ABSTRACT
Background Over one billion adults have hypertension globally, of whom approximately 70% cannot achieve blood pressure control goal with monotherapy alone. Data are lacking on patterns of dual combination therapies prescribed to patients who escalate from monotherapy in routine practice.
Methods Using eleven electronic health record databases that cover 118 million patients across eight countries/regions, we characterized the initiation of antihypertensive dual combination therapies for patients with hypertension. In each database, we first constructed twelve exposure cohorts of patients who newly initiate dual combination therapy with one of the four most commonly used antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACEi] or angiotensin receptor blocker [ARB]; calcium channel blocker [CCB]; beta-blocker; and thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic) after escalating from monotherapy with one of the three alternative classes. Using these cohorts, we then described dual combination therapy utilization, stratified by age, gender, history of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and country.
Results Across data sources, we identified 980,648 patients with hypertension initiating dual combination therapy with antihypertensive agents after escalating from monotherapy: 12,541 from Australia, 6,980 from South Korea, 2,096 from Singapore, 7,008 from China, 16,663 from Taiwan, 103,994 from France, 76,082 from Italy, and 754,137 from the United States (US). Significant variations in treatment utilization existed across countries and patient subgroups. In Australia and Singapore, starting an ACEi/ARB monotherapy followed by a CCB was most common while in South Korea, China and Taiwan, starting a CCB monotherapy followed by an ACEi/ARB was most common. In Italy, France, and the US, sequential use of an ACEi/ARB monotherapy followed by a diuretic was most common. Younger patients were more likely to be prescribed ACEi/ARB followed by either a CCB or a diuretic compared with older patients. Women were more likely to be prescribed diuretics then an ACEi/ARB or a CCB compared with men. Among patients with history of CVD, ACEi/ARB followed by beta-blocker, and beta-blocker followed by ACEi/ARB were more commonly prescribed.
Conclusion This is the largest and most comprehensive study characterizing the real-world utilization of dual combination therapies in treating hypertension. Large variation in the transition between monotherapy and dual combination therapy for hypertension was observed across countries. These results highlight the need for future research to identify which second-line dual combination therapy is most effective in practice.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: JL, XW, CR MVZ are employees of IQVIA. YL reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K12HL138037) and the Yale Center for Implementation Science. She was a recipient of a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion. HMK received expenses and/or personal fees from UnitedHealth, IBM Watson Health, Element Science, Aetna, Facebook, the Siegfried and Jensen Law Firm, Arnold and Porter Law Firm, Martin/Baughman Law Firm, F-Prime, and the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing. He was a co-founder of Refactor Health and HugoHealth and had grants and/or contracts from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Medtronic, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Johnson & Johnson, and the Shenzhen Center for Health Information. MAS reports grants from US National Science Foundation, grants from US National Institutes of Health, grants from IQVIA, personal fees from Janssen Research and Development. SCY reports grants from Korean Ministry of Health & Welfare, grants from Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy. RWP reports grants from Korean Ministry of Health & Welfare, grants from Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy. The other co-authors report no potential competing interests.
Funding Statement
There is no funding source for the study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All the data partners received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval or exemption. Please see the Table at the end of the manuscript for ethnical approval. IQVIA LPD Australia: Use of de-identified IQVIA data sources was deemed not human subject research by the IQVIA internal review committee and approved for OHDSI network studies. ePBRN SWSLHD 2019 Linked Dataset: Use of Australia ePBRN SWSLHD data source was approved by the UNSW Sydney and South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committees (Project number: 2019/PID05368). Korea Ajou University School of Medicine (AUSOM) CDM: The Korean Bioethics Act does not require an IRB review for retrospective observational studies using common data model in distributed research networks. Korea CDM of Kyung Hee University Hospital: The Korean Bioethics Act does not require an IRB review for retrospective observational studies using common data model in distributed research networks. Khoo Teck Puat Hospital (KTPH): Use of KTPH data source was reviewed by National Health Group Domain Specific Review Board and approved the request for waiver of informed consent (Project number: 2017/00995). National University Hospital (NUH): Use of NUH data source was reviewed by National Health Group Domain Specific Review Board and was determined that it qualifies for exemption because the analysis involved a dataset without identifiers (Project number: 2021/00125). China Jiangsu Province Hospital: Use of Jiangsu Province Hospital data source was reviewed and approved by the Nanjing Medical University Institutional Review Board. Taiwan Taipei Medical University Clinical Research Database (TMUCRD): Use of TMUCRD data has been approved by theTMU-Joint Institutional Review Board (Project number: TMU-JIRB N202011003). IQVIA Ambulatory EMR: Use of de-identified IQVIA data sources was deemed not human subject research by the IQVIA internal review committee and approved for OHDSI network studies. IQVIA LPD France: Use of de-identified IQVIA data sources was deemed not human subject research by the IQVIA internal review committee and approved for OHDSI network studies. IQVIA LPD Italy: Use of de-identified IQVIA data sources was deemed not human subject research by the IQVIA internal review committee and approved for OHDSI network studies.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Listed alphabetically
Data Availability
All aggregated data and executable source code are available through GitHub at: github.com/ohdsi-studies.
