CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 405Medication Adherence and ComplianceBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of a Fixed-Dose Combination Strategy on Adherence and Risk Factors in Patients With or at High Risk of CVD: The UMPIRE Randomized Clinical Trial

Thom, Simon·2013·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2013.277064
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Most patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) do not take recommended medications long-term. The use of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) improves adherence in several clinical areas. Previous trials of cardiovascular FDCs have assessed short-term effects compared with placebo or no treatment. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether FDC delivery of aspirin, statin, and 2 blood pressure-lowering agents vs usual care improves long-term adherence to indicated therapy and 2 major CVD risk factors, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The UMPIRE trial, a randomized, open-label, blinded-end-point trial among 2004 participants with established CVD or at risk of CVD enrolled July 2010-July 2011 in India and Europe. The trial follow-up concluded in July 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to an FDC-based strategy (n=1002) containing either (1) 75 mg aspirin, 40 mg simvastatin, 10 mg lisinopril, and 50 mg atenolol or (2) 75 mg aspirin, 40 mg simvastatin, 10 mg lisinopril, and 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide or to usual care (n=1002). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Adherence to medication (defined as self-reported use of antiplatelet, statin, and ≥2 BP-lowering medications) and changes in SBP and LDL-C from baseline. RESULTS: At baseline, mean BP was 137/78 mm Hg, LDL-C was 91.5 mg/dL, and 1233 (61.5%) of 2004 participants reported use of antiplatelet, statin, and 2 or more BP-lowering medications. Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 12-18 months). The FDC group had improved adherence vs usual care (86% vs 65%; relative risk [RR] of being adherent, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.26-1.41; P < .001) with concurrent reductions in SBP (-2.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.0 to -1.1 mm Hg; P < .001) and LDL-C (-4.2 mg/dL; 95% CI, -6.6 to -1.9 mg/dL; P < .001) at the end of the study. Although there was consistency of effects across predefined subgroups, evidence existed of larger benefits in patients with lower adherence at baseline. In this subgroup of 727 participants (36%), adherence at the end of study was 77% vs 23% (RR, 3.35; 95% CI, 2.74-4.09; P < .001 for interaction), SBP was reduced by 4.9 mm Hg (95% CI 7.3-2.6 mm Hg; P = .01 for interaction), and LDL-C was reduced by 6.7 mg/dL (95% CI, 10.5-2.8 mg/dL; P = .11 for interaction). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events or cardiovascular events (50 [5%] in the FDC group and 35 [3.5%] in the usual care group; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.94-2.24; P=.09) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with or at high risk of CVD, use of an FDC strategy for blood pressure, cholesterol, and platelet control vs usual care resulted in significantly improved medication adherence at 15 months and statistically significant but small improvements in SBP and LDL-C. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01057537.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2013.277064

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 401

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Thom, S.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Thom, Simon
ORCID
Thom, Simon
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2013-09-04
Volume
310
Issue
9
Pages
918
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2013.277064
OpenAlex
W2097285811
Cited by
405
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 11
FWCI
41.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Keywords
fixed-dose combination, medication adherence, cardiovascular disease, aspirin, simvastatin, lisinopril, atenolol, hydrochlorothiazide, systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, blood pressure lowering agents, antiplatelet therapy, long-term adherence, cardiovascular risk factors, Europe, low- and middle-income countries
MeSH terms
Aged, Anticholesteremic Agents, Antihypertensive Agents, Aspirin, Atenolol, Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular Diseases, Drug Combinations, Female, Humans, Hydrochlorothiazide, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Middle Aged, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors, Risk Factors, Treatment Outcome, Drug Monitoring, Lisinopril, Simvastatin

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review