Evidence mapPaperPMID 25938807Full record

Trial reportPloS one2015

Comparison of Azelnidipine and Trichlormethiazide in Japanese Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Hypertension: The COAT Randomized Controlled Trial.

Masahiro Takihata, Akinobu Nakamura, Yoshinobu Kondo, Satsuki Kawasaki, Mari Kimura, Yasuo Terauchi

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Masahiro TakihataDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Akinobu NakamuraDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yoshinobu KondoDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Chigasaki Municipal Hospital, Chigasaki, Kanagawa, Japan.
Satsuki KawasakiDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Shonan Fujisawa Tokushukai Hospital, Fujisawa, Kanagawa, Japan.
Mari KimuraDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yasuo TerauchiDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yokohama City University · JPChigasaki Rehabilitation College · JPYokufukai Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study compared the efficacy and safety of azelnidipine with that of trichlormethiazide in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients with hypertension.

methodsIn a multicenter, open-label trial, 240 patients with adequately controlled diabetes (HbA1c ≤ 7.0%) under lifestyle modification and/or administration of hypoglycemic agents and inadequately controlled hypertension (systolic blood pressure [sBP] ≥ 130 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure [dBP] ≥ 80 mmHg) who were being treated with olmesartan were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to an azelnidipine group or a trichlormethiazide group and were followed up for 48 weeks. Main outcome measure was the difference in the change in HbA1c levels from the baseline values at 48 weeks between these two groups.

resultsOf the 240 subjects that were enrolled, 209 subjects (azelnidipine group: 103 patients, trichlormethiazide group: 106 patients) completed this trial. At 48 weeks, the following changes were observed in the azelnidipine and trichlormethiazide groups, respectively: HbA1c levels, 0.19 ± 0.52% and 0.19 ± 0.54%; sBP/dBP, -10.7 ± 9.6/-6.6 ± 6.6 mmHg and -7.1 ± 7.7/-3.3 ± 6.1 mmHg (P < 0.001 for both sBP and dBP). In both groups, dizziness (12 patients [11.7%] and 16 patients [15.1%]) and edema (16 patients [15.5%] and 7 patients [6.6%], P = 0.047) were observed during the 48-week follow-up period.

conclusionsAzelnidipine was more effective for controlling blood pressure than trichlormethiazide in Japanese type 2 diabetes patients, whereas trichlormethiazide was more effective for reducing albuminuria than azelnidipine. Both of these agents, however, similarly exacerbated glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients with hypertension.

trial registrationUMIN 000006081.

Indexed as

AgedAzetidinecarboxylic AcidBlood PressureCalcium Channel BlockersDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2DihydropyridinesDiureticsFemaleHumansHypertensionJapanMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeTrichlormethiazideazelnidipineAzetidinecarboxylic AcidCalcium Channel BlockersDihydropyridinesDiureticsTrichlormethiazide

Identifiers

PMID25938807
PMCPMC4418830
OpenAlexW1588682331

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.