Observational studyClinical and translational science2024
Generic substitution of amlodipine is not associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse cardiovascular events: An observational cohort study.
Observational study in Clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of pooled procurement of medicines on patient adherence and economic burden: evidence from China.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Generic substitution of amlodipine is not associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse cardiovascular events: An observational cohort study.Clinical and translational science · 2024Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to assess clinical outcomes following switching from originator to generic amlodipine. This population-based, matched, cohort study included users of originator amlodipine using claims data during 2018-2020 from a health system in Tianjin, China, in which usage of generic amlodipine was promoted by a drug procurement policy, the national volume-based procurement. Non-switchers refer to those remained on originator after the policy, while pure-switchers were those who switched to and continued using generic amlodipine, and back-switchers were those switched to generic amlodipine but then back to the originator. Propensity score matching generates comparable non-switchers and pure-switchers pairs, and non-switchers and back-switchers pairs. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction during follow-up (April 1, 2019 to December 30, 2020). Secondary outcomes included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and adherence to amlodipine. The hazard ratio (HR) for each clinical outcome was assessed through Cox proportional hazard regression. In total, 5943 non-switchers, 2949 pure-switchers, and 3061 back-switchers were included (mean age: 62.9 years; 55.5% men). For the matched pairs, pure-switchers (N = 2180) presented no additional risks of clinical outcomes compared to non-switchers (N = 4360) (e.g., MACEs: 2.86 vs. 2.95 events per 100 person-years; HR = 0.97 [95%CI: 0.70-1.33]). Back-switchers (N = 1998) also presented no additional risk compared to non-switchers (N = 3996) for most outcomes except for stroke (HR = 1.55 [95%CI: 1.03-2.34]). Pure-switchers and back-switchers all had better amlodipine adherence than non-switchers. Generic substitution of amlodipine is not associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events or all-cause mortality, but improves medicine adherence.
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.