Trial reportJournal of human hypertension2002
Efficacy of eprosartan in combination with HCTZ in patients with essential hypertension.
Trial report in Journal of human hypertension, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Combining angiotensin receptor blockers with chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide - which is the better alternative? A meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluation of the dose response with valsartan and valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide in patients with essential hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2007Pooled it
- Efficacy of fimasartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination in hypertensive patients inadequately controlled by fimasartan monotherapy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2015Trial
- Once-daily eprosartan mesylate in the treatment of elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension: data from a 13-week double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, multicenter study.Journal of human hypertension · 2004Trial
- Efficacy of ARB/HCTZ Combination Therapy in Uncontrolled Hypertensive Patients Compared with ARB Monotherapy: A Meta-Analysis.International journal of hypertension · 2021Article
- The comparative efficacy and safety of the angiotensin receptor blockers in the management of hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases.Drug safety · 2015Review
- Eprosartan: a review of its use in hypertension.Drugs · 2009Review
- Comparison of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension.Drugs · 2008Review
- Olmesartan medoxomil combined with hydrochlorothiazide for the treatment of hypertension.Vascular health and risk management · 2006Review
- Hypertension in patients with type-II diabetes: relation to urinary albumin excretion, endothelial function and inflammation.Journal of human hypertension · 2005Review
- Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers in combination with hydrochlorothiazide: a review of the factorial-design studies.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2004Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This randomised, double-blind study was designed to investigate the efficacy of a once-daily (OD) combination of the AT(1) receptor blocker, eprosartan 600 mg, and the thiazide diuretic, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg, in patients with mild to moderate hypertension (sitting diastolic blood pressure (sitDBP) > or =98 mm Hg and < or =114 mm Hg) not adequately controlled with eprosartan 600 mg OD. A total of 494 patients entered the open-label monotherapy run-in phase, which consisted of eprosartan 600 mg OD for 3 weeks. Patients who responded to monotherapy were not eligible to enter the randomised phase of the study and were withdrawn. The remaining 309 patients were then randomised to either eprosartan 600 mg plus HCTZ 12.5 mg OD or to continue on eprosartan 600 mg OD. In the eprosartan plus HCTZ combination group, both sitDBP and sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP) were significantly reduced compared with the eprosartan monotherapy group. In addition, the response rate was higher in the combination group compared with the monotherapy group. There were no significant effects on reduction of sitDBP due to gender, prior use of antihypertensives or baseline severity of hypertension. The tolerability profile for the combination group was similar to that for the monotherapy group. Headache was the most frequent adverse event in both treatment groups. The majority of adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity. In this study of patients who were unresponsive to eprosartan monotherapy for 3 weeks, a combination product of eprosartan 600 mg and HCTZ 12.5 mg was shown to be an effective and well tolerated treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
11896506What 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.