Trial reportVascular health and risk management2011
Ambulatory blood pressure response to triple therapy with an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB), calcium-channel blocker (CCB), and HCTZ versus dual therapy with an ARB and HCTZ.
Trial report in Vascular health and risk management, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aldosterone Synthase Inhibitors for Resistant Hypertension: Pharmacological Insights - A Systematic Review.Drugs · 2025Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of triple vs dual combination of angiotensin II receptor blocker and calcium channel blocker and diuretic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2013Pooled it
- A Rapid, Sensitive, and High-throughput Method for the Simultaneous Determination of Antihypertensive Drug Combinations in Dog Plasma by UHPLC-MS/MS: The Assessment of Predicable Bioequivalence ofCurrent pharmaceutical design · 2024Article
- Pathophysiologically based antihypertensive pharmacotherapeutics rationality, efficacy and safety in Sub Saharan African Nations - A review.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2021Review
- Evaluation of effectiveness and safety of amlodipine/valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide single-pill combination therapy in hypertensive patients: an observational study.Journal of drug assessment · 2014Article
- A Comparative Study of the Management of Stage 2 hypertension by Combined therapy with Losartan, Amlodipine and Hydrochlorothiazide.International cardiovascular research journal · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStage 2 hypertension often requires combination antihypertensive therapy. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is a useful tool for assessing antihypertensive drugs and their combinations.
objectiveTo compare the effect of a moderate dose of angiotensin receptor blocker/calcium channel blocker (ARB/CCB) combined with a diuretic versus a maximal dose of ARB with a diuretic on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and other derived ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) parameters.
methodsThe EXforge As compared to Losartan Treatment ABPM substudy was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, active-control, forced-titration study of patients with Stage 2 hypertension that compared the efficacy of initial treatment with valsartan/amlodipine 160/5 mg (n = 48) or losartan 100 mg (n = 36). At week 3, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg was added in both treatment groups. ABP was measured at baseline and at week 6. Additionaly, 24-hour ABP, nighttime (10 pm to 6 am) and daytime (6 am to 10 pm) ABP, and ABP load (percentage of readings above 140/90 mmHg) were determined.
resultsEighty-four patients (48 ARB/CCB/HCTZ, 36 ARB/HCTZ) had ABPM at baseline and at week 6. Reductions of systolic/diastolic ABP were greater in the ARB/CCB/ HCTZ group than in the ARB/HCTZ group for 24-hour mean ABP (-22.0/-13.3 versus -17.4/-8.1 mmHg), as well as nighttime ABP (-22.2/-13.3 versus -16.2/-7.4 mmHg), daytime ABP (-21.9/-13.0 versus -18.1/-8.6 mmHg), ABP in the last 4 hours of the dosing period (-21.5/-13.5 versus -17.0/-7.7 mmHg), and ABP load (21.7%/12.8% versus 30.8%/20.0%).
conclusionInitiating antihypertensive treatment with moderate doses of ARB/CCB with a diuretic is more effective in lowering nighttime and daytime ABP and reducing ABP load than a maximal dose of an ARB with a diuretic.
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.