Literature DB >> 11824857

Amlodipine versus chlorthalidone versus placebo in the treatment of stage I isolated systolic hypertension.

Richard H Grimm1, Henry Black, Randall Rowen, Andrew Lewin, Harry Shi, Mathieu Ghadanfar.   

Abstract

The study was to compare the effects of amlodipine (calcium channel antagonist), chlorthalidone (diuretic), and placebo in adults more than 50 years of age with stage 1 isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). After a 4-week placebo run-in phase, 150 patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to treatment with 5 mg of amlodipine (n = 48), 15 mg of chlorthalidone (n = 50), or placebo (n = 52). Patients who failed to meet the systolic blood pressure (BP) reduction goal by week 4 had their dose increased to 10 mg of amlodipine or 30 mg of chlorthalidone, and maintained at this increased dose for 12 weeks. Results showed a mean reduction (mean +/- SD) in sitting systolic BP from baseline to the last treatment visit of -14.6+/-12.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] -18.2, -11.0), -14.0+/-13.46 mm Hg (95% CI -17.8, -10.2), and -3.4+/-11.83 mm Hg (95% CI -6.7, -0.1) for the amlodipine, chlorthalidone, and the placebo treatment groups, respectively. Both active treatments showed significantly greater reductions than the placebo group (P < or = .001), but were not significantly different from each other. Sixty-seven percent of the amlodipine, 69% of the chlorthalidone, and 25% of the placebo-treated patients reached the protocol defined systolic BP goal (P = .001). Both active treatment groups showed a trend of better systolic BP response in older patients (> or =65 years). Secondary efficacy measures including pulse pressure, standing systolic, diastolic, and the 24-h ambulatory BP were also statistically significantly improved for both active treatments at the end of treatment, except for chlorthalidone in standing diastolic BP. Adverse events that occurred during the study were as expected and were well tolerated. The results of this study support the efficacy and safety of amlodipine and chlorthalidone for the treatment of stage 1 ISH during 20 weeks of treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11824857     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-7061(01)02224-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hypertens        ISSN: 0895-7061            Impact factor:   2.689


  6 in total

1.  Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of manidipine versus amlodipine in elderly subjects with isolated systolic hypertension: MAISH study.

Authors:  Antonio Coca Payeras; Krzysztof Sladek; Giuseppe Lembo; Marco Alberici
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.859

Review 2.  Use of calcium channel antagonists for the treatment of hypertension in the elderly.

Authors:  Hans-Michael Steffen
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.923

3.  Updated meta-analytical approach to the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs in reducing blood pressure.

Authors:  J P Baguet; B Legallicier; P Auquier; S Robitail
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.859

4.  All thiazide-like diuretics are not chlorthalidone: putting the ACCOMPLISH study into perspective.

Authors:  Michael E Ernst; Barry L Carter; Jan N Basile
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  Network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide in hypertensive patients.

Authors:  Stela Dineva; Katya Uzunova; Velichka Pavlova; Elena Filipova; Krassimir Kalinov; Toni Vekov
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 1.430

6.  Monotherapy treatment with chlorthalidone or amlodipine in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT).

Authors:  Deep Vakil; Stavros Zinonos; John B Kostis; Jeanne M Dobrzynski; Nora M Cosgrove; Abel E Moreyra; William J Kostis
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 3.738

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.