A double-blind, randomized study comparing the antihypertensive effect of eplerenone and spironolactone in patients with hypertension and evidence of primary aldosteronism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eplerenone is claimed to be a more selective blocker of the mineralocorticoid receptor than spironolactone being associated with fewer antiandrogenic side-effects. We compared the efficacy, safety and tolerability of eplerenone versus spironolactone in patients with hypertension associated with primary aldosteronism. METHODS: The study was multicentre, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, and parallel group design. Following a single-blind, placebo run-in period, patients were randomized 1: 1 to a 16-week double-blind, treatment period of spironolactone (75-225 mg once daily) or eplerenone (100-300 mg once daily) using a titration-to-effect design. To be randomized, patients had to meet biochemical criteria for primary aldosteronism and have a seated DBP at least 90 mmHg and less than 120 mmHg and SBP less than 200 mmHg. The primary efficacy endpoint was the antihypertensive effect of eplerenone versus spironolactone to establish noninferiority of eplerenone in the mean change from baseline in seated DBP. RESULTS: Changes from baseline in DBP were less on eplerenone (-5.6 ± 1.3 SE mmHg) than spironolactone (-12.5 ± 1.3 SE mmHg) [difference, -6.9 mmHg (-10.6, -3.3); P<0.001]. Although there were no significant differences between eplerenone and spironolactone in the overall incidence of adverse events, more patients randomized to spironolactone developed male gynaecomastia (21.2 versus 4.5%; P=0.033) and female mastodynia (21.1 versus 0.0%; P=0.026). CONCLUSION: The antihypertensive effect of spironolactone was significantly greater than that of eplerenone in hypertension associated with primary aldosteronism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".