Manidipine Versus Amlodipine in Patients With Hypertension

Hypertension Clinical Trial

Official title:

Manidipine Versus Amlodipine in Patients With Hypertension: Effects on Peripheral Edema Evaluated by Bioimpedance Analysis

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Terminated

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03106597
• Other study ID #: KUGH15082 (MAAMA)
• Status: Terminated
• Phase: Phase 4
• Start date: August 20, 2015
• Est. completion date: August 14, 2019

Study information

• Verified date: April 2017
• Source: Korea University Guro Hospital
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of a third-generation Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB), manidipine, compared with second-generation Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB), amlodipine, on the development of peripheral edema using Direct Segmental Multi-Frequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (DSM-BIA) method in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Investigator expects this study could show more objective evidence of better safety of manidipine compared with amlodipine for peripheral edema.

Description:

Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs) are one of the most commonly used potent antihypertensive agents. Their vasodilatory effects are associated with Adverse Effects (AEs) such as peripheral edema, headache and flushing.

The incidence of peripheral edema with Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB) is 6% in a recent systematic review and is clearly dose-dependent and more common in women, in obese and in elderly hypertensives. Peripheral edema could be a cause for poor persistence with therapy or antihypertensive treatment withdrawal and has a deleterious impact on health-related quality of life.

A recent meta-analysis of head-to-head trials to compare the efficacy and safety profile of manidipine and amlodipine showed significantly better safety of manidipine: the Relative Risk (RR) for adverse event was 0.69 (0.56-0.85), and particularly for ankle edema Relative Risk (RR) was 0.35 (0.22-0.54).

Although peripheral edema is an important issue in Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB) treatment, techniques (e.g, ankle-foot volume using a water displacement measurement, plethysmography, and pretibial subcutaneous tissue pressure) for the objective measurement are not generally available in a clinical setting. Most clinical studies relied on self-report of peripheral edema that is not a reliable objective method.

Recently, Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) has become increasingly popular for estimating body composition, including Extracellular Water (ECW) and Intracellular Water (ICW), fat mass and fat-free mass. Mechanistically, the Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB)-related peripheral edema is likely due to distal arteriolar dilatation with capillary leak to tissue spaces. Because BIA method can measure the edema as the ratio of Extracellular Water (ECW) to Total Body Water (TBW), it may reflect the Calcium Channel Blocker (CCB)-related edema. Moreover, the Direct Segmental Multi-frequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (DSM-BIA) has been validated to assess segmental body (i.e., trunk, arms and legs) composition in addition to total body composition and can provide segmental edema score as well as total edema score. This new, previously not reported method is expected to provide more objective and precise data for peripheral edema.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Terminated
• Enrollment: 46
• Est. completion date: August 14, 2019
• Est. primary completion date: May 15, 2018
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 20 Years to 80 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Male and female outpatients between the ages of 20 and 80 years with uncomplicated essential hypertension are eligible.

• Inclusion criteria requires that patients have either stage I or stage II hypertension (mean sitting systolic Blood Pressure (BP) 140-179 mmHg, diastolic BP 90-109 mmHg).

• The patients are newly diagnosed or known hypertensive subjects who were not taking antihypertensive agents for more than the last 4 weeks.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients are excluded from the study if they have any evidence of clinically significant concurrent medical conditions including cardiac, renal, hepatic, gastrointestinal, or endocrinologic disease.

• Patients are also excluded if they have known hypersensitivity or serious drug reactions to Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs), any evidence of prior deep vein thrombosis, lymphatic disease, or concurrent requirement for medications that could affect Blood Pressure (BP) or salt and water retention (e.g, nonsteroidal antinflammatory drugs, estrogen containing drugs).

