ReviewPharmacoEconomics1996
ACE inhibitors in patients with diabetes mellitus. Clinical and economic considerations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research trends in contemporary health economics: a scientometric analysis on collective content of specialty journals.Health economics review · 2024Review
- Cost-effective strategies in the prevention of diabetic nephropathy.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Review
- To pay or not to pay? A decision and cost-utility analysis of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor therapy for diabetic nephropathy.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2000Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of the ACE inhibitors has been one of the major developments in cardiovascular pharmacology this century. Aside from their role as potent anti-hypertensive drugs with few adverse effects, ACE inhibitors have numerous other effects that have only been partially explained. Antihypertensive therapy is the most effective treatment in patients with diabetic nephropathy, postponing the development of end-stage renal failure. Although this effect can apparently be obtained with all antihypertensives (except nifedipine), recent meta-analyses have indicated that the beneficial effects of ACE inhibitors on proteinuria and preserved renal function are greater than with other drugs. In nondiabetic patients, treatment with ACE inhibitors may delay or prevent the development of congestive heart failure following acute myocardial infarction. Whether this also occurs in diabetic patients is still unknown, but subgroup analysis of existing studies and controlled clinical trials in this area should be encouraged. In conclusion, ACE inhibitors are the only drugs that have been proven, in controlled clinical trials, to be effective in preventing progression from micro-albuminuria to overt nephropathy. Furthermore, they are more effective in diminishing albuminuria at low levels of blood pressure reduction compared with other antihypertensives. In comparison with beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors have the advantage that they do not mask the subjective symptoms of hypoglycaemia, nor do they affect the serum lipid profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.