Development of UHPLC-MS/MS methods to quantify 25 antihypertensive drugs in serum in a cohort of patients treated for hypertension

We developed three ultra-high pressure liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry detection (UHPLC-MS/MS) methods to quantify 25 antihypertensive drugs in serum samples. Patient-reported drug lists were collected, and drug concentrations were analysed in samples from 547 patients, half with uncontrolled hypertension, and all treated with ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs. For sample preparation, serum was mixed with deuterated internal standards and acetonitrile and precipitated. Aliquots of the supernatant were injected on UHPLC-MSMS with a C18 reversed phase column. The mobile phase was 0.1 % HCOOH (formic acid) in water and 0.1 % HCOOH in acetonitrile (except in methanol for spironolactone/canrenone) at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. The calibrators and internal controls were prepared in Autonorm™. The calibration ranges were wide, and the models were linear or quadratic with squared correlation coefficients ≥ 0.97. The limits of detection and quantification, specificity, carry-over, and matrix effects were acceptable. The accuracy of the internal controls was in the range 85–121 %, and the intermediate precision for all drugs was 4–28 %. The patient-reported antihypertensive drug use and the detected serum drug concentrations were in accordance with that most frequently prescribed nationally. The percent non-detectable level was 5–10 % for bendroflumethiazide, doxazosin, nifedipine, and ramipril. Often the drug dose chosen was lower than the recommended maximum daily dose. We report the maximum (Cmax) and minimum (Cmin) drug concentrations after drug intake. The inter-individual pharmacokinetic variability at Cmin was 18-fold for hydrochlorothiazide, 22-fold for losartan carboxyl acid, 26-fold for amlodipine, 44-fold for candesartan, and 50-fold for valsartan. Our methods are suitable for measuring antihypertensive drugs in patient serum for therapy control.publishedVersio

Detection of Nonadherence to Antihypertensive Treatment by Measurements of Serum Drug Concentrations

Nonadherence to drugs is a challenge in hypertension treatment. We aimed to assess the prevalence of nonadherence by serum drug concentrations compared with 2 indirect methods and relate to the prescribed drug regimens in a nationwide multicenter study. Five hundred fifty patients with hypertension using ≥2 antihypertensive agents participated. We measured concentrations of 23 antihypertensive drugs using ultra high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass-spectrometry and compared with patients’ self-reports and investigators’ assessment based on structured interview. We identified 40 nonadherent patients (7.3%) using serum drug concentrations. They had higher office diastolic blood pressure (90 versus 83 mm Hg, P<0.01) and daytime diastolic blood pressure (85 versus 80 mm Hg, P<0.01) though systolic blood pressures did not differ significantly. They had more prescribed daily antihypertensive pills (2.5 versus 2.1 pills, P<0.01) and total daily pills (5.5 versus 4.4 pills, P=0.03). Prescription of fixed-dose combination pills were lower among the nonadherent patients identified by serum concentrations (45.0 versus 67.1%, P<0.01). Fifty-three patients self-reported nonadherence, while the investigators suspected 69 nonadherent patients. These groups showed no or few differences in drug regimens, respectively. In summary, we detected 7.3% prevalence of nonadherence by serum drug measurements in patients using ≥2 antihypertensive agents in a nationwide study; they had higher office and ambulatory diastolic blood pressures, higher number of prescribed daily pills, more daily antihypertensive pills, and less frequent prescriptions of fixed-dose combination pills. Indirect methods showed poor overlap with serum drugs concentrations and no or minimal medication differences. Thus, serum measurements of drugs were useful in detection and characterization of nonadherence to antihypertensive treatment.acceptedVersio

Improvements in Hypertension Care: Serum drug measurements to detect non-adherence to standard treatment and effects of renal denervation following directly observed therapy

