ReviewDrugs2008
Comparison of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension.
Review in Drugs, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Angiotensin receptor blockers for heart failure.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Effect of Fimasartan versus Valsartan and Olmesartan on Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Korean Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Essential Hypertension: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Control, Three-Parallel Group, Forced Titration, Multicenter, Phase IV Study (Fimasartan Achieving Systolic Blood Pressure Target (FAST) Study).Drug design, development and therapy · 2020Trial
- The Impact of Azilsartan Medoxomil Treatment (Capsule Formulation) at Doses Ranging From 10 to 80 mg: Significant, Rapid Reductions in Clinic Diastolic and Systolic Blood Pressure.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Trial
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of azilsartan with that of candesartan cilexetil in Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind clinical study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2012Trial
- Comparison of the novel angiotensin II receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil vs valsartan by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2011Trial
- Rapid Normalization of Amniotic Fluid Index Following Discontinuation of Olmesartan: A Case Report.AJP reports · 2026Article
- Comparison of effects of telmisartan versus valsartan on post-induction hypotension during noncardiac surgery: a prospective observational study.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2024Observational
- Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and manufacturing contamination: A retrospective National Register Study into suspected associated adverse drug reactions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Single-Center Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetics and Safety of the Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonist Azilsartan Medoxomil in Mild to Moderate Hepatic Impairment.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Management of Hypertension Using Olmesartan Alone or in Combination.Cardiology and therapy · 2017Review
- Efficacy of olmesartan amlodipine in Colombian hypertensive patients (soat study).BMC research notes · 2017Observational
- Comparative effectiveness analysis of amlodipine/renin-angiotensin system blocker combinations.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2012Article
- Binding of losartan to angiotensin AT1 receptors increases dopamine D1 receptor activation.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2012Article
- Blood pressure outcomes in patients receiving angiotensin II receptor blockers in primary care: a comparative effectiveness analysis from electronic medical record data.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2011Article
- Review
- Differential clinical profile of candesartan compared to other angiotensin receptor blockers.Vascular health and risk management · 2011Review
- Use of Angiotensin receptor blockers in cardiovascular protection: current evidence and future directions.P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management · 2011Article
- Olmesartan/amlodipine: a review of its use in the management of hypertension.Vascular health and risk management · 2011Review
- Aliskiren: a review of its use as monotherapy and as combination therapy in the management of hypertension.Drugs · 2010Review
- Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of telmisartan and enalapril in patients of mild to moderate essential hypertension.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertension is a major health problem worldwide, yet remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) are highly effective at reducing blood pressure (BP), exhibit renoprotective properties and have placebo-like tolerability. However, it is unclear whether there are clinical differences in efficacy and tolerability between the available ARBs. A review of published, randomized, comparative clinical trials suggests that differences in BP-lowering efficacy and 24-hour BP control may exist between ARBs, although it appears that there is no evidence for important differences in tolerability between ARBs. Few studies have assessed attainment rates for important combined systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) goals recommended in treatment guidelines. Likewise, few studies have directly compared more than two agents or ARB/hydrochlorothiazide fixed-dose combinations, and most ARBs have not been compared across their full recommended dosage ranges. Overall, there is insufficient weight of evidence to allow definitive conclusions to be drawn regarding the comparative efficacy of the available ARBs. However, newer ARBs (e.g. olmesartan medoxomil and telmisartan) appear to be more effective than older ARBs (e.g. losartan and valsartan) in reducing DBP and/or SBP in some trials. In addition, olmesartan medoxomil treatment regimens resulted in high BP control rates in several trials, but head-to-head trials with other ARBs are required to put these control rates into perspective, especially for SBP control with various agents. The purpose of this review is to present published data from ARB efficacy trials for a comparison of various efficacy parameters among the agents within this drug class.
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.