Efficacy and Safety of Azilsartan Medoxomil and Telmisartan in Hypertensive Patients: A Randomized, Assessor-Blinded Study.
Adverse drug reaction
ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
azilsartan medoxomil
hypertension
telmisartan
Journal
Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciences
ISSN: 2321-4856
Titre abrégé: Saudi J Med Med Sci
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101675905
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
06
03
2019
revised:
10
04
2019
accepted:
03
06
2019
entrez:
27
6
2020
pubmed:
27
6
2020
medline:
27
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Few studies have compared the safety and efficacy of azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) and telmisartan in hypertensive patients, especially using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of AZL-M and telmisartan in hypertensive patients using ABPM and clinic blood pressure (BP) monitoring. This prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-arm study included 700 patients, aged 18-70 years, with clinic and 24-h mean ambulatory systolic BP (SBP) of 150-180 mmHg and 130-170 mmHg, respectively. They were randomized equally into two groups: Group A received AZL-M 40 mg and Group T received telmisartan 40 mg; the dose was force titrated to 80 mg after 2 weeks if the response rate was not achieved. BP (clinical and ambulatory) was measured after 12 weeks and compared with baseline measurements. AZL-M significantly reduced the 24-h mean ambulatory SBP (Group A: 112.74 ± 7.58 mmHg; Group T: 113.96 ± 8.52 mmHg; This study found that AZL-M has greater antihypertensive efficacy than telmisartan, with comparable side effects. In addition, ABPM was shown to be a feasible method for such studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Few studies have compared the safety and efficacy of azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) and telmisartan in hypertensive patients, especially using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM).
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of AZL-M and telmisartan in hypertensive patients using ABPM and clinic blood pressure (BP) monitoring.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
This prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-arm study included 700 patients, aged 18-70 years, with clinic and 24-h mean ambulatory systolic BP (SBP) of 150-180 mmHg and 130-170 mmHg, respectively. They were randomized equally into two groups: Group A received AZL-M 40 mg and Group T received telmisartan 40 mg; the dose was force titrated to 80 mg after 2 weeks if the response rate was not achieved. BP (clinical and ambulatory) was measured after 12 weeks and compared with baseline measurements.
RESULTS
RESULTS
AZL-M significantly reduced the 24-h mean ambulatory SBP (Group A: 112.74 ± 7.58 mmHg; Group T: 113.96 ± 8.52 mmHg;
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study found that AZL-M has greater antihypertensive efficacy than telmisartan, with comparable side effects. In addition, ABPM was shown to be a feasible method for such studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32587489
doi: 10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_19_19
pii: SJMMS-8-87
pmc: PMC7305670
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
87-94Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
JAMA. 1999 Aug 11;282(6):539-46
pubmed: 10450715
Compr Physiol. 2014 Jul;4(3):1201-28
pubmed: 24944035
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011 Feb;13(2):81-8
pubmed: 21272195
Core Evid. 2016 Apr 05;11:1-10
pubmed: 27103882
J Hypertens. 2016 Apr;34(4):788-97
pubmed: 26766564
Blood Press Monit. 2003 Jun;8(3):111-7
pubmed: 12900588
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2006;2(3):195-201
pubmed: 17326326
Hypertension. 2004 May;43(5):993-1002
pubmed: 15007034
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011 Jul;13(7):467-72
pubmed: 21762358
Hypertension. 2011 Mar;57(3):413-20
pubmed: 21282560
Circulation. 2018 Mar 20;137(12):e67-e492
pubmed: 29386200
Hypertension. 2005 Jul;46(1):156-61
pubmed: 15939805
J Hypertens. 1994 Jun;12(6):703-8
pubmed: 7963496
Hypertens Res. 2013 Jul;36(7):627-33
pubmed: 23344134
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2011 Jul;2:27-39
pubmed: 22915967
Circulation. 2017 Mar 7;135(10):e146-e603
pubmed: 28122885
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 1;167(5):1677-87
pubmed: 23121914
JAMA. 2014 Feb 5;311(5):507-20
pubmed: 24352797
P T. 2011 Jan;36(1):22-40
pubmed: 21386934
J Int Med Res. 2000 Jul-Aug;28(4):149-67
pubmed: 11014323
Ir J Med Sci. 2019 May;188(2):481-488
pubmed: 29971568
BMJ. 2009 May 19;338:b1665
pubmed: 19454737
J Hum Hypertens. 2010 Nov;24(11):749-54
pubmed: 20200549
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Oct 08;(4):CD003822
pubmed: 18843650
Int J Clin Pract Suppl. 2004 Dec;(145):46-9
pubmed: 15617459
Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2016 Nov;241(17):1888-1899
pubmed: 27439538
Int J Hypertens. 2017;2017:5491838
pubmed: 29348933