2004Chinese New Drugs JournalRequires access

A randomized and double-blind trial for candesartan cilexetil in the treatment of essential hypertension

He Li

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil made in China in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Methods: In a multi-centers, randomized, double blind and parallel control trail, 217 patients with mild and moderate essential hypertension were randomly received either candesartan cilexetil at 4-8mg daily (n = 107) or irbesartan at 150-300mg daily (n = 110) for 8 weeks. The poor-prognosis patients treated with candesatan or irbesartan in 4 weeks (DBP≥90mmHg) were co-administrated with hydrochlorothiazide at 12.5mg daily. Results:No significant differences in the overall response rate of candesartan or irbesartan monotherapy (72.4 % vs. 73.1 %) and co-administration therapies (93.3 % vs. 94.4 %) were found. The change of mean BP at sitting position in candesartan group was from (155.6±10.9)/(98. 6±4. 9)mmHg to (130.2± 10.0)/(82.7±5.7)mmHgversus in irbesartan group from (152. 6±10. 3)/(98.4±4. 1)mmHg to (129.1±8.0)/(82. 8±5. 1)mmHg (P 0. 05). The occurrence of adverse events was 12. 3% for those patients taking candesartan against 13.1% for those on irbesartan. Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil are similar to those of irbesartan in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil made in China in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Methods: In a multi-centers, randomized, double blind and parallel control trail, 217 patients with mild and moderate essential hypertension were randomly received either candesartan cilexetil at 4-8mg daily (n = 107) or irbesartan at 150-300mg daily (n = 110) for 8 weeks. The poor-prognosis patients treated with candesatan or irbesartan in 4 weeks (DBP≥90mmHg) were co-administrated with hydrochlorothiazide at 12.5mg daily. Results:No significant differences in the overall response rate of candesartan or irbesartan monotherapy (72.4 % vs. 73.1 %) and co-administration therapies (93.3 % vs. 94.4 %) were found. The change of mean BP at sitting position in candesartan group was from (155.6±10.9)/(98. 6±4. 9)mmHg to (130.2± 10.0)/(82.7±5.7)mmHgversus in irbesartan group from (152. 6±10. 3)/(98.4±4. 1)mmHg to (129.1±8.0)/(82. 8±5. 1)mmHg (P 0. 05). The occurrence of adverse events was 12. 3% for those patients taking candesartan against 13.1% for those on irbesartan. Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil are similar to those of irbesartan in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil made in China in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Methods: In a multi-centers, randomized, double blind and parallel control trail, 217 patients with mild and moderate essential hypertension were randomly received either candesartan cilexetil at 4-8mg daily (n = 107) or irbesartan at 150-300mg daily (n = 110) for 8 weeks. The poor-prognosis patients treated with candesatan or irbesartan in 4 weeks (DBP≥90mmHg) were co-administrated with hydrochlorothiazide at 12.5mg daily. Results:No significant differences in the overall response rate of candesartan or irbesartan monotherapy (72.4 % vs. 73.1 %) and co-administration therapies (93.3 % vs. 94.4 %) were found. The change of mean BP at sitting position in candesartan group was from (155.6±10.9)/(98. 6±4. 9)mmHg to (130.2± 10.0)/(82.7±5.7)mmHgversus in irbesartan group from (152. 6±10. 3)/(98.4±4. 1)mmHg to (129.1±8.0)/(82. 8±5. 1)mmHg (P 0. 05). The occurrence of adverse events was 12. 3% for those patients taking candesartan against 13.1% for those on irbesartan. Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of candesartan cilexetil are similar to those of irbesartan in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension.

Key concepts: Candesartan, Irbesartan, Medicine, Hydrochlorothiazide, Essential hypertension, Adverse effect, Urology, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A randomized and double-blind trial for candesartan cilexetil in the treatment of essential hypertension — Research Paper | ScholarLens