Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22707187›Full record

Trial reportClinical cardiology2012

Comparison between zofenopril and ramipril in combination with acetylsalicylic acid in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: results of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, European study (SMILE-4).

Claudio Borghi, Ettore Ambrosioni, Salvatore Novo, Dragos Vinereanu, Giuseppe Ambrosio, SMILE-4 Working Party

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical cardiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Adjunctive therapy with an oral HBritish journal of pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Claudio BorghiUnit of Internal Medicine, Policlinico S. Orsola, University of Bologna, Italy. claudio.borghi@unibo.it
Ettore Ambrosioni
Salvatore Novo
Dragos Vinereanu
Giuseppe Ambrosio
SMILE-4 Working Party
Clinical Emergency Hospital Bucharest · ROPoliclinico S.Orsola-Malpighi · ITUniversity of Bologna · ITUniversity of Palermo · ITUniversity of Perugia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAngiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are largely employed for treating patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), but their efficacy may be negatively affected by concomitant administration of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), with some difference among the different compounds. HYPOTHESIS: The interaction between ASA and the two ACEIs zofenopril and ramipril may result in a different impact on survival of cardiac patients, due to differences in the pharmacological properties of the two ACEIs.

methodsThis phase IIIb, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, European study compared the safety and efficacy of zofenopril (60 mg/day) and ramipril (10 mg/day) plus ASA (100 mg/day), in 771 patients with LVD (clinical signs of heart failure or a left ventricular ejection fraction <45%) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The primary study end point was 1-year combined occurrence of death or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes.

resultsIn the intention-to-treat population, the primary outcome was significantly reduced by zofenopril (n = 365) vs ramipril (n = 351) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.70, and 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-0.96; P = 0.028) as a result of a decrease in cardiovascular hospitalization (OR: 0.64,95% CI: 0.46-0.88; P = 0.006). Mortality rate was not significantly different between the 2 treatments (OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 0.70-3.27; P = 0.293). Blood pressure values did not significantly change during the 1-year follow-up. N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels were progressively reduced during the study, with no statistically significant between-treatment differences. Proportion of patients with deterioration of renal function during the study was similar between the 2 groups. Drug safety profile was comparable between treatments.

conclusionsIn patients with LVD following AMI, the efficacy of zofenopril associated with ASA was superior to that of ramipril plus ASA, indicating some important clinical implications for the future use of ACEIs in patients with LVD or overt heart failure.

Indexed as

AgedAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAspirinCaptoprilChi-Square DistributionDouble-Blind MethodDrug Therapy, CombinationEuropeFemaleHeart FailureHospitalizationHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAspirinCaptoprilPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsRamiprilzofenopril

Identifiers

PMID22707187
PMCPMC6652444
OpenAlexW2049382616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.