Lakshmi Manasa S Chekka1, Arlene B Chapman2, John G Gums1, Rhonda M Cooper-DeHoff3, Julie A Johnson4. 1. Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 2. Division of Nephrology, University of Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 4. Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Electronic address: julie.johnson@ufl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chlorthalidone is recommended over hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) as the preferred thiazide, but the supporting evidence is not robust at routinely used doses, or in whites vs blacks, in whom differences in response to thiazides are well known. We compare the efficacy and safety of HCTZ and chlorthalidone as first-line therapies for white and black hypertensive patients. METHODS: We compared treatment-related outcomes between the HCTZ arm (12.5 mg for 2-3 weeks; 25 mg for additional 6 weeks) of the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR, n = 376) and chlorthalidone arm (15 mg for 2 weeks; 25 mg for additional 6 weeks) of PEAR-2 (n = 326) clinical trials, in 17-65-year-old mild-moderate uncomplicated hypertensive whites and blacks. RESULTS: Mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) reduction with HCTZ vs chlorthalidone: 8 ± 8/4 ± 5 vs 12 ± 9/7 ± 5 mm Hg in whites (P < 10-6 SBP and DBP); 12 ± 10/7 ± 6 vs 15 ± 10/9 ± 6 in blacks (P = .008 SBP, P = .054 DBP). Treatment with HCTZ vs chlorthalidone in whites resulted in significantly fewer patients achieving target BP (<140/90 mm Hg) (44% vs 57%, P = .018) and clinical response rate (≥10 mm Hg DBP reduction); and significantly higher nonresponse rate (<6 mm Hg DBP reduction); but no significant differences in rates among blacks (eg, target-BP rate: 56% vs 63%, P = .31). HCTZ treatment led to significantly lower rates of hypokalemia and hyperuricemia in whites and blacks, vs chlorthalidone, and significantly lower odds of requiring potassium supplementation among blacks (odds ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.37; P = 3.4e-7). CONCLUSION: Compared with HCTZ, chlorthalidone showed greater blood pressure lowering and adverse metabolic effects in whites, but similar blood pressure lowering and greater adverse effects in blacks; suggesting that the recent guideline recommendations to choose chlorthalidone over HCTZ may not be warranted in blacks.
BACKGROUND: Chlorthalidone is recommended over hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) as the preferred thiazide, but the supporting evidence is not robust at routinely used doses, or in whites vs blacks, in whom differences in response to thiazides are well known. We compare the efficacy and safety of HCTZ and chlorthalidone as first-line therapies for white and black hypertensive patients. METHODS: We compared treatment-related outcomes between the HCTZ arm (12.5 mg for 2-3 weeks; 25 mg for additional 6 weeks) of the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR, n = 376) and chlorthalidone arm (15 mg for 2 weeks; 25 mg for additional 6 weeks) of PEAR-2 (n = 326) clinical trials, in 17-65-year-old mild-moderate uncomplicated hypertensive whites and blacks. RESULTS: Mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) reduction with HCTZ vs chlorthalidone: 8 ± 8/4 ± 5 vs 12 ± 9/7 ± 5 mm Hg in whites (P < 10-6 SBP and DBP); 12 ± 10/7 ± 6 vs 15 ± 10/9 ± 6 in blacks (P = .008 SBP, P = .054 DBP). Treatment with HCTZ vs chlorthalidone in whites resulted in significantly fewer patients achieving target BP (<140/90 mm Hg) (44% vs 57%, P = .018) and clinical response rate (≥10 mm Hg DBP reduction); and significantly higher nonresponse rate (<6 mm Hg DBP reduction); but no significant differences in rates among blacks (eg, target-BP rate: 56% vs 63%, P = .31). HCTZ treatment led to significantly lower rates of hypokalemia and hyperuricemia in whites and blacks, vs chlorthalidone, and significantly lower odds of requiring potassium supplementation among blacks (odds ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.37; P = 3.4e-7). CONCLUSION: Compared with HCTZ, chlorthalidone showed greater blood pressure lowering and adverse metabolic effects in whites, but similar blood pressure lowering and greater adverse effects in blacks; suggesting that the recent guideline recommendations to choose chlorthalidone over HCTZ may not be warranted in blacks.
Authors: Jackson T Wright; J Kay Dunn; Jeffrey A Cutler; Barry R Davis; William C Cushman; Charles E Ford; L Julian Haywood; Frans H H Leenen; Karen L Margolis; Vasilios Papademetriou; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Paul K Whelton; Gabriel B Habib Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-04-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Yan Chen; Yingying Sang; Shoshana H Ballew; Adrienne Tin; Alex R Chang; Kunihiro Matsushita; Josef Coresh; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Miklos Z Molnar; Morgan E Grams Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Michael P Dorsch; Brenda W Gillespie; Steven R Erickson; Barry E Bleske; Alan B Weder Journal: Hypertension Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: I S Hamadeh; T Y Langaee; R Dwivedi; S Garcia; B M Burkley; T C Skaar; A B Chapman; J G Gums; S T Turner; Y Gong; R M Cooper-DeHoff; J A Johnson Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: George Hripcsak; Marc A Suchard; Steven Shea; RuiJun Chen; Seng Chan You; Nicole Pratt; David Madigan; Harlan M Krumholz; Patrick B Ryan; Martijn J Schuemie Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 21.873