Trandolapril with Verapamil Hydrochloride-SR, film-coated tablet, 4 mg – 240 mg (sustained release), Tarka
Public summary document for Trandolapril with Verapamil Hydrochloride-SR, film-coated tablet, 4 mg – 240 mg (sustained release), Tarka
Page last updated: 02 March 2007
Public Summary Document
Product: Trandolapril with Verapamil Hydrochloride-SR, film-coated tablet, 4 mg –
240 mg (sustained release), Tarka
Sponsor: Abbott Australasia Pty Ltd
Date of PBAC Consideration: November 2006
1. Purpose of Application
The resubmission requested a restricted benefit listing for the treatment of hypertension (high blood pressure) in patients who are not adequately controlled with 4 mg of trandolapril monotherapy.
2. Background
At the November 2005 meeting, the PBAC rejected a submission for a restricted benefit listing for trandolapril with verapamil (Tarka) for the treatment of hypertension because of a lack of clinical need in patients with hypertension for the combination, concerns about inappropriate substitution for angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) + thiazide combinations and unconvincing evidence of superiority over the individual components in the requested doses.
3. Registration Status
Tarka was registered by the TGA on 20 October 2004 for “the treatment of hypertension. Treatment should not be initiated with this fixed dose combination”.
4. Listing Requested and PBAC’s View
Restricted benefit
For the treatment of hypertension in patients who are not adequately controlled with
4 mg of trandolapril monotherapy.
5. Clinical Place for the Proposed Therapy
Tarka provides an alternative to thiazide (diuretic) combinations and it is claimed that Tarka provides similar improvements in blood pressure whilst resulting in lower rate of new-onset diabetes.
6. Comparator
7. Clinical Trials
The resubmission presented a new pivotal trial, a randomised controlled trial (TV-51-HTN)
comparing Tarka with trandolapril (4 mg) and verapamil (240 mg) monotherapies in patients
with mild to moderate essential hypertension.
This trial had been published at the time of resubmission, as follows:
|
Trial/First author |
Protocol title |
Publication citation |
|---|---|---|
|
TV-51 |
||
|
Messerli et al (1998) |
Effects of verapamil and trandolapril in the treatment of hypertension. |
Hypertension 11: 322-327. |
The Study of Trandolapril/verapamil-SR and Insulin Resistance (STAR) comparing trandolapril/verapamil-SR
and losartan/hydrochlorothiazide in patients with metabolic syndrome was provided
as supportive evidence, and the bioequivalence study (TV-4-CP) as a reference supporting
the bioequivalence between Tarka 4/240 and its individual components of trandolapril
4 mg and verapamil-SR 240 mg given concomitantly.
8. Results of Trials
The pivotal trial (TV-51-HTN) result showed for the primary endpoint of sitting diastolic
blood pressure (DBP), that all active treatment groups had statistically significant
lower endpoint mean trough sitting DBP compared to placebo (p<0.01). At endpoint,
the combination therapy of trandolaril/verapamil had a statistically significant lower
mean trough sitting DBP compared to its monotherapies (p<0.01). The combination provided
a further -3.6 mmHg reduction in blood pressure versus trandolapril and a further
-3.8 mmHg reduction compared to verapamil-SR.
The results from the STAR trial showed that the 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test
(OGTT) adjusted mean change in blood glucose level for patients on trandolapril/verapamil-SR
was -3.8 mg/dL compared to +26 mg/dL for patients on losartan/hydrochlorothiazide.
This difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). Between Weeks 8 and 39, there
was significantly better control over the systolic blood pressure in losartan/hydrochlorothiazide
group, although differences were not statistically significant at study end.
The combination of trandolapril and verapamil-SR was associated with more reports
of chest pain and joint pain compared to the individual components and placebo in
the pivotal trial of TV-51-HTN. Significantly more events were observed in patients
with the combination therapy of trandolapril and verapamil-SR in cough and pain in
the extremity in the STAR trial.
9. Clinical Claim
The resubmission described Tarka as being significantly more effective than the individual components given as monotherapy and was no worse in terms of efficacy and safety than the individual components given concomitantly.
10. Economic Analysis
The resubmission presented an updated preliminary economic evaluation. A treatment course of 28 days was used in the updated evaluation compared to a 30-day course in the previous submission.
11. Estimated PBS Usage and Financial Implications
12. Recommendation and Reasons
The PBAC recommended listing on a cost-minimisation basis compared with the corresponding
strengths of the trandolapril and verapamil hydrochloride sustained release constituents.
The PBAC noted that the sponsor had agreed that patients be stabilised on monotherapy
with both drugs at the doses contained in the combination, before moving to the combination
product.
The PBAC recommended the 20 day safety net rule should apply.
Recommendation
TRANDOLAPRIL with VERAPAMIL HYDROCHLORIDE-SR, film-coated tablet, 4 mg – 240 mg (sustained
release)
Restriction: CAUTION:
The myocardial depressant effects of verapamil hydrochloride and of beta-blocking
drugs are additive.
Restricted Benefit
Hypertension in a patient who is stabilised on treatment with trandolapril 4 mg and
verapamil hydrochloride sustained release 240 mg.
Maximum quantity: 28
Repeats: 5
13. Context for Decision
The PBAC helps decide whether and, if so, how medicines should be subsidised in Australia. It considers submissions in this context. A PBAC decision not to recommend listing or not to recommend changing a listing does not represent a final PBAC view about the merits of the medicine. A company can resubmit to the PBAC or seek independent review of the PBAC decision.
14. Sponsor’s Comment
The sponsor has no comment.
