ArticleOncotarget2017
LCZ696, a promising novel agent in treating hypertension (a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials).
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of the Angiotensin-Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor on Cardiac Reverse Remodeling: Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Pooled it
- Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibitor Therapy: A Retrospective Chart Study.Innovations in pharmacy · 2025Article
- Anti-hypertensive effect of a novel angiotensin II receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNi) -S086 in DSS rat model.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Network meta-analysis of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of essential hypertension.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023Review
- The Antihypertensive Effects and Safety of LCZ696 in Patients with Hypertension: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- The renin-angiotensin system in cardiovascular autonomic control: recent developments and clinical implications.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo determine the effectiveness and safety of LCZ696 for the clinical treatment of hypertension, we performed a meta-analysis of the previous clinical trials.
methodsRelevant English articles and randomized controlled trials were searched in Pubmed, Embase, EBSCO, Cochrane base and ClinicalTrials.gov. The last search date was July 20th, 2017.
resultsCompared with 20mg olmesartan, 200mg and 400mg LCZ696 outperformed olmesartan in terms of reducing mean sitting systolic blood pressure, mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure, mean sitting diastolic blood pressure and mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure. Compared with 20mg olmesartan, 200mg and 400mg LCZ696 was better than olmesartan in terms of reducing mean sitting pulse pressure. And these studies showed that 400mg LCZ696 was better than 20mg olmesartan in terms of reducing mean ambulatory pulse pressure, however, there was no significant difference between 200mg LCZ696 and 20mg olmesartan in terms of redducing mean ambulatory pulse pressure. In addition, 200mg and 400mg LCZ696 was better than placebo in terms of reducing blood pressure parameters mentioned above. Compared with placebo or 20 mg olmesartan, LCZ696 showed no superiority in terms of reducing adverse events or serious adverse events.
conclusionsLCZ696 at 200 mg or 400 mg was better at reducing most of blood pressure parameters than 20 mg olmesartan or placebo. Compared with placebo or 20 mg olmesartan, 200 mg or 400 mg LCZ696 do not result in more adverse events in treating hypertension.
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.