Trial reportJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)
Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension.
Trial report in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 102 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
102 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 264 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of an angiotensin receptor blocker, olmesartan medoxomil, in older hypertensive patients.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Pooled it
- Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analytical approach.International journal of clinical practice · 2009Pooled it
- Updated meta-analytical approach to the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs in reducing blood pressure.Clinical drug investigation · 2007Pooled it
- Population pharmacokinetics of olmesartan following oral administration of its prodrug, olmesartan medoxomil: in healthy volunteers and hypertensive patients.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2005Pooled it
- A Comparison Study of Olmesartan and Valsartan Effects on Myocardial Metabolism in Patients With Dilated Cardiomyopathy: the OVOID Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Trial
- Efficacy of Olmesartan/Amlodipine Single-Pill Combination on 24-h Mean Systolic Blood Pressure Measured by Ambulatory Monitoring in Non-Responders to Valsartan or Candesartan Monotherapy.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Trial
- Characterization of subgroups of heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction with possible implications for prognosis and treatment response.European journal of heart failure · 2015Trial
- Risk of hyperkalemia in patients with moderate chronic kidney disease initiating angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers: a randomized study.BMC research notes · 2013Trial
- Long-term efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil in Chinese hypertensive patients as assessed by clinic, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurements.Clinical drug investigation · 2012Trial
- Effects of 1-year administration of olmesartan on portal pressure and TGF-beta1 in selected patients with cirrhosis: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of gastroenterology · 2011Trial
- Effects of high dose olmesartan medoxomil plus hydrochlorothiazide on blood pressure control in patients with grade 2 and grade 3 hypertension.Journal of human hypertension · 2011Trial
- Olmesartan reduces arterial stiffness and serum adipocyte fatty acid-binding protein in hypertensive patients.Heart and vessels · 2011Trial
- The comparative effects of azilsartan medoxomil and olmesartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2011Trial
- Effects of olmesartan medoxomil, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist, on plasma concentration of B-type natriuretic peptide, in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a preliminary, observational, open-label study.Clinical drug investigation · 2011Trial
- Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg combination therapy versus olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, multinational, phase III study.Clinical drug investigation · 2010Trial
- Blood pressure goal achievement with olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment: additional analysis of the OLMEBEST study.Vascular health and risk management · 2009Trial
- Results of an olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment regimen in hypertensive patients.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2008Trial
- Comparison of increasing doses of olmesartan medoxomil, losartan potassium, and valsartan in patients with essential hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2007Trial
- Efficacy and safety of treating stage 2 systolic hypertension with olmesartan and olmesartan/HCTZ: results of an open-label titration study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2007Trial
- Efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: the OLMEBEST Study.Clinical drug investigation · 2007Trial
42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, the authors compared the antihypertensive efficacy of once-daily treatment with the new angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) olmesartan (20 mg) with recommended starting doses of losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg), and irbesartan (150 mg) in 588 patients with a cuff diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of greater than or equal to 100 and less than or equal to 115 mm Hg and a mean daytime DBP of greater than or equal to 90 mm Hg and less than 120 mm Hg, as measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Cuff and ambulatory blood pressures were monitored at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment. All groups were predominantly white and approximately 62% male, and their mean age was approximately 52 years. In all groups, mean baseline DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were approximately 104 and 157 mm Hg, respectively. The reduction of sitting cuff DBP with olmesartan (11.5 mm Hg), the primary efficacy variable of this study, was significantly greater than with losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan (8.2, 7.9, and 9.9 mm Hg, respectively). Reductions of cuff SBP with the four ARBs ranged from 8.4-11.3 mm Hg and were not significantly different. The reduction in mean 24-hour DBP with olmesartan (8.5 mm Hg) was significantly greater than reductions with losartan and valsartan (6.2 and 5.6 mm Hg, respectively) and showed a trend toward significance when compared to the reduction in DBP with irbesartan (7.4 mm Hg; p=0.087). The reduction in mean 24-hour SBP with olmesartan (12.5 mm Hg) was significantly greater than the reductions with losartan and valsartan (9.0 and 8.1 mm Hg, respectively) and equivalent to the reduction with irbesartan (11.3 mm Hg). All drugs were well tolerated. The authors conclude that olmesartan, at its starting dose, is more effective than the starting doses of the other ARBs tested in reducing cuff DBP in patients with essential hypertension.
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.