Trial reportCardiovascular drugs and therapy1995
Nicorandil safety in the long-term treatment of coronary heart disease.
Trial report in Cardiovascular drugs and therapy, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nicorandil and Long-acting Nitrates: Vasodilator Therapies for the Management of Chronic Stable Angina Pectoris.European cardiology · 2018Review
- The KThe journal of headache and pain · 2017Article
- Vasodilator Therapy: Nitrates and Nicorandil.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2016Review
- Review
- Nicorandil: a review of its use in the management of stable angina pectoris, including high-risk patients.Drugs · 2004Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The results of an open prospective study that evaluated the long-term clinical safety of nicorandil are presented. This study included 199 patients with severe chronic stable angina treated over a 1-year period. The most often reported adverse event was headache, which was responsible for most of the study withdrawals due to clinical intolerance (9.6%). When using a progressive titration scheme, this incidence was substantially reduced to 2.7%. As with other less frequent adverse events (dizziness, gastrointestinal disorders), headaches were reported as being mild to moderate in severity, were experienced during the first days of treatment, and, if treatment was maintained, usually resolved within a few days. The incidence of adverse events was not modified when nicorandil was given in combination with a beta-blocker, a calcium antagonist, or both agents. Cardiovascular safety was satisfactory and laboratory parameters were not altered. At the end of the study, 70% of patients were maintained on nicorandil. These results are in agreement with those reported from the nicorandil safety database, which gathered 1152 patients treated by nicorandil, including those of the present study. In comparative studies of nicorandil versus beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, or nitrates, the overall incidence of adverse events was no different between the two treatment groups, although the safety profile differed according to the drug category.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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.