Trial reportJAMA2004
Effect of antihypertensive agents on cardiovascular events in patients with coronary disease and normal blood pressure: the CAMELOT study: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 284 papers, 22 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
284 citing papers in PubMed, 22 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,149 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension 2025 (JSH2025).Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Guideline
- A systematic review and meta-analysis testing the effect of lifestyle modification and medication optimization programs on cholesterol and blood pressure in patients with cardiovascular disease.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The link between adherence to antihypertensive medications and mortality rates in patients with hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Latin-American guidelines of recommendations at discharge from an acute coronary syndrome.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2024Guideline
- Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor induced cough compared with placebo, and other antihypertensives: A systematic review, and network meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2023Pooled it
- Association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and the risk of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of a Run-In Period on Estimated Treatment Effects in Cardiovascular Randomized Clinical Trials: A Meta-Analytic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative peripheral edema for dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Pooled it
- The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2019).Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019Guideline
- Effects of lowering diastolic blood pressure to <80 mmHg on cardiovascular mortality and events in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019Pooled it
- Effects of anti-hypertensive treatment on major cardiovascular events in populations within prehypertensive levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of human hypertension · 2018Pooled it
- Association of Blood Pressure Lowering With Mortality and Cardiovascular Disease Across Blood Pressure Levels: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Renin angiotensin system inhibitors for patients with stable coronary artery disease without heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Pooled it
- The Results of ACES (Antihypertensive Combinations' Long Term Efficacy Comparing Study): Analysis of Metabolic Effects of Antihypertensive Combination Therapies.Clinical drug investigation · 2016Pooled it
- Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels in patients with diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analyses.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016Pooled it
- Diabetes mellitus as a compelling indication for use of renin angiotensin system blockers: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016Pooled it
- Guideline
- Heterogeneity of prognostic studies of 24-hour blood pressure variability: systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Revisiting evidence of blood pressure-dependent and independent effects of amlodipine on the risk of stroke.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2011Pooled it
- Secondary prevention of ischaemic cardiac events.BMJ clinical evidence · 2011Pooled it
224 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe effect of antihypertensive drugs on cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and normal blood pressure remains uncertain.
objectiveTo compare the effects of amlodipine or enalapril vs placebo on cardiovascular events in patients with CAD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsDouble-blind, randomized, multicenter, 24-month trial (enrollment April 1999-April 2002) comparing amlodipine or enalapril with placebo in 1991 patients with angiographically documented CAD (>20% stenosis by coronary angiography) and diastolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg. A substudy of 274 patients measured atherosclerosis progression by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).
interventionsPatients were randomized to receive amlodipine, 10 mg; enalapril, 20 mg; or placebo. IVUS was performed at baseline and study completion.
main outcome measuresThe primary efficacy parameter was incidence of cardiovascular events for amlodipine vs placebo. Other outcomes included comparisons of amlodipine vs enalapril and enalapril vs placebo. Events included cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, coronary revascularization, hospitalization for angina pectoris, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, fatal or nonfatal stroke or transient ischemic attack, and new diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease. The IVUS end point was change in percent atheroma volume.
resultsBaseline blood pressure averaged 129/78 mm Hg for all patients; it increased by 0.7/0.6 mm Hg in the placebo group and decreased by 4.8/2.5 mm Hg and 4.9/2.4 mm Hg in the amlodipine and enalapril groups, respectively (P<.001 for both vs placebo). Cardiovascular events occurred in 151 (23.1%) placebo-treated patients, in 110 (16.6%) amlodipine-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.88 [P = .003]), and in 136 (20.2%) enalapril-treated patients (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.67-1.07 [P = .16]. Primary end point comparison for enalapril vs amlodipine was not significant (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.63-1.04 [P = .10]). The IVUS substudy showed a trend toward less progression of atherosclerosis in the amlodipine group vs placebo (P = .12), with significantly less progression in the subgroup with systolic blood pressures greater than the mean (P = .02). Compared with baseline, IVUS showed progression in the placebo group (P<.001), a trend toward progression in the enalapril group (P = .08), and no progression in the amlodipine group (P = .31). For the amlodipine group, correlation between blood pressure reduction and progression was r = 0.19, P = .07.
conclusionsAdministration of amlodipine to patients with CAD and normal blood pressure resulted in reduced adverse cardiovascular events. Directionally similar, but smaller and nonsignificant, treatment effects were observed with enalapril. For amlodipine, IVUS showed evidence of slowing of atherosclerosis progression.
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.