Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22278628›Full record

Trial reportHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2012

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.

Hiromi Rakugi, Kazuaki Enya, Kenkichi Sugiura, Yoshinori Ikeda

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Catheter-based ultrasound renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension: the randomized, controlled REQUIRE trial.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2022
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Changeover Trial of Azilsartan and Olmesartan Comparing Effects on the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in Patients with Essential Hypertension after Cardiac Surgery (CHAOS Study).Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2016
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hiromi RakugiDepartment of Geriatric Medicine and Nephrology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. rakugi@geriat.med.osaka-u-ac.jp
Kazuaki Enya
Kenkichi Sugiura
Yoshinori Ikeda
Takeda (Japan) · JPOsaka University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Azilsartan is a novel angiotensin receptor blocker being developed for hypertension treatment. This 16-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of azilsartan (20-40 mg once daily by forced titration) and its ability to provide 24-h blood pressure (BP) control, with that of candesartan cilexetil (candesartan; 8-12 mg once daily by forced titration) in 622 Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension. Efficacy was evaluated by clinic-measured sitting BP, and by ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) at week 14. Participants (mean age: 57 years, 61% males) had a mean baseline sitting BP of 159.8/100.4 mm Hg. The mean change from baseline in sitting diastolic BP at week 16 (primary endpoint) was -12.4 mm Hg in the azilsartan group and -9.8 mm Hg in the candesartan group, demonstrating a statistically significant greater reduction with azilsartan vs. candesartan (difference: -2.6 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.08 to -1.22 mm Hg, P=0.0003). The week 16 (secondary endpoint) mean change from baseline in sitting systolic BP was -21.8 mm Hg and -17.5 mm Hg, respectively, a significant decrease with azilsartan vs. candesartan (difference: -4.4 mm Hg, 95% CI: -6.53 to -2.20 mm Hg, P<0.0001). On ABPM, the week 14 mean changes from baseline in diastolic and systolic BP were also significantly greater with azilsartan over a 24-h period, and during the daytime, night-time and early morning. Safety and tolerability were similar among the two groups. These data demonstrate that once-daily azilsartan provides a more potent 24-h sustained antihypertensive effect than that of candesartan but with equivalent safety.

Indexed as

AgedAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsAsian PeopleBenzimidazolesBiphenyl CompoundsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedOxadiazolesSeverity of Illness IndexTetrazolesAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsazilsartanBenzimidazolesBiphenyl Compoundscandesartan cilexetilOxadiazolesTetrazoles

Identifiers

PMID22278628
PMCPMC3348575
OpenAlexW2076870989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.