ReviewJournal of human hypertension2026
Triple and quadruple combination antihypertensive therapy in untreated individuals.
Review in Journal of human hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose combinations (LDCs) of 3 or 4 blood-pressure (BP) lowering drugs in people with untreated hypertension. This was an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials comparing LDC to placebo, monotherapy and dual therapy in people on no background antihypertensive therapy. We identified 12 randomised clinical trials consisting of 4733 untreated patients (average age 55 ± 7 years with 57% women). Comparing LDC to placebo, the mean (95% CI) systolic blood pressure (SBP) difference was -13.1 (-17.6, -8.6, p < 0.001) mmHg and DBP difference was -6.3 (-9.3,-3.3, p < 0.001) mmHg at first follow-up (4-12 weeks). Compared to monotherapy, the mean difference in SBP was -3.4 (0.8, -7.6, p < 0.116) mmHg whilst mean difference in DBP was -1.4 (-5.8, 3.0 p < 0.001) mmHg. There was no significant difference in BP change between LDC and dual therapy. The proportion of patients reaching BP < 140/90 mmHg was significantly higher with LDC than placebo (RR 1.42, 95% CI, 1.62-3.62, p < 0,001) and monotherapy (RR 1.23, 1.08-1.39, p = 0.002) but not with dual therapy (RR 1.25, 0.97-1.60, p = 0.08). There was no difference in rates of treatment withdrawal or serious adverse events, but there was more dizziness reported with LDC vs control (RR 3.79, 95% CI 1.10-13.01, p = 0.03) and less headaches (RR 0.33, 95% CI, 0.14, 0.78, p = 0.001. Study heterogeneity was significant in all comparisons. LDCs of three of four BP lowering drugs appear to be highly effective and well tolerated in people on no background antihypertensives, highlighting the potential for LDCs as a first line agent in hypertension.
Identifiers
42637900What 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.