Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38871219›Full record

Trial reportIndian heart journal

Comparison of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the FDC of telmisartan + bisoprolol with telmisartan + metoprolol succinate ER combination therapy for stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension: A double-blind, multicentric, phase-III clinical study.

Gurpreet S Wander, Bhim Ram, Satyendra Kumar Sonkar, C N Manjunath, Padmanabh Kamath, L Sreenivasamurthy, R Balamurugan, Ssvv Narasinga Rao, Debabrata Roy, Prajapati Vipulkumar Bachubhai and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

12 authors.

Gurpreet S WanderDepartment of Cardiology, Dayanand Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, 141001, India. Electronic address: apigswander@gmail.com.
Bhim RamDepartment of General Medicine, Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sheikhpura, Patna, Bihar, 800014, India. Electronic address: bhimdr42197@gmail.com.
Satyendra Kumar SonkarDepartment of Medicine, King Georges Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, 226003, India. Electronic address: satyendra.sonkar@gmail.com.
C N ManjunathSri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560069, India. Electronic address: drcnmanjunath@gmail.com.
Padmanabh KamathDepartment of Cardiology, KMC Hospital, Mangalore, Karnataka, 575001, India. Electronic address: kamathcardio@gmail.com.
L SreenivasamurthyLife Care Hospital and Research Centre, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560092, India. Electronic address: drlsm@lcrc.in.
R BalamuruganKovai Diabetes Speciality Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, 641009, India. Electronic address: rbmkdsc@gmail.com.
Ssvv Narasinga RaoDepartment of General Medicine, Government Medical College & Government General Hospital (Old RIMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, 532001, India. Electronic address: drnarasingaraossvv@yahoo.com.
Debabrata RoySenior Consulting Interventional Cardiologist & Academic Co-ordinator, Rabindranath Tagore International Institute of Cardiac Sciences, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700099, India. Electronic address: debroy67@ymail.com.
Prajapati Vipulkumar BachubhaiDepartment of General Medicine, GCS Medical College, Hospital & Research Center, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380025, India. Electronic address: prajapativipul1983@gmail.com.
Manjula SDepartment of Medical Services, Micro Labs Limited, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560001, India. Electronic address: drmanjulas@gmail.com.
Krishna Kumar MDepartment of Medical Services, Micro Labs Limited, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560001, India. Electronic address: dr.kkiyer@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe present study compared the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of the new fixed-dose combination (FDC) of telmisartan 40 mg + bisoprolol 5 mg (TBP) tablets with the existing comparator FDC telmisartan 40 mg + metoprolol succinate ER 50 mg (TMS) tablets in patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension. METHODOLOGY: The multicentric, double-blind, parallel-group, comparative, prospective, phase-III clinical study involved 264 subjects with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension from 10 centres across India. The selected subjects were randomized into two groups: group A received the TMS and group B received the new FDC TBP. The primary endpoint was the mean change in seated systolic blood pressure (SeSBP) and seated diastolic blood pressure (SeDBP) from baseline to week 12 in both the control and study arms. The secondary endpoint was achieving the target of SeSBP <140 mmHg and SeDBP <90 mmHg from baseline to week 12 in both groups. Safety and tolerability parameters were evaluated in both groups based on adverse effects (AEs) reported by the patients and the physician.

resultsBoth treatment groups exhibited a reduction in BP after 2 weeks of treatment, which was sustained until 12 weeks. The mean change in SeSBP and SeDBP at weeks 2, 6, and 12 compared to the previous visit showed statistical significance (p < 0.001) in all cases for both groups A and B. The mean changes in SeSBP and SeDBP from baseline to study end were numerically higher in group B than in group A. The mean difference in SeSBP from baseline to study end was significantly higher in group B compared to group A (p = 0.029). By week 12, 88.28 % and 89.84 % of subjects in group B achieved SeSBP <140 mmHg and SeDBP <90 mmHg respectively, while 86.71 % and 91.40 % of subjects in group A achieved the same targets. Reported AEs were mostly mild to moderate in both treatment groups, and no serious AEs or deaths were reported. Tolerability was rated as 'excellent' by 93.75 % of subjects in group B and 91.40 % of subjects in group A.

conclusionBoth the new FDC TBP and the existing comparator TMS combination therapy have comparable efficacy, tolerability, and safety for the management of stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRY NAME: Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI) TRIAL REGISTRATION NO: CTRI/2021/11/037,926 PROTOCOL NO: MLBTL/05/2021 PROTOCOL URL: https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?trialid=62069&EncHid=&userName=bisoprolol.

Indexed as

BisoprololBlood PressureHypertensionMetoprololTelmisartanAdultAntihypertensive AgentsBenzimidazolesBenzoatesDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodDrug CombinationsDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansAntihypertensive AgentsBenzimidazolesBenzoatesBisoprololDrug CombinationsMetoprololTelmisartanBisoprololFixed-dose combinationHypertensionMetoprololTelmisartan

Identifiers

PMID38871219
PMCPMC11329064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.