Evidence mapPaperPMID 39412629Full record

SynthesisAdvances in therapy2024

A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis of Azilsartan Medoxomil Compared to Other Anti-hypertensives Efficacy in Lowering Blood Pressure Amongst Mild to Moderate Hypertensive Patients.

Juying Qian, Mengjun Zhang, Zhangwei Chen

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

3 authors.

Juying QianDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China. qian.juying@zs-hospital.sh.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-7512-3692
Mengjun ZhangHasten Biopharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 200124, China.
Zhangwei ChenDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA systematic literature review and network meta-analysis was conducted on azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) versus other antihypertensive drugs' efficacy in hypertensive patients.

methodsThe search utilized English platforms, from January 2000 until December 2023, resulting in 10,380 articles being screened. Screening criteria included hypertension (mild or moderate); first-line treatment and washout periods; studies (monotherapy) with AZL-M, angiotensin type II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNIs), beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, either as intervention or comparator; and antihypertension efficacy as an outcome measure. Study design was randomized clinical trials. Efficacy variables included absolute office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) reductions. A total of 21 publications provided adequate data for analysis, of which 20 studies reported both systolic and diastolic BP and one study reported only the diastolic BP.

resultsIn 21 studies on systolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in systolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, candesartan, irbesartan, nebivolol, nifedipine, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 93% being the best in all other included treatments. In 20 studies on diastolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in diastolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, bisoprolol, nebivolol, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The SUCRA ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 90% being the best in all other included treatments.

conclusionAZL-M at 40 mg and 80 mg shows favorable efficacy compared to other anti-hypertensives, and the 80 mg dosage seemed to be the most efficacious of all the included treatments in reducing both office systolic and diastolic BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsBenzimidazolesHypertensionOxadiazolesAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsBlood PressureCalcium Channel BlockersHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAntihypertensive Agentsazilsartan medoxomilBenzimidazolesCalcium Channel BlockersOxadiazolesHypertensionNetwork meta-analysisRandomized controlled trialSystematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID39412629
PMCPMC11550241

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.