ArticleInvestigational new drugs2012
Treatment of bevacizumab-induced hypertension by amlodipine.
Article in Investigational new drugs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and risk of sorafenib-induced hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2014Pooled it
- Acute vascular effects of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition in the forearm arterial circulation.Journal of hypertension · 2020Trial
- A Prospective Comparison of Azilsartan and Amlodipine for Bevacizumab-induced Hypertension and Proteinuria in Colorectal Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Trial
- Impact of Antihypertensive Treatment on Outcomes of Adjuvant Bevacizumab for Ovarian Cancer (IATRO), Results from a Nationwide Emulated Clinical Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Navigating the Complexities of Cancer Treatment-Induced Hypertension.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Chinese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension (2024 revision).Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2025Article
- Hypertension toxicity of VEGFR-TKIs in cancer treatment: incidence, mechanisms, and management strategies.Archives of toxicology · 2025Review
- Effect of blood pressure control on the risk of proteinuria during bevacizumab treatment in patients with colorectal cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2024Article
- Treatment and Implications of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitor-Induced Blood Pressure Rise: A Clinical Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- Risks and management of hypertension in cancer patients undergoing targeted therapy: a review.Clinical hypertension · 2022Review
- Hypertension in neonates treated with intravitreal bevacizumab for retinopathy of prematurity.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- Heart Failure With Targeted Cancer Therapies: Mechanisms and Cardioprotection.Circulation research · 2021Review
- Hypertension and Prohypertensive Antineoplastic Therapies in Cancer Patients.Circulation research · 2021Review
- Team-Based Approach to Management of Hypertension Associated with Angiogenesis Inhibitors.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2020Review
- Resistance to antihypertensive drugs targeting Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone-System in cancer patients: a case series.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
- Increase in Blood Pressure Associated With Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Targeting Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor.JACC. CardioOncology · 2019Article
- Expert recommendations on the management of hypertension in patients with ovarian and cervical cancer receiving bevacizumab in the UK.British journal of cancer · 2019Review
- Management of VEGF-Targeted Therapy-Induced Hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2018Review
- Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor-Induced Hypertension.Current oncology reports · 2018Review
- Increased risk of adverse drug events secondary to bevacizumab treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertension is a common toxicity of anti-VEGF agents, but its optimal treatment remains to define. This study aimed to describe the efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine, a calcium channel blocker, in patients with metastatic malignancies treated with bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to VEGF. PATIENTS AND
methodsOne hundred and eighty-seven patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, colorectal or ovarian cancer receiving bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks) and chemotherapy were eligible for this analysis. Blood pressure was measured at home twice daily according to international guidelines. Patients received amlodipine 5 mg daily for grade ≥ 2 bevacizumab-induced hypertension.
resultsTwenty-six patients received amlodipine 5 mg daily for de novo hypertension (group A), and another 10 patients received amlodipine for exacerbation of previously existing hypertension (group B). Hypertension was controlled within 7 days under amlodipine in 23/26 (88.5%, 95%CI: 76.2-100) patients in group A, and 8/10 (80%, 95%CI: 55.2-100) patients in group B, with a favourable toxicity profile.
conclusionsAmlodipine 5 mg daily appears safe and efficient for the treatment of hypertension in patients receiving bevacizumab at a dose-intensity of 2.5 mg/kg/week. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these results.
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.