ArticleJACC. Asia2024
Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Allisartan for the Treatment of Primary Hypertension.
Article in JACC. Asia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Sacubitril/Allisartan versus Olmesartan on serum uric acid in Chinese patients with hypertension and hyperuricaemia.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Trial
- Blood pressure lowering efficacy of sacubitril/allisartan versus olmesartan in elderly Chinese hypertensive patients.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2026Article
- Emerging therapeutic frontiers in hypertension management.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibition: An Overlooked Frontier in the Treatment of Hypertension.JACC. Asia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prevalence of hypertension still increases with the very rapidly increasing longevity in some countries, such as China. The control rate remains low. Objectives: This randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/allisartan, compared with olmesartan in Chinese patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Methods: Eligible patients aged 18 to 75 years (n = 1,197) with mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomized to receive sacubitril/allisartan 240 mg (n = 399), sacubitril/allisartan 480 mg (n = 399), or olmesartan 20 mg (n = 399) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who completed the 12-week treatment then received another 12-week extended treatment (n = 1,084) and 28-week prolonged treatment (n = 189). The primary end point was a reduction in clinic mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) from baseline at 12 weeks. Results: Sacubitril/allisartan 240 mg/d provided a greater reduction in msSBP than olmesartan at 12 weeks (between-group difference: -1.9 mm Hg [95% CI: -4.2 to 0.4 mm Hg]; Conclusions: Sacubitril/allisartan is effective for the treatment of hypertension and well tolerated in Chinese patients.
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.