ArticleClinical drug investigation1998
Tolerability and efficacy of fosinopril and hydrochlorothiazide compared with amiloride and hydrochlorothiazide in patients with mild to moderate hypertension.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This 6-month multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel group clinical trial compared the tolerability and antihypertensive efficacy of a once-daily combination of fosinopril 20mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5mg (FOS/HCTZ) with a combination of amiloride 5mg/hydrochlorothiazide 50mg (AMI/HCTZ) in 217 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Adverse events related to hypotension or to specifically targeted clinical laboratory values were observed infrequently with FOS/HCTZ compared with AMI/HCTZ: with FOS/HCTZ, only 4 of 104 patients (3.9%) experienced such events, compared with 16 of 113 (14.1%) in the AMI/HCTZ group (p < 0.001). While statistically significant differences were found between the two treatment groups for changes from baseline in serum potassium, cholesterol, triglyceride and glucose values, the metabolic profile was uniformly unfavourable towards the AMI/HCTZ group; for example, reductions in potassium and elevations in cholesterol, triglyceride and glucose were more pronounced with the AMI/HCTZ group than with the FOS/HCTZ group. Both antihypertensive regimens produced statistically significant reductions from baseline in seated diastolic blood pressure that were equivalent at most points of measurement during double-blind treatment. Therapeutic response rates were high (>/=95%) and were similar for both regimens throughout the study. Because the relative risk for adverse events was markedly less over the long term with FOS/HCTZ than with AMI/HCTZ, the combination of fosinopril and hydrochlorothiazide may offer significant tolerability advantages over amiloride plus hydrochlorothiazide for such patients.
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.