Trial reportBlood pressure monitoring2014
Effects of combining azilsartan medoxomil with amlodipine in patients with stage 2 hypertension.
Trial report in Blood pressure monitoring, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil in the treatment of hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of the angiotensin II receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil in African-American patients with hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Trial
- Safety of combination therapy of azilsartan medoxomil and amlodipine: a population-based cohort study.Epidemiology and health · 2025Article
- Article
- Azilsartan as a Potent Antihypertensive Drug with Possible Pleiotropic Cardiometabolic Effects: A Review Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2016Review
- Azilsartan medoxomil in the management of hypertension: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy.Core evidence · 2016Review
- Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of adding an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) to a calcium channel blocker (CCB) following ineffective CCB monotherapy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2015Article
- New developments in the pharmacological treatment of hypertension: dead-end or a glimmer at the horizon?Current hypertension reports · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the study was to measure the effects on blood pressure (BP) of the angiotensin receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil, in 40 and 80 mg doses, combined with 5 mg of the calcium channel blocker amlodipine and to compare these effects with placebo plus amlodipine 5 mg.
methodsThis was a randomized, controlled, double-blind study of 6 weeks' duration in 566 patients with stage 2 hypertension. The primary endpoint was 24-h systolic BP by ambulatory monitoring.
resultsThe mean age of the participants was 58 years; men and women were equally represented, and baseline 24-h BP (153-154/93 mmHg) and clinic BP (165-166/94-95 mmHg) were similar across the three treatment groups. After 6 weeks, 24-h BP decreased by 25/15 mmHg in both the azilsartan medoxomil/amlodipine 40/5 and 80/5 mg groups. These reductions were each greater than the 14/8 mmHg decrease with placebo plus amlodipine 5 mg (P≤0.001 for both comparisons). All treatments were well tolerated, and adverse events did not increase with the azilsartan medoxomil doses. Edema or fluid retention was less common in both combination groups (2.6 and 2.7%) than with placebo plus amlodipine (7.6%).
conclusionCoadministration of azilsartan medoxomil with amlodipine was well tolerated and led to meaningful additional BP reductions compared with placebo plus amlodipine.
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.