학술논문

Pairwise comparison of hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone responses among hypertensive patients.
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Chekka LMS; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.; Cooper-DeHoff RM; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.; Gums JG; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.; Chapman AB; Division of Nephrology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.; Johnson JA; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Source
Publisher: WileyBlackwell Pub Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101474067 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1752-8062 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 17528054 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Clin Transl Sci Subsets: MEDLINE
Subject
Language
English
Abstract
This study conducted a pairwise comparison of antihypertensive and metabolic effects of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and chlorthalidone (CTD) at 25 mg/day in the same individuals to address the clinical dilemma on preferred thiazide for hypertension (HTN) management. We included 15 African American (AA) and 35 European American (EA) patients with HTN treated with HCTZ and CTD as part of the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR) and PEAR-2 trials, respectively. Mean reduction in systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) with HCTZ versus CTD was 8/5 versus 16/8 mmHg among EA patients (p < 1.0e -5 SBP, p = 0.002 DBP) and 11/8 versus 20/11 mmHg among AA patients (p = 0.03 SBP, p = 0.22 DBP). While CTD showed clinically meaningful benefit over HCTZ in two-thirds of participants with respect to SBP reduction and half of EA patients with respect to DBP reduction, a majority of AA patients (53%) showed similar DBP reduction with both thiazides. Sixty percent of AA patients and 29% of EA patients attained blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mmHg with both thiazides. Mean potassium (K+) reduction was greater with CTD compared to HCTZ both in EA patients (mean difference = 0.35, p = 0.0002) and AA patients (0.49, p = 0.043). While 31% of AA patients developed severe hypokalemia on CTD, <5% of others developed severe hypokalemia. Although 46% of AA patients on CTD required K+ supplementation, only 6%-11% of others required supplementation. Overall, in the majority of EA patients, CTD was superior to HCTZ, whereas among AA patients, it was superior in a minority, and was associated with significant potassium-related risk, suggesting that guideline preferences for CTD over HCTZ are reasonable in EA patients but may be less reasonable in AA patients, particularly if the target is <140/90 mmHg.
(© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)