SynthesisJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2021
Is the newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil more efficacious in lowering blood pressure than the older ones? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 6 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antihypertensive Efficacy and Safety of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs) with and without Inverse Agonism: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of azilsartan medoxomil in the treatment of hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Two-Drug Combinations Therapy of Different Doses of Valsartan Existing Diverse Significance for Hypertensive Patients.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions for reducing blood pressure in prehypertension: A meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of fimasartan in patients with hypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Pooled it
- Is the newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil more efficacious in lowering blood pressure than the older ones? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Pooled it
- Chinese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension (2024 revision).Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2025Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of six angiotensin II receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: a network meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Review
- Effect of Azilsartan on clinical blood pressure reduction compared to other angiotensin receptor blockers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Ferroptosis-related biomarkers for adamantinomatous craniopharyngioma treatment: conclusions from machine learning techniques.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Therapeutic Implications of Renin-Angiotensin System Modulators in Alzheimer's Dementia.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- National Heart Center/Saudi Heart Association 2023 Guidelines on the Management of Hypertension.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2023Article
- RSSDI Guidelines for the management of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus.International journal of diabetes in developing countries · 2022Review
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 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Angiotensin-receptor blockers are often considered insufficiently efficacious in reducing blood pressure. However, newer angiotensin-receptor blockers may be more effective than the older ones. A network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of various angiotensin-receptor blockers in reducing office and ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Relevant literature was searched from English and Chinese databases for randomized controlled trials involving angiotensin-receptor blockers in hypertension. Efficacy variables included systolic and diastolic blood pressure either in the office or on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Absolute blood pressure reductions at 6-12 weeks of treatment and their credible intervals were reported. A total of 34 publications provided adequate data for analysis (n = 14 859). In 28 studies on office systolic blood pressure (n = 12 731), against the common comparator valsartan 80 mg, the differences in systolic blood pressure were in favor of azilsartan medoxomil (20-80 mg), irbesartan (300 mg), olmesartan (20-40 mg), telmisartan (80 mg), and valsartan (160-320 mg), but not candesartan (8-16 mg), losartan (50-100 mg), irbesartan (150 mg), olmesartan (10 mg), and telmisartan (40 mg). The ranking plot shows that azilsartan medoxomil 80 mg had a possibility of 99% being the best in the class. Similar results were observed for office diastolic blood pressure and from 13 studies for 24-hour ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In conclusion, angiotensin-receptor blockers had different blood pressure lowering efficacy. The newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil at the dose of 80 mg seemed to be most efficacious in reducing both systolic and diastolic blood pressure in the office and on ambulatory measurement.
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.