As many as 40% of hypertensive patients are unable to reach their blood pressure target despite treatment with antihypertensive drugs. Over the last years, medication non-adherence have emerged as one of the most important causes of treatment failure. Largely depending on the method used in this assessment, the prevalence of non-adherence ranges from <10% to as much as 86% throughout different studies. Traditionally, most assessment methods have been indirect, i.e. patient self-assessment based on questionnaires, or physician-assessment wherein a doctor guesses whether a patient is adherent or not. These methods have proven to be less accurate, whereas direct methods, such as detection of antihypertensive drugs- or metabolites in biological fluids present as more accurate methods of non-adherence assessment. All 550 patients described in Paper I used ≥2 antihypertensive drugs and were referred/self-referred to a national hypertension study. They underwent thorough investigations including serum drug measurements of antihypertensive drugs. Furthermore, they were asked to complete a single, written question asking about their antihypertensive drug adherence. In addition, the physician assessed non-adherence based on a structured physician-patient interview. The results showed a prevalence of non-adherence of 7.3% based on the direct method. The indirect methods poorly overlapped and only two patients were identified as non-adherent by all three methods. A higher number of prescribed daily pills-, a higher number of prescribed antihypertensive pills-, and less prescription of combination pills were associated with non-adherence. Further, a lower patient age and non-caucasian ethnicity were associated with non-adherence. In the late 2000’s, renal denervation (RDN) was introduced as a potential treatment method for hypertension by introducing a catheter to the renal arteries and applying radiofrequency energy to ablate the sympathetic nerves within the adventitia of the artery wall. After the promising results from the first few studies, later randomized studied have shown the effect of RDN to be approximately equivalent to that of one antihypertensive drug. Although it is beyond doubt that RDN is able to reduce blood pressure, some patients seem to have a larger effect than others. Thus, it is important to find objective methods to identify these patients in advance. Additionally, long-term follow-up of patients who have undergone RDN is of importance to assess the safety- and efficacy of the procedure. The patients in Papers II and III were specifically referred to a renal denervation study, suspected of having treatment-resistant hypertension, i.e. using maximally tolerable doses of at least 3 antihypertensive drugs of which one had to be a diuretic. After witnessed intake of their prescribed drugs, patients underwent office- and ambulatory blood pressure measurements. Patients who remained hypertensive on the 24h ambulatory measurement were randomized to either RDN or drug adjustment assisted by hemodynamic monitoring. Paper II describes patients on long-term follow-up after three- and seven years. The two groups have similar blood pressure measurements on both visits, without any functional- or anatomical deterioration in renal function or any adverse events that could be attributed to the procedure. Paper III describes heart rate variability- and continuous blood pressure measurements during stress tests along with simultaneous sampling of catecholamines during an orthostatic stress test and a cold-pressor test. Before randomization, the two groups were similar in heart rate variability, continuous blood pressure measurements and catecholamine assessment, whereas at six months follow up the RDN group had a significantly lower adrenaline concentration immediately following the cold-pressor test. Thus, RDN seems to be able to reduce adrenaline reactivity

Establishing Serum Reference Ranges for Antihypertensive Drugs

Background: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves the measurement of serum drug concentrations to optimize pharmacotherapy. Traditionally, blood pressure measurements alone, and not TDM, have been used to evaluate the antihypertensive drug response. However, approximately 50% of hypertensive patients treated with lifestyle changes and antihypertensive drugs fail to achieve blood pressure control. Serum drug concentration measurements could be useful to select the optimal drugs in adjusted doses and to identify nonadherence. Implementation of TDM in clinical routine for antihypertensive drugs depends on established serum reference ranges. Methods: Commonly used antihypertensive drugs were identified based on prescription data. The authors performed a review of authoritative literature on reported serum drug concentrations and calculated expected concentrations from previously reported pharmacokinetic parameters with commonly prescribed daily doses. Finally, serum drug concentrations in samples from patients undergoing antihypertensive treatment were measured. Results: Serum reference ranges for 24 frequently used antihypertensive drugs were established based on results from 3 approaches. Conclusions: Serum drug concentration measurements, interpreted in light of the established reference ranges, together with blood pressure measurements and other clinical data, may help identify nonadherent patients and tailor individual antihypertensive treatment when deviant drug responses appear in line with the concept of personalized medicine

The randomised Oslo study of renal denervation vs. Antihypertensive drug adjustments: efficacy and safety through 7 years of follow-up

Purpose The blood pressure (BP) lowering effect of renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) in treatment-resistant hypertension shows variation amongst the existing randomised studies. The long-term efficacy and safety of RDN require further investigation. For the first time, we report BP changes and safety up to 7 years after RDN, compared to drug adjustment in the randomised Oslo RDN study. Materials and methods Patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, defined as daytime systolic ambulatory BP ≥135 mmHg after witnessed intake of ≥3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic, were randomised to either RDN (n = 9) or drug adjustment (n = 10). The initial primary endpoint was the change in office BP after 6 months. The RDN group had their drugs adjusted after 1 year using the same principles as the Drug Adjustment group. Both groups returned for long-term follow-up after 3 and 7 years. Results The decrease in office BP and ambulatory BP (ABPM) after 6 months did not persist, but gradually increased in both groups. From 6 months to 7 years follow-up, mean daytime systolic ABPM increased from 142 ± 10 to 145 ± 15 mmHg in the RDN group, and from 133 ± 11 to 137 ± 13 mmHg in the Drug Adjustment group, with the difference between them decreasing. In a mixed factor model, a significantly different variance was found between the groups in daytime systolic ABPM (p = .04) and diastolic ABPM (p = .01) as well as office diastolic BP (p<.01), but not in office systolic BP (p = .18). At long-term follow-up we unveiled no anatomical- or functional renal impairment in either group. Conclusions BP changes up to 7 years show a tendency towards a smaller difference in BPs between the RDN and drug adjustment patients. Our data support RDN as a safe procedure, but it remains non-superior to intensive drug adjustment 7 years after the intervention

Changes in sympathetic nervous system activity after renal denervation: results from the randomised Oslo RDN study

