SynthesisJournal of human hypertension2006
Meta-analysis of large outcome trials of angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertension.
Synthesis in Journal of human hypertension, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Candesartan cilexetil in children with hypertension or proteinuria: preliminary data.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2006Trial
- Comparative Effectiveness of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors Versus Angiotensin Receptor Blockers: Multidatabase Target Trial Emulation Studies.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2025Article
- Blood pressure reduction and clinical outcomes with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers: protocol for a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.Systematic reviews · 2018Article
- Comparing six antihypertensive medication classes for preventing new-onset diabetes mellitus among hypertensive patients: a network meta-analysis.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2017Article
- β-Arrestin mediates the Frank-Starling mechanism of cardiac contractility.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016Article
- The Different Therapeutic Choices with ARBs. Which One to Give? When? Why?American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2016Review
- The comparative efficacy and safety of the angiotensin receptor blockers in the management of hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases.Drug safety · 2015Review
- Antihypertensive drugs and glucose metabolism.World journal of cardiology · 2014Review
- Cognition and Hemodynamics.Current cardiovascular risk reports · 2012Article
- Does outcome reporting bias "cause" cancer? Risks associated with hidden data on Angiotensin receptor blockers.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2012Article
- A current evaluation of the safety of angiotensin receptor blockers and direct renin inhibitors.Vascular health and risk management · 2011Review
- Rationale for the use of a fixed-dose combination in the management of hypertension: efficacy and tolerability of lercanidipine/enalapril.Clinical drug investigation · 2010Review
- Effect on the atherogenic marker plasminogen activator inhibitor type-1 of addition of the ACE inhibitor imidapril to angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist therapy in hypertensive patients with abnormal glucose metabolism: a prospective cohort study in primary care.Clinical drug investigation · 2009Article
- Perindopril versus angiotensin II receptor blockade in hypertension and coronary artery disease: implications of clinical trials.Clinical drug investigation · 2007Review
- Review
- Review
- Treating hypertension while protecting the vulnerable islet in the cardiometabolic syndrome.Journal of the American Society of Hypertension : JASHArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), also known as sartans, block the activation of angiotensin type 1 receptors and have a recognised role in the treatment of heart failure and nephropathy. Since 2002, there have been three major outcome trials of ARBs in hypertension. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of ARB on major outcomes. Randomised controlled trials of ARBs in hypertensive subjects with an average follow-up of at least 2 years and at least 100 major cardiovascular events were included. For each trial, the ARB used, number and characteristics of subjects, baseline and change in blood pressure, cardiovascular and noncardiovascular outcomes were recorded. Three trials involving 29 375 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. In Losartan Intervention For Endpoint (LIFE) and Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) but not in Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation trial (VALUE), an ARB reduced the occurrence of the primary end point and stroke compared to control. Compared to other antihypertensive drugs, ARB treatment was associated with no significant change in all-cause mortality (relative risk ratio (RRR) 0.96, 95% CI: 0.88-1.06, P = 0.45). There was an increase in myocardial infarction (RRR, 1.12, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26, P = 0.041), but a decrease in new-onset diabetes mellitus (RRR, 0.80, 95% CI: 0.74-0.86, P < 0.0000001). In conclusion, the reduction in new-onset diabetes partly offsets any increase in the risk of myocardial infarction. Most hypertensive patients require more than one class of drugs. Small differences in treatment outcome should not over-ride the importance of good blood pressure control.
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.