Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12939564›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)

Comparative effect of lercanidipine, felodipine, and nifedipine GITS on blood pressure and heart rate in patients with mild to moderate arterial hypertension: the Lercanidipine in Adults (LEAD) Study.

Roberta Romito, Maria Ida Pansini, Francesco Perticone, Gianfranco Antonelli, Mariavittoria Pitzalis, Paolo Rizzon

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. New Insights into the Nephroprotective Potential of Lercanidipine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Lercanidipine in hypertension.Vascular health and risk management · 2005
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Lercanidipine in the Management of Hypertension: An Update.Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Roberta RomitoSezione di Malattie dell'Apparato Cardiovascolare, Dipartimento di Metodologia Clinica e Tecnologie Medico-Chirurgiche, Universita degli Studi di Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124 Bari, Italy.
Maria Ida Pansini
Francesco Perticone
Gianfranco Antonelli
Mariavittoria Pitzalis
Paolo Rizzon
Tecnologie Avanzate (Italy) · ITMagna Graecia University · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the effects of three dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (lercanidipine, felodipine, and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system) on blood pressure and heart rate in 250 patients with mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure > or =95 and 109 mm Hg). Patients were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with once-daily doses of lercanidipine 10 mg, felodipine 10 mg, or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system 30 mg. After 4 weeks of treatment, the dose was doubled in nonresponding patients. At 8 weeks, no significant differences in blood pressure were observed among the three groups. Increases in heart rate in all three groups induced by stressful conditions before and after treatment were not exacerbated during active treatment. The incidence of adverse drug reactions was lower in the lercanidipine and nifedipine groups than in the felodipine group (p<0.05); in particular, the incidence of edema for lercanidipine was 5.5% vs. 13% for felodipine and 6.6% for nifedipine.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCalcium Channel BlockersDihydropyridinesDouble-Blind MethodFelodipineFemaleHeart RateHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedNifedipineAntihypertensive AgentsCalcium Channel BlockersDihydropyridinesFelodipinelercanidipineNifedipine

Identifiers

PMID12939564
PMCPMC8101891
OpenAlexW2032553750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.