Original Moxonidine and Generics: Where is the Edge of Difference?

Aim: To compare the efficacy of adding original moxonidine and its generics to previous ineffective antihypertensive therapy in patients with poorly controlled arterial hypertension (AH).

Material and methods: This observational prospective non-randomized study included 120 patients with poorly controlled blood pressure on the previous antihypertensive therapy. All patients underwent clinical evaluation, including anthropometric and laboratory indexes, and 24-hour blood pressure monitoring (24-h BPM) at baseline and after 12 weeks of observation. Office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded after 4 and 12 weeks of treatment. During the observation period, 4 equal groups were formed: group 1, Physiotens was added to the treatment; group 2, Moxonitex; group 3, Moxonidine SZ; and group 4, Moxonidine Canon. Statistical analysis was performed with the StatTech v.4.2.7 software (© OOO StatTech, Russia).

Results: After 4 weeks of therapy, the BP target was achieved significantly more frequently in group 1 (63% of patients) compared to groups 2 (36.7% of patients), 3 (16.7% of patients), and 4 (16.7% of patients) (p<0.05). At 12 weeks, office SBP, DBP, and HR were significantly decreased in all groups, but the decrease was significantly greater in group 1. The therapy was associated with a more pronounced decrease in all studied 24-h BPM parameters in the Physiotens group than in other groups, as well as with a significantly more frequent normalization of the 24-h BP profile, in 66.7% of patients vs. 46.7%, 33.4%, and 23.2% of patients in groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively.

Conclusion: The treatment with original moxonidine demonstrated advantages over generic drugs in terms of achieving the BP goal, reducing office BP and HR, and improving 24-h BPM parameters.