Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2004
Subclinical alteration of taste sensitivity induced by candesartan in healthy subjects.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Angiotensin II receptor blocker-induces blunted taste sensitivity: comparison of candesartan and valsartan.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2005Trial
- HIV and risk of hypertension: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Endocrinology of Taste with Aging.Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America · 2023Review
- Salt Taste and Salt Sensitive Hypertension in HIV.Current hypertension reports · 2023Review
- Nutrition as Treatment Modality in Heart Failure.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2021Review
- ACE2: the molecular doorway to SARS-CoV-2.Cell & bioscience · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThere have been case reports of taste disturbance for the angiotensin II receptor blockers losartan and valsartan, but not for candesartan. This study was undertaken to examine whether candesartan causes taste disturbance.
methodsCandesartan cilexetil (4 mg day(-1)) or vehicle was given to healthy volunteers (n = 8) for 7 days in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over design with a 2-week washout period. Clinical gustometry using the filter-paper disc test and electrogustometry were sequentially performed before and at the end of each trial. Serum and salivary zinc concentrations were also measured.
resultsDetection thresholds of four basic tastes (sweet, salty, sour and bitter) determined by the paper disc test were significantly (P < 0.05 in all tests) worsened (i.e. score of test increased) after repeated dosing of the drug, although the subjects did not notice such changes. The mean +/- SEM (and 95% CI) scores of the four tastes at just before the seventh dosing of candesartan or vehicle was 3.38 +/- 0.32 (3.02, 3.74) and 2.63 +/- 0.18 (2.18, 3.08) for sweetness, 3.63 +/- 0.38 (4.49, 2.77) and 2.63 +/- 0.26 (3.27, 1.98) for salt, 4.01 +/- 0.42 (3.04, 4.98) and 2.61 +/- 0.32 (3.35, 1.87) for sourness, 4.01 +/- 0.38 (3.22, 4.80) and 2.99 +/- 0.33 (2.24, 3.74) for bitterness, for candesartan and placebo, respectively. Electrogustometry confirmed the candesartan-related taste disturbance. Serum and salivary zinc concentrations were not influenced by candesartan.
conclusionsThese data suggest that candesartan subclinically reduces taste sensitivity after repeated dosing in healthy subjects. Because similar events are reported for losartan and valsartan in case reports, this adverse effect might be a class effect of angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs).
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.