ArticleThe Canadian journal of cardiology2008
Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and cardiovascular outcomes in elderly patients: a population-based study.
Article in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Adherence to Dihydropyridine Calcium-Channel Blockers: A Pharmacoepidemiologic Study.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Cardioprotective Effects of Mebudipine in a Rat Model of Doxorubicin-Induced Heart Failure.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- The Expanding Role of Pyridine and Dihydropyridine Scaffolds in Drug Design.Drug design, development and therapy · 2021Review
- Article
- New generations of dihydropyridines for treatment of hypertension.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are widely used for the treatment of hypertension and angina. Despite safety concerns associated with short-acting agents, increasing evidence supports the safety of long-acting dihydropyridines. Although amlodipine is the best studied of these, there are few studies comparing it with nifedipine.
objectiveTo examine the association between hospitalization for acute coronary syndromes and treatment with amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine in patients 65 years of age and older. The primary objective was a composite of hospital admission for angina or acute myocardial infarction.
methodsThe present population-based, retrospective cohort study used linked health care databases from Ontario. Propensity scores were used to identify highly similar patients started on amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine between April 1997 and March 2002. Time-to-event analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsThe analysis included 24,190 patients (44% male; mean age 75 years) treated with amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine (n=12,095 each). The number of patients reaching the primary end point was 362 (3%) and 294 (2.4%) in the amlodipine and nifedipine groups, respectively. The groups were similar in a large number of demographic and clinical characteristics. No significant differences were observed among users of extended-release nifedipine (adjusted hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13) relative to amlodipine.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that amlodipine and extended-release nifedipine are not associated with differential rates of acute coronary events in older patients.
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.