Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2020
Effect of Fimasartan versus Valsartan and Olmesartan on Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Korean Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Essential Hypertension: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Control, Three-Parallel Group, Forced Titration, Multicenter, Phase IV Study (Fimasartan Achieving Systolic Blood Pressure Target (FAST) Study).
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02495324 (A Randomized, Double-blind, Active Control, 3-parallel Group, Forced Titration, Multicenter, Phase IV Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Fimasartan Versus Valsartan Monotherapy in Patients With Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Active Control, 3-parallel Group, Forced Titration, Multicenter, Phase IV Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Fimasartan Versus Valsartan Monotherapy in Patients With Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers for nocturnal blood pressure reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Real-world efficacy of fimasartan vs. other angiotensin receptor blockers in combination with calcium channel blockers: a nationwide cohort study.Clinical hypertension · 2024Article
- Comparison Between Fimasartan Versus Other Angiotensin Receptor Blockers in Patients With Heart Failure After Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- Long-term mortality and cardiovascular events of seven angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: Analysis of a national real-world database: A retrospective cohort study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Incidence and Pattern of Aminotransferase Elevation During Anti-Hypertensive Therapy With Angiotensin-II Receptor Blockers.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHead-to-head comparison of the blood pressure (BP) lowering effect of fimasartan versus valsartan, with olmesartan as a reference, on office blood pressure and ambulatory BP. PATIENTS AND
methodsOf the 369 randomly assigned patients in this study, 365 hypertensive patients were referred as the full analysis set and divided into 3 groups with a 3:3:1 ratio (fimasartan group: 155, valsartan group: 157, olmesartan group: 53). After the 2-week single-blind placebo run-in period, initial standard doses of 60-mg fimasartan, 80-mg valsartan, and 10-mg olmesartan were administered for 2 weeks, then forcibly up-titrated higher doses (fimasartan 120 mg, valsartan 160 mg, olmesartan 20 mg) were given for 4 weeks. ABP was measured before and after the 6-week treatment. Primary endpoint was reduction of sitting office systolic BP (SiSBP) of fimasartan compared to valsartan after 6 weeks. Secondary endpoints were reduction of sitting office diastolic BP (SiDBP) and 24 hrs, day-time, and night-time mean systolic and diastolic ABP (ASBP, ADBP) after 6 weeks.
resultsPatients' mean age was 58.34±7.68 years, and 289 patients were male (79.18%). After the 6-week treatment, SiSBP reduction of fimasartan and valsartan were -16.26±15.07 and -12.81±13.87 (p=0.0298) and SiDBP were -7.63±9.67 and -5.14±8.52 (p=0.0211). Reductions in 24 hrs mean ASBP were -15.22±13.33 and -9.45±12.37 (p=0.0009), and ADBPs were -8.74±7.55 and -5.98±7.85 (p=0.0140). Reductions of night-time ASBPs were -16.80±15.81 and -10.32±14.88 (p=0.0012), and those of night-time ADBPs were -8.89±9.93 and -5.55±9.70 (p=0.0152). Reduction of BP in olmesartan group did not demonstrate significant difference with fimasartan group in all end-points.
conclusionFimasartan 120-mg treatment demonstrated superior efficacy in reduction of SiSBP, SiDBP, and 24 hrs ASBP and ADBP compared to valsartan 160 mg. Reduction of night-time ASBP from baseline was largest in fimasartan group, suggesting that fimasartan may be effective for recovering dipping pattern. NCT NUMBER: NCT02495324 (Fimasartan Achieving SBP Target (FAST) study).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.