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Hypertension

Intervention

Drug:
• Manidipine 20mg
After a 1~2-week run-in period, patents will be randomized to receive manidipine (20 mg/day; n=50) for a 8-week open-labeled phase. Study drugs will be administered orally and once daily between 8:00am and 10:00am. BP, heart rate, adverse events and concomitant therapy are assessed and a physical examination is performed at each visit. A 12-lead standard ECG is obtained and hematology, clinical biochemistry and urine analysis investigations performed at the screening visit. A Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) is undertaken at the screening visit and at the end of the 8-week treatment course. Patients have to attend the clinic visit every 4 weeks during the treatment period.
• Amlodipine 10mg
After a 1~2-week run-in period, patents will be randomized to receive amlodipine (10 mg/day; n=50) for a 8-week open-labeled phase. Study drugs will be administered orally and once daily between 8:00am and 10:00am. BP, heart rate, adverse events and concomitant therapy are assessed and a physical examination is performed at each visit. A 12-lead standard ECG is obtained and hematology, clinical biochemistry and urine analysis investigations performed at the screening visit. A Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) is undertaken at the screening visit and at the end of the 8-week treatment course. Patients have to attend the clinic visit every 4 weeks during the treatment period.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Korea, Republic of	Korea University Guro Hospital	Seoul
Korea, Republic of	Yonsei University Severance Hospital	Seoul
Korea, Republic of	Yonsei University Wonju Hospital	Wonju

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Korea University Guro Hospital	Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Korea, Republic of, 

References & Publications (10)

Fogari R, Malamani G, Zoppi A, Mugellini A, Rinaldi A, Fogari E, Perrone T. Effect on the development of ankle edema of adding delapril to manidipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: a three-way crossover study. Clin Ther. 2007 Mar;29(3):413-8. — View Citation

Fogari R. Ankle oedema and sympathetic activation. Drugs. 2005;65 Suppl 2:21-7. Review. — View Citation

Ling CH, de Craen AJ, Slagboom PE, Gunn DA, Stokkel MP, Westendorp RG, Maier AB. Accuracy of direct segmental multi-frequency bioimpedance analysis in the assessment of total body and segmental body composition in middle-aged adult population. Clin Nutr. 2011 Oct;30(5):610-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2011.04.001. Epub 2011 May 8. — View Citation

Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Wever-Pinzon O, Messerli FH. Effect of renin-angiotensin system blockade on calcium channel blocker-associated peripheral edema. Am J Med. 2011 Feb;124(2):128-35. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007. — View Citation

Messerli FH, Oparil S, Feng Z. Comparison of efficacy and side effects of combination therapy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (benazepril) with calcium antagonist (either nifedipine or amlodipine) versus high-dose calcium antagonist monotherapy for systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 2000 Dec 1;86(11):1182-7. — View Citation

Opie LH. Calcium channel antagonists. Part IV: Side effects and contraindications drug interactions and combinations. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 1988 Jul;2(2):177-89. Review. — View Citation

Richy FF, Laurent S. Efficacy and safety profiles of manidipine compared with amlodipine: a meta-analysis of head-to-head trials. Blood Press. 2011 Feb;20(1):54-9. doi: 10.3109/08037051.2010.518670. Epub 2010 Oct 14. — View Citation

Schoeller DA, Alon A, Manekas D, Mixson LA, Lasseter KC, Noonan GP, Bolognese JA, Heymsfield SB, Beals CR, Nunes I. Segmental bioimpedance for measuring amlodipine-induced pedal edema: a placebo-controlled study. Clin Ther. 2012 Mar;34(3):580-92. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.01.018. Epub 2012 Mar 3. — View Citation

Seo HS, Kim EJ, Kim SW, Im SI, Na JO, Choi CU, Lim HE, Won Kim J, Rha SW, Park CG. Extracellular fluid adjusted for body size is contracted in hypertension. Hypertens Res. 2013 Oct;36(10):916-21. doi: 10.1038/hr.2013.68. Epub 2013 Jul 11. — View Citation

Weir MR, Rosenberger C, Fink JC. Pilot study to evaluate a water displacement technique to compare effects of diuretics and ACE inhibitors to alleviate lower extremity edema due to dihydropyridine calcium antagonists. Am J Hypertens. 2001 Sep;14(9 Pt 1):963-8. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Change in leg edema score (Extracellular Water(ECW) to Total Body Water(TBW))		Up to 8 weeks
Secondary	Changes in segmental (each arm/leg, trunk) edema score		Up to 8 weeks
Secondary	Changes in Blood Pressure (BP)		Up to 8 weeks
Secondary	Incidences of AEs		Up to 8 weeks