Trial reportJournal of human hypertension2002
Persistence of the antihypertensive efficacy of amlodipine and nifedipine GITS after two 'missed doses': a randomised, double-blind comparative trial in Asian patients.
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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative peripheral edema for dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Pooled it
- A randomized controlled trial on the blood pressure-lowering effect of amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS in sustained hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Trial
- Sustained blood pressure-lowering effect of aliskiren compared with telmisartan after a single missed dose.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2013Trial
- Developing decision support algorithm for hypertension medications for use in a digital therapeutic system.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2025Article
- Amlodipine in the current management of hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2023Review
- Comparative efficacy of generic nifedipine versus brand-name amlodipine for hypertension management in Taiwan.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Article
- Amlodipine as an antiischemic drug is superior to long acting nitrates.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2015Review
- Transforaminal Epidural Injection Induces Hypertensive Crisis in a Patient whose Nifedipine was Withdrawn.Clinical drug investigation · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 14 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suboptimal management of hypertension is often a result of poor patient compliance in the form of missed doses of their antihypertensive medication. This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial was designed to compare the persistence of the antihypertensive efficacy of the amlodipine and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) after two 'missed doses', and also to compare the drugs' overall efficacy and safety in Asian patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Following a 2-week placebo run-in period, 222 patients were randomised to receive either amlodipine (5 mg daily, increased after 6 weeks if necessary to 10 mg daily, n=109) or nifedipine GITS (30 mg daily, increased after 6 weeks if necessary to 60 mg daily; n=113) for 12 weeks. A placebo was then substituted for further 2 days with continuous ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring. The increases in the last 9 h of mean ambulatory BP on day 2 after treatment withdrawal were significantly less with amlodipine than with nifedipine GITS: 4.4+/-7.0 vs 11.2+/-11.3 mmHg for systolic BP (P<or=0.0001) and 2.4+/-6.3 vs 6.0+/-6.0 mmHg for diastolic BP (P<or=0.0002). Significant differences between the two drugs in mean 24-h ambulatory BP levels were already evident on day 1 after withdrawal, even though there were no significant differences on the final day of treatment. No differences in safety parameters were observed, and neither drug caused any serious or severe treatment-related adverse events. In conclusion, amlodipine provides greater protection than nifedipine GITS against loss of BP control following missed doses.
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.