SynthesisInternational journal of clinical practice2009
Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analytical approach.
Synthesis in International journal of clinical practice, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Two-Drug Combinations Therapy of Different Doses of Valsartan Existing Diverse Significance for Hypertensive Patients.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Different Doses of Sacubitril/Valsartan Compared with Olmesartan in Patients with Essential Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2023Pooled it
- Is the newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil more efficacious in lowering blood pressure than the older ones? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Pooled it
- Dealing with missing standard deviation and mean values in meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Additivity of nebivolol/valsartan single-pill combinations versus other single-pill combinations for hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Trial
- Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of six angiotensin II receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: a network meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Review
- Effect of Azilsartan on clinical blood pressure reduction compared to other angiotensin receptor blockers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Unveiling Wide Spectrum Therapeutic Implications and Signaling Mechanisms of Valsartan in Diverse Disorders: A Comprehensive Review.Current drug research reviews · 2024Review
- Long-term mortality and cardiovascular events of seven angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: Analysis of a national real-world database: A retrospective cohort study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Network-based approach highlighting interplay among anti-hypertensives: target coding-genes: diseases.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Differential effects of low-dose sacubitril and/or valsartan on renal disease in salt-sensitive hypertension.American journal of physiology. Renal physiology · 2020Article
- Comparative efficacy of irbesartan/ hydrochlorothiazide and valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination in lowering blood pressure: a retrospective observational study in Oman.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2013Article
- Long-term safety and efficacy of telmisartan/amlodipine single pill combination in the treatment of hypertension.Vascular health and risk management · 2013Review
- Sexual dimorphism in urinary angiotensinogen excretion during chronic angiotensin II-salt hypertension.Gender medicine · 2012Article
- Differential pharmacology and benefit/risk of azilsartan compared to other sartans.Vascular health and risk management · 2012Review
- Effectiveness, safety and cost of drug substitution in hypertension.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- Efficacy of combination therapy with telmisartan plus amlodipine in patients with poorly controlled hypertension.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevityArticle
- Influence of Hospital Formularies on Outpatient Prescribing Practices: Analysis of the Introduction of a Local Formulary: A Single-Center, 2-Year Follow-Up, Retrospective Cohort Study of a Local Formulary in Japan.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of valsartan in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) reduction with other angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in essential hypertension.
methodsSystematic literature search of databases between October 1997 and May 2008. Meta-analysis of short-term, double-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for treatment of adult hypertension (DBP: 90-115 mmHg). Random-effects meta-regression adjusting for baseline blood pressure (BP) was used to analyse the data. Mean change in SBP and DBP was estimated for each individual drug and dose combination.
resultsIn all, 31 RCTs (n = 13,110 patients) were included in the analysis. Six studies include trial arms with candesartan, six irbesartan, 13 losartan, two olmesartan, five telmisartan and 12 valsartan. The weighted average reduction in mean SBP and DBP for valsartan 160 mg was -15.32 mmHg (95% CI: -17.09, -13.63) and -11.3 mmHg (95% CI: -12.15, -10.52) and for 320 mg was -15.85 mmHg (95% CI: -17.60, -14.12) and -11.97 mmHg (95% CI: -12.81, -11.16); these are statistically significantly greater reductions compared with losartan 100 mg, which was -12.01 mmHg (95% CI: -13.78, -10.25) and -9.37 mmHg (95% CI: -10.18, -8.54) for SBP and DBP respectively. There is evidence that valsartan 160 mg reduces SBP and DBP more than irbesartan 150 mg and reduced DBP more than candesartan 16 mg. No other statistically significant difference in efficacy is demonstrated.
conclusionValsartan administered at 160 or 320 mg is more effective at lowering BP than losartan 100 mg and shows comparable efficacy to other ARBs in patients with essential hypertension.
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.