approach to care; (2) the tool greatly influenced CVD risk communication; (3) successful implementation into routine care would require integration with practice software, minimal data entry, regular revision with updated guidelines, and a self-auditing feature. There were no substantive differences in study findings for Aboriginal Medical Services GPs, and the tool was generally considered appropriate for use with Aboriginal patients. Conclusion A fully-integrated, self-populating, and potentially Internet-based CDS tool could contribute to improved global CVD risk management in Australian primary health care. The findings from this study will inform a large-scale trial intervention.

The association between resting heart rate, cardiovascular disease and mortality: evidence from 112,680 men and women in 12 cohorts

Background: Multiple studies have examined the relationship between heart rate and mortality; however, there are discrepancies in results. Our aim was to describe the relationship between resting heart rate (RHR) and both major cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, as well as all-cause mortality in the Asia-Pacific region. Design and methods: Individual data from 112,680 subjects in 12 cohort studies were pooled and analysed using Cox models, stratified by study and sex, and adjusted for age and systolic blood pressure. Results: During a mean 7.4 years follow-up, 6086 deaths and 2726 fatal or nonfatal CV events were recorded. There was a continuous, increasing association between having a RHR above approximately 65 beats/min and the risk of both CV and all-cause mortality, yet there was no evidence of associations below this threshold. The hazard ratio (95% CI) comparing the extreme quarters of RHR (80+ v <65 beats/min) was 1.44 (1.29–1.60) for CV and 1.54 (1.43–1.66) for total mortality. These associations were not materially changed by adjustment for other risk factors and exclusion of the first 2 years of follow-up. Hazard ratios of a similar magnitude were found for ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, but the hazard ratio for heart failure was higher (2.08, 95% CI 1.07–4.06) and for Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) was lower (1.11, 95% CI 0.93–1.31) than for stroke. Conclusions: RHR of above 65 beats/min has a strong independent effect on premature mortality and stroke, but a lesser effect on CHD. Lifestyle and pharmaceutical regimens to reduce RHR may be beneficial for people with moderate to high levels of RHR.

Effectiveness of fixed dose combination medication ('polypills') compared with usual care in patients with cardiovascular disease or at high risk : A prospective, individual patient data meta-analysis of 3140 patients in six countries

AIMS To conduct a prospective, individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing a polypill-based approach with usual care in high risk individuals. METHODS AND RESULTS Three trials comparing polypill-based care with usual care in individuals with CVD or high calculated cardiovascular risk contributed IPD. Primary outcomes were self-reported adherence to combination therapy (anti-platelet, statin and ≥ two blood pressure (BP) lowering agents), and difference in mean systolic BP (SBP) and LDL-cholesterol at 12 months. Analyses used random effects models. Among 3140 patients from Australia, England, India, Ireland, New Zealand and The Netherlands (75% male, mean age 62 years), median follow-up was 15 months. At baseline, 84%, 87% and 61% respectively were taking a statin, anti-platelet agent and at least two BP lowering agents. At 12 months, compared to usual care, participants in the polypill arm had higher adherence to combination therapy (80% vs. 50%, RR 1.58; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.90; p < 0.001), lower SBP (-2.5 mmHg; 95% CI, -4.5 to -0.4; p = 0.02) and lower LDL-cholesterol (-0.1 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.0; p = 0.04). Baseline treatment levels were a major effect modifier for adherence and SBP (p-homog < 0.0001 and 0.02 respectively) with greatest improvements seen among those under-treated at baseline. CONCLUSIONS Polypill therapy significantly improved adherence, SBP and LDL-cholesterol in high risk patients compared with usual care, especially among those who were under-treated at baseline.

Perceptions of risk: understanding cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is still the leading cause of death and disability worldwide despite the availability of well-established and effective preventive options. Accurate perception of a patient’s risk by both the patient and the doctors is important as this is one of the components that determine health-related behavior. Doctors tend to not use cardiovascular (CV) risk calculators and underestimate the absolute CV risk of their patients. Patients show optimistic bias when considering their own risk and consistently underestimate it. Poor patient health literacy and numeracy must be considered when thinking about this problem. Patients must possess a reasonably high level of understanding of numerical processes when doctors discuss risk, a level that is not possessed by large numbers of the population. In order to overcome this barrier, doctors need to utilize various tools including the appropriate use of visual aids to accurately communicate risk with their patients. Any intervention has been shown to be better than nothing in improving health understanding. The simple process of repeatedly conveying risk information to a patient has been shown to improve accuracy of risk perception. Doctors need to take responsibility for the accurate assessment and effective communication of CV risk in their patients in order to improve patient uptake of cardioprotective lifestyle choices and preventive medications.

Quarter-dose quadruple combination therapy for initial treatment of hypertension: placebo-controlled, crossover, randomised trial and systematic review.