Purpose Sympathetic nervous system (SNS) over-activity is associated with essential hypertension. Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) possibly lowers office- and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH). We aimed to assess the effect of RDN compared to drug adjustment on SNS activity among patients with TRH by measuring plasma catecholamines and heart rate variability (HRV) during stress tests. Materials and methods Patients with TRH were randomised to RDN (n = 9) or Drug Adjustment (DA) (n = 10). We measured continuous HRV and beat-to-beat-BP using FinaPres® and obtained plasma catecholamines during standardised orthostatic- and cold-pressor stress tests (CPT) before- and six months after randomisation. Results CPT revealed no differences between groups at baseline in peak adrenaline concentration (69.3 pg/mL in the DA group vs. 70.0 pg/mL in the RDN group, p = 0.38) or adrenaline reactivity (Δ23.1 pg/mL in the DA group vs. Δ29.3 pg/mL in the RDN group, p = 0.40). After six months, adrenaline concentrations were statistically different between groups after one minute (66.9 pg/mL in the DA group vs. 55.3 pg/mL in the RDN group, p = 0.03), and six minutes (62.4 pg/mL in the DA group vs. 50.1 pg/mL in the RDN group, p = 0.03). There was a tendency of reduction in adrenaline reactivity after six months in the RDN group (Δ26.3 pg/mL at baseline vs. Δ12.8 pg/ml after six months, p = 0.08), while it increased in the DA group (Δ13.6 pg/mL at baseline vs. Δ19.9 pg/mL after six months, p = 0.53). We also found a difference in the Low Frequency band at baseline following the CPT (667µs2 in the DA group vs. 1628µs2 in the RDN group, p = 0.03) with a clear tendency of reduction in the RDN group to 743µs2 after six months (p = 0.07), compared to no change in the DA group (1052µs2, p = 0.39). Conclusion Our data suggest that RDN reduces SNS activity after six months. This finding warrants investigation in a larger study. Clinical Trial Number registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT0167351

Development of UHPLC-MS/MS methods to quantify 25 antihypertensive drugs in serum in a cohort of patients treated for hypertension

We developed three ultra-high pressure liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry detection (UHPLC-MS/MS) methods to quantify 25 antihypertensive drugs in serum samples. Patient-reported drug lists were collected, and drug concentrations were analysed in samples from 547 patients, half with uncontrolled hypertension, and all treated with ≥ 2 antihypertensive drugs. For sample preparation, serum was mixed with deuterated internal standards and acetonitrile and precipitated. Aliquots of the supernatant were injected on UHPLC-MSMS with a C18 reversed phase column. The mobile phase was 0.1 % HCOOH (formic acid) in water and 0.1 % HCOOH in acetonitrile (except in methanol for spironolactone/canrenone) at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. The calibrators and internal controls were prepared in Autonorm™. The calibration ranges were wide, and the models were linear or quadratic with squared correlation coefficients ≥ 0.97. The limits of detection and quantification, specificity, carry-over, and matrix effects were acceptable. The accuracy of the internal controls was in the range 85–121 %, and the intermediate precision for all drugs was 4–28 %. The patient-reported antihypertensive drug use and the detected serum drug concentrations were in accordance with that most frequently prescribed nationally. The percent non-detectable level was 5–10 % for bendroflumethiazide, doxazosin, nifedipine, and ramipril. Often the drug dose chosen was lower than the recommended maximum daily dose. We report the maximum (Cmax) and minimum (Cmin) drug concentrations after drug intake. The inter-individual pharmacokinetic variability at Cmin was 18-fold for hydrochlorothiazide, 22-fold for losartan carboxyl acid, 26-fold for amlodipine, 44-fold for candesartan, and 50-fold for valsartan. Our methods are suitable for measuring antihypertensive drugs in patient serum for therapy control

Detection of Nonadherence to Antihypertensive Treatment by Measurements of Serum Drug Concentrations

Nonadherence to drugs is a challenge in hypertension treatment. We aimed to assess the prevalence of nonadherence by serum drug concentrations compared with 2 indirect methods and relate to the prescribed drug regimens in a nationwide multicenter study. Five hundred fifty patients with hypertension using ≥2 antihypertensive agents participated. We measured concentrations of 23 antihypertensive drugs using ultra high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass-spectrometry and compared with patients’ self-reports and investigators’ assessment based on structured interview. We identified 40 nonadherent patients (7.3%) using serum drug concentrations. They had higher office diastolic blood pressure (90 versus 83 mm Hg, P<0.01) and daytime diastolic blood pressure (85 versus 80 mm Hg, P<0.01) though systolic blood pressures did not differ significantly. They had more prescribed daily antihypertensive pills (2.5 versus 2.1 pills, P<0.01) and total daily pills (5.5 versus 4.4 pills, P=0.03). Prescription of fixed-dose combination pills were lower among the nonadherent patients identified by serum concentrations (45.0 versus 67.1%, P<0.01). Fifty-three patients self-reported nonadherence, while the investigators suspected 69 nonadherent patients. These groups showed no or few differences in drug regimens, respectively. In summary, we detected 7.3% prevalence of nonadherence by serum drug measurements in patients using ≥2 antihypertensive agents in a nationwide study; they had higher office and ambulatory diastolic blood pressures, higher number of prescribed daily pills, more daily antihypertensive pills, and less frequent prescriptions of fixed-dose combination pills. Indirect methods showed poor overlap with serum drugs concentrations and no or minimal medication differences. Thus, serum measurements of drugs were useful in detection and characterization of nonadherence to antihypertensive treatment