A randomized and double-blind trial for candesartan cilexetil in the treatment of essential hypertension
He Li
Abstract
He Li
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.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
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