Abstract

Aim. To study the therapeutic equivalence of original and generic fosinopril in patients with arterial hypertension (HT) of 1-2 degrees, and to evaluate the cost effectiveness of original drug substitution with generic. Material and methods. Patients (n=36) with HT of 1-2 degree aged 41-82 years and disease duration up 3 to 22 years included in an open, crossover , randomized trial. All patients had two courses of treatment: with generic (Fosicard) and the original drug (Monopril); sequence of courses was determined by randomization. Wash-out period (10-14 days) preceded each course. Treatment duration was 6 weeks; drugs were administered QD; initial dose - 10 mg/day. Blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) were evaluated at the end of the wash-out period, and in 2, 4 and 6 weeks of therapy. In case of ineffective BP control (>140/90 mm Hg) hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was added initially and dose fosinopril was increased up to 20 mg/day next. Results. Patients in groups were comparable by basic clinical parameters. Both fosinopril based drugs have comparable antihypertensive effect. Differences between their effect on systolic and diastolic BP as well as HR at all steps of treatment were not significant. The individual analysis revealed a tendency to more pronounced Monopril antihypertensive effect compared with Fosicard, but the differences were not significant. An average dose of Monopril was 11.8±3.9 mg/day , and Fosicard — 13.2±4.7 mg/day (p=0.13); the rate of monotherapy with both drugs of fosinopril at dose of 10 mg/day was similar (in 41% and 44% of patients, respectively); the rate of combined therapies with various composition differed insignificantly. Reduction in BP <140/90 mmHg was recorded at the end of the study in 29 (85.3%) patients treated with Monorpil and in 27 (79.4%) — Fosicard (p=0.52). Both drugs showed a good safety profile. Conclusion. Fosicard or its combination with hydrochlorothiazide is therapeutically equivalent to original drug (Monopril) or its combination with hydrochlorothiazide.

Highlights

  • Значение показателей терапевтической эквивалентности при замене оригинального препарата на воспроизведенный на примере фозиноприла Н.П

  • An average dose of Monopril was 11.8±3.9 mg/day, and Fosicard — 13.2±4.7 mg/day (p=0.13); the rate of monotherapy with both drugs of fosinopril at dose of 10 mg/day was similar; the rate of combined therapies with various composition differed insignificantly

  • Reduction in Blood pressure (BP)

Read more

Summary

ПРЕПАРАТА НА ВОСПРОИЗВЕДЕННЫЙ НА ПРИМЕРЕ

Значение показателей терапевтической эквивалентности при замене оригинального препарата на воспроизведенный на примере фозиноприла Н.П. Изучение терапевтической эквивалентности оригинального и воспроизведенного препаратов фозиноприла у больных артериальной гипертонией (АГ) 1-2 степени и оценка экономической эффективности замены оригинального препарата генериком. Оба препарата фозиноприла оказывали сопоставимый антигипертензивный эффект, при этом различия между препаратами по влиянию на систолическое и диастолическое АД и ЧСС на всех этапах лечения были недостоверны. Крупных клинических исследований по изучению влияния на прогноз взаимозаменяемости антигипертензивных препаратов по вполне понятным причинам не проводилось и вряд ли такие исследования когда-либо будут проведены, поэтому информация о терапевтической эквивалентности и экономической эффективности таких замен достаточно ограниченна. Цель исследования — изучение терапевтической эквивалентности оригинального и воспроизведенного препаратов фозиноприла у больных АГ 1-2 степени

Материал и методы
Результаты исследования
САД ДАД ЧСС
Findings
Обсуждение результатов
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.