Literature DB >> 11588406

Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension.

S Oparil1, D Williams, S G Chrysant, T C Marbury, J Neutel.   

Abstract

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, the authors compared the antihypertensive efficacy of once-daily treatment with the new angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) olmesartan (20 mg) with recommended starting doses of losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg), and irbesartan (150 mg) in 588 patients with a cuff diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of greater than or equal to 100 and less than or equal to 115 mm Hg and a mean daytime DBP of greater than or equal to 90 mm Hg and less than 120 mm Hg, as measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Cuff and ambulatory blood pressures were monitored at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment. All groups were predominantly white and approximately 62% male, and their mean age was approximately 52 years. In all groups, mean baseline DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were approximately 104 and 157 mm Hg, respectively. The reduction of sitting cuff DBP with olmesartan (11.5 mm Hg), the primary efficacy variable of this study, was significantly greater than with losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan (8.2, 7.9, and 9.9 mm Hg, respectively). Reductions of cuff SBP with the four ARBs ranged from 8.4-11.3 mm Hg and were not significantly different. The reduction in mean 24-hour DBP with olmesartan (8.5 mm Hg) was significantly greater than reductions with losartan and valsartan (6.2 and 5.6 mm Hg, respectively) and showed a trend toward significance when compared to the reduction in DBP with irbesartan (7.4 mm Hg; p=0.087). The reduction in mean 24-hour SBP with olmesartan (12.5 mm Hg) was significantly greater than the reductions with losartan and valsartan (9.0 and 8.1 mm Hg, respectively) and equivalent to the reduction with irbesartan (11.3 mm Hg). All drugs were well tolerated. The authors conclude that olmesartan, at its starting dose, is more effective than the starting doses of the other ARBs tested in reducing cuff DBP in patients with essential hypertension.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11588406      PMCID: PMC8101821          DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2001.01136.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)        ISSN: 1524-6175            Impact factor:   3.738


  33 in total

1.  The antihypertensive effect and tolerability of candesartan cilexetil, a new generation angiotensin II antagonist, in comparison with losartan.

Authors:  O K Andersson; S Neldam
Journal:  Blood Press       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.835

2.  Blood pressure and risk of coronary heart disease: the Framingham study.

Authors:  W B Kannel; M J Schwartz; P M McNamara
Journal:  Dis Chest       Date:  1969-07

3.  Comparison of angiotensin II receptor blockers: impact of missed doses of candesartan cilexetil and losartan in systemic hypertension.

Authors:  G Mancia; R Dell'Oro; C Turri; G Grassi
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1999-11-18       Impact factor: 2.778

4.  Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). SHEP Cooperative Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1991-06-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Does lowering the blood pressure improve the mood? Quality-of-life results from the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) study.

Authors:  I Wiklund; K Halling; T Rydén-Bergsten; A Fletcher
Journal:  Blood Press       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 2.835

Review 6.  Angiotensin II receptor antagonists.

Authors:  M Burnier; H R Brunner
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-02-19       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  ABPM comparison of the antihypertensive profiles of the selective angiotensin II receptor antagonists telmisartan and losartan in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Authors:  J Mallion; J Siche; Y Lacourcière
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.012

8.  Persistence of anti-hypertensive effect after 'missed doses' of calcium antagonist with long (amlodipine) vs short (diltiazem) elimination half-life.

Authors:  F H Leenen; A Fourney; G Notman; J Tanner
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 4.335

9.  Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT Study Group.

Authors:  L Hansson; A Zanchetti; S G Carruthers; B Dahlöf; D Elmfeldt; S Julius; J Ménard; K H Rahn; H Wedel; S Westerling
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-06-13       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 1, Prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias.

Authors:  S MacMahon; R Peto; J Cutler; R Collins; P Sorlie; J Neaton; R Abbott; J Godwin; A Dyer; J Stamler
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-03-31       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  79 in total

1.  Effects of olmesartan medoxomil, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist, on plasma concentration of B-type natriuretic peptide, in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a preliminary, observational, open-label study.

Authors:  Toshihide Kawai; Izumi Takei; Akira Shimada; Takumi Hirata; Kumiko Tanaka; Yoshifumi Saisho; Junichiro Irie; Chihiro Horimai; Hideo Matsumoto; Hiroshi Itoh
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.859

2.  Angiotensin II receptor blockers.

Authors:  Amy Barreras; Cheryle Gurk-Turner
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2003-01

3.  Population pharmacokinetics of olmesartan following oral administration of its prodrug, olmesartan medoxomil: in healthy volunteers and hypertensive patients.

Authors:  Kazutaka Yoshihara; Yuying Gao; Hiroshi Shiga; D Russell Wada; Masafumi Hisaoka
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Intermittent drug dosing intervals guided by the operational multiple dosing half lives for predictable plasma accumulation and fluctuation.

Authors:  Anita Grover; Leslie Z Benet
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2011-04-16       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: the OLMEBEST Study.

Authors:  Vivencio Barrios; Alessandro Boccanelli; Silke Ewald; Xavier Girerd; Anthony Heagerty; Jean-Marie Krzesinski; Robert Lins; José Rodicio; Thomas Stefenelli; Arend Woittiez; Michael Böhm
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.859

6.  Relationship between decrease in ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate variability due to the effects of taking olmesartan medoxomil.

Authors:  Taiji Furukawa; Taketo Hatsuno; Yasunari Ueno; Kensuke Nagaoka; Yuji Watari; Takeshi Yamakawa; Toshio Sagawa; Takaaki Isshiki
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.859

7.  Patient Cases: 1. A Patient with Apparent Compliance.

Authors:  Pantelis A Sarafidis
Journal:  High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev       Date:  2015-07-15

8.  Comparative cost effectiveness of angiotensin II receptor blockers in a US managed care setting: olmesartan medoxomil compared with losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan.

Authors:  W Robert Simons
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Blood pressure goal achievement with olmesartan medoxomil-based treatment: additional analysis of the OLMEBEST study.

Authors:  Vivencio Barrios; Carlos Escobar; Alberto Calderon; Michael Böhm
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2009-09-07

Review 10.  Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analytical approach.

Authors:  R M Nixon; E Müller; A Lowy; H Falvey
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.