Trial reportInternational journal of nephrology and renovascular disease2026
Effectiveness and Safety of Telmisartan Plus Amlodipine Compared to Telmisartan Plus Cilnidipine in Indian Patients with Hypertension and Renal Impairment: A Randomized, Open Label, Post Marketing Study (START Renal).
Trial report in International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the effectiveness and safety of telmisartan-amlodipine (TA) versus telmisartan-cilnidipine (TC) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in patients with hypertension and renal impairment. Patients and Methods: This open label, randomized, multicentric, post-marketing study was conducted in India. Adult patients with hypertension and renal impairment, receiving a stable dose of telmisartan and not on calcium channel blockers, were enrolled. Participants were randomized (1:1) to receive the TA or TC FDC for 12 months. The primary endpoint was change in the urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) from baseline to 12 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), serum creatinine, and serum uric acid at 6 and 12 months, and office systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Similar parameters were assessed in the diabetic subpopulation. Adverse events were recorded and classified using system organ classification. Results: At 12 months, the TA and TC groups showed significant reductions in UACR by 119±157.7 mg/g and 97.5±128.6 mg/g, respectively (p<0.0001 for both). Improvements in eGFR and serum creatinine were comparable between groups (p>0.05). SBP reduction was significantly greater with TA at both 9 months (20.74±12.75 vs. 16.9±13.66) mmHg, (p=0.0430)] and 12 months (25.4±14.25 vs. 20.6±10.94) mmHg, (p=0.0397)], while DBP reductions were similar. The diabetic subgroup showed a superior SBP reduction favoring the TA group -24.5 (±13.75) mmHg (p≤.0001) Vs -18.9 (±10.68) mmHg (p≤.0001) while the renal parameters were similar between the two groups. A total of 17 mild drug-related adverse events were reported (TA: 8; TC: 9), with no serious events. Conclusion: Both the TA and TC FDCs were effective and well tolerated when treating hypertension with renal impairment. The TA FDC may provide better BP reduction with similar reno-protective benefits than the TC FDC.
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.