BACKGROUND Globally, most patients with hypertension are treated with monotherapy, and control rates are poor because monotherapy only reduces blood pressure by around 9/5 mm Hg on average. There is a pressing need for blood pressure-control strategies with improved efficacy and tolerability. We aimed to assess whether ultra-low-dose combination therapy could meet these needs. METHODS We did a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trial of a quadpill-a single capsule containing four blood pressure-lowering drugs each at quarter-dose (irbesartan 37·5 mg, amlodipine 1·25 mg, hydrochlorothiazide 6·25 mg, and atenolol 12·5 mg). Participants with untreated hypertension were enrolled from four centres in the community of western Sydney, NSW, Australia, mainly by general practitioners. Participants were randomly allocated by computer to either the quadpill or matching placebo for 4 weeks; this treatment was followed by a 2-week washout, then the other study treatment was administered for 4 weeks. Study staff and participants were unaware of treatment allocations, and masking was achieved by use of identical opaque capsules. The primary outcome was placebo-corrected 24-h systolic ambulatory blood pressure reduction after 4 weeks and analysis was by intention to treat. We also did a systematic review of trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of quarter-standard-dose blood pressure-lowering therapy against placebo. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12614001057673. The trial ended after 1 year and this report presents the final analysis. FINDINGS Between November, 2014, and December, 2015, 55 patients were screened for our randomised trial, of whom 21 underwent randomisation. Mean age of participants was 58 years (SD 11) and mean baseline office and 24-h systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were 154 (14)/90 (11) mm Hg and 140 (9)/87 (8) mm Hg, respectively. One individual declined participation after randomisation and two patients dropped out for administrative reasons. The placebo-corrected reduction in systolic 24-h blood pressure with the quadpill was 19 mm Hg (95% CI 14-23), and office blood pressure was reduced by 22/13 mm Hg (p<0·0001). During quadpill treatment, 18 (100%) of 18 participants achieved office blood pressure less than 140/90 mm Hg, compared with six (33%) of 18 during placebo treatment (p=0·0013). There were no serious adverse events and all patients reported that the quadpill was easy to swallow. Our systematic review identified 36 trials (n=4721 participants) of one drug at quarter-dose and six trials (n=312) of two drugs at quarter-dose, against placebo. The pooled placebo-corrected blood pressure-lowering effects were 5/2 mm Hg and 7/5 mm Hg, respectively (both p<0·0001), and there were no side-effects from either regimen. INTERPRETATION The findings of our small trial in the context of previous randomised evidence suggest that the benefits of quarter-dose therapy could be additive across classes and might confer a clinically important reduction in blood pressure. Further examination of the quadpill concept is needed to investigate effectiveness against usual treatment options and longer term tolerability. FUNDING National Heart Foundation, Australia; University of Sydney; and National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.

Prospective meta-analysis of trials comparing fixed dose combination based care with usual care in individuals at high cardiovascular risk: The SPACE Collaboration

BACKGROUND An international collaboration of investigators will assess the benefits and risks of fixed dose combination (FDC) based care compared with usual care in populations at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Several trials are being conducted, as the effectiveness and economic impact of a FDC-based strategy may vary substantially between countries, given the varying influence of the health-care system within which the intervention is delivered. METHODS Individual patient data (IPD) will be provided by participating trials for combined IPD meta-analysis. RESULTS Primary outcomes will include self-reported current use of antiplatelet, statin, and combination (≥ 2) blood pressure lowering therapies at 12 months, and change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and LDL cholesterol from baseline to 12 months. Non-inferiority margins of 3 mm Hg for SBP and 0.3 mmol/L for LDL cholesterol have been pre-specified. Secondary outcomes will include change in cholesterol fractions, diastolic blood pressure and creatinine from baseline to 12 months, quality of life, new onset diabetes mellitus, mortality (cardiovascular, non-cardiovascular and all cause) and a composite outcome of cardiovascular events (including all coronary heart disease events, heart failure events leading to death or requiring hospital admission, cerebrovascular events and peripheral arterial events). CONCLUSION The SPACE group of trials will assess, in a variety of healthcare settings, whether a FDC strategy for delivery of preventive medication has the potential to significantly improve prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients at high risk.

Polypill treatments for cardiovascular diseases

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality globally. Effective CVD preventive medications are available including statin, blood pressure-lowering and antiplatelet medications; however most people do not take these drugs long term. Fixed-dose combination pills (“polypills”) have been shown, in several clinical trials, to improve adherence to these recommended medications, with corresponding improvements in risk factors such as blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol. In patients not taking all modalities of recommended CVD preventive therapies, polypill-based strategies could importantly contribute to global CVD control strategies. The largest benefits are seen in those who are under-treated at baseline, rather than those who are already taking the individual components separately: simplified step-up is more important than pill count reduction. Despite the potential benefits for patients and payers, only a few polypills are available due to market failure in the funding of research and development for affordable non-communicable disease medicines. Regulatory paradigms have focused on substitution indications among patients already taking component medications; however, this is the population that is likely to receive the least benefit from a polypill-based strategy. Greater health impact is likely if focus is given to patients who have indications for all polypill components, but currently do not receive the benefits of recommended medicines